Return to Proposed Revisions to NSI Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Merlin
Date/Time: Sat, March 17, 2001 at 4:15 AM GMT
Browser: Netscape Communicator V4.08 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: Artificial Scarcity and More

Message:
 

 
                                                Many of the problems regarding domain names can be attributed to Verisign/NSI and yes-even ICANN

We are all aware that Verisign/NSI has had and in many respects still can be considered a Monopoly.

Up until the recent past a prospective domain registrant had only one place, one option available to register a domain name, Network Solutions.

This resulted in no competition regarding price and customer service but more importantly NSI effectively STOPPED competition by rejecting the inclusion of new tlds in the A root.

The very idea and reason behind the formation of ICANN can be directly related to the above situation but what has ICANN really done?

Sure you can now purchase a domain name from numerous registers, which has provided choice and has led to better pricing and customer service however that is where it ends.

NSI/Verisign fought these plans every step of the way but ironically the very same plan they fought against turns out it to be one of the best things that could have happened to them. Right now no matter whom we decide we want to buy our .com and others from whether it be register.com, bulkregister and many others the fact is that NSI/Verisign gets paid $6 for every name sold. This effectively has proven to be a boon for NSI and they have made more money this way than they had before. In essence ICANN has conveniently provided NSI with what is tantamount to a giant sales force working for them.

The fact is for their to be any hope for competition the competition needs to be at the registry level, and as such we sit and wait for one of the hopes of this happening being the addition of new tlds.

ICANNís solution to competition at the registry level can only be described as an utter failure

I don't buy the myth that ICANN so conveniently likes to use that they must be careful in the addition of new tlds because it could undermine the stability of the Internet. Many experts have testified that this is false and that the A root can handle thousands if not millions of new tlds. Should you care to debate this then you can look no further to the inclusion of many of today's cctlds as proof that the "stability of the Internet" argument is a myth

We all know that ICANN has "chosen" 7 new tlds for inclusion into the A Root but I would like to point out that these choices are weak at best and doesn't satisfy the desires of the internet community and won't prove to offer any meaningful competition

We can leave that to opinion although I am confident that those outside of ICANN and its process would agree.

I will use Afilias and their award to operate .info to support why I think ICANN has failed in bringing competition at the registry level. First off of all the seven choices .info is an open tld and most likely will prove to have the most registrations and realistically the one tld that can be considered to offer any hope of competition to .com,.net and .org when compared to the other six tlds chosen. This of course isn't saying much but this is what we find we are stuck with. When you look closer it comes as no surprise who has their hands in .info Wouldn't you know it's Verisign/NSI along with 18 other registers many of which are the closest thing we can consider to big established players after NSI i.e. Register.com

So on one hand where .com and NSI were supposed have competition in the marketplace deriving from ICANN's choice of new tlds and again they are weak to begin with in the end ICANN didn't deliver since NSI doesn't lose out in the least because they will also profit from .info, the so-called competition.

There are those who will say that's nonsense because NSI is but one register composed of afilias. Let me point out that I am aware that NameSecure.com, is also one of the 19 in Afilias and is owned by NSI and perhaps there are others NSI owns or has an interest in I am not yet aware of.

I am troubled by the fact that ICANN has endorsed Afilias, who I deem is the just the foundation of a larger Monopoly. One that might prove to be more predatory than NSI ever was.

Why should we think Afilias, a combination of players in the market couldn't and wouldn't fix prices and a host of other things to cripple any competition outside of their circle?

In my opinion ICANN is party to the creation of a potentially far reaching Monopoly

I think this was the only way for NSI and ICANN to sneak by the public so called competition issue by having other players involved in the application along with NSI/Verisign.

ICANN has consistently demonstrated a peculiar affection for NSI/Verisign that should make us all wonder?

Isn't it odd how NetworkSoltutions bought GreatDomains.com and Register.com bought Afternic.com?

Now look at all those domain names that we know NetworkSolutions.com is hoarding and ask yourself why would they buy one of the biggest domain brokerages on the web, same goes for register.com?

I know this much for those not yet aware of it. Right now if you go to greatdomains.com there are thousands of domain names available from NSI for purchase and as it turns out can you believe that these same domain names are unavailable for purchase from any other register. This of course negates any price and customer service competition that ICANN supposedly was supposed to insure.

Apparently NSI's argument is these are domains that people "bought" and were billed for and never paid for. This is a weak technicality if at all. If the people didn't pay their bill then they lose the domain and it should revert back to the pool. No actual money changed hands.

I am still waiting for ICANN to stick their head out from NSI's ass and realize that we know this doesn't hold water and only lends credibility to the theory by many who think ICANN is nothing more than NSI/Verisigns puppet.

What of the truly Expired domains NSI is hoarding? What excuse is there?

Why hasn't ICANN done anything? Heck they haven't even addressed it as an issue!

See "Where Domains Got to Die"

http://www.zdnet.com/smartbusinessmag/stories/all/0,6605,2669939,00.html

What next full-blown auctions of all domains by register.com and NSI?

The way things are don't be surprised when it happens. Certainly it can only prove a breeding ground for corruption and conflict of interest that turns into a public relations nightmare what then will ICANN say?


Now thanks to the ICANN/NSI/Verisign proposal all .org and .net holders are need to be alarmed. When you think of it can we really be all that shocked by it's audacity when reviewing history.

So while NSI/Verisign looks after ICANN and ICANN looks after NSI/Verisign who is looking out for the public?

     
     
     
     
     
     

 

Link: Where Domains Got to Die

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy