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

Username: friedrich
Date/Time: Thu, March 22, 2001 at 10:46 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows NT 4.0
Score: 5
Subject: Analysis: ICANN will sign these contracts because they are good for ICANN and for Verisign.



1. Current situation: No competition or "first-come-first-serve" with Verisign: Verisign holds back
expired domain names in order to sell them in the "aftermarket". The other registrars are helpless.

2. Bad Service: It often takes more than four months to change a contact's e-mail address with
Verisign and sometimes even longer than that.

3. High Prices: Renewal fees are still 35$, even though there is no reason why they are 35$ and
not 7$. It is not that expensive to keep a database running.

4. Strong Monopoly: No unrestricted domain names (always the ones with a max. of registrations)
exist outside of Verisign. Dot info will be introduced and Verisign belongs to Afilias, the registry
which will run .info.

5. Shutting the "back door": Verisign will loose their influence on dot org. Therefore .org is going
to become a restricted gtld now. Verisign will thus continue to keep its monopoly on unrestricted

6. Strange Deadline: Why has this contract, which is of highest importance for the stability of
the internet, not been shown to the public several months ago? A bottom-up consensus must grow
and the whole discussion should have been opened to the public long before the contracts were
"ready", even before the decisions about new gtlds were taken.

7. Buttom-up-Problem: Now we are shown a contract which can obviously not be modified
anymore. We may say "yes" or "no".

8. Lucrative contracts: Both parties take advantages from these contracts: ICANN gets more
money and Verisign can continue to keep their monopoly of unrestricted gtlds.
Therefore both parties praise these contracts.

8. Left-out Question: Where is the advantage of the internet community resulting from these
Why isn't the internet community (and even some directors of ICANNs board of directors) allowed
to take their time and think about the contracts? - Verisign and some ICANN lawyers seem to have
discussed them for nearly a year behind closed doors.

9. What does "good" exactly mean?: If the contracts are that "good", why does Verisign fear a
further period of discussion and why aren't they ready to consider any changes?

10. Conclusion: Obviously the contracts are not good.

Otherwise Versign would behave differently. They are not ready to allow more time for reviewing
these contracts and threaten not to sign them anymore. ICANN knows what this means: they
won't get the money mentioned in these contracts anymore.

Therefore ICANN is eager to hurry.

The fact that Versign does not refrain from such kind of pressure (on ICANN) shows their real
intent: No competition please, not even from ICANN.

If ICANN signs these contracts, they may be looked upon as an organisation bought by
These contracts clearly need to be revised.

Friedrich Kisters
Human Bios GmbH
Seeblickstrasse 34-36
CH-8280 Kreuzlingen


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy