ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [ga] Investigation of Possible Contract Breach in .eu Landrush

  • To: Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, General Assembly of the DNSO <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [ga] Investigation of Possible Contract Breach in .eu Landrush
  • From: Joanna Lane <jolane1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:58:21 -0400
  • Cc: kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, EURid <info@xxxxxxxx>, president@xxxxxxxxxxx
  • Importance: Normal
  • In-reply-to: <001c01c6633d$c3fa3f30$3430fd3e@richard>
  • Reply-to: jolane1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Hi Richard,

Thank you for your thoughtful report. I can't comment on the auction issue,
but I do have a comment on another aspect. I am Admin contact for four
variants of a dot-eu domain name registered in a single click through one of
the better known Registrars during Landrush. These are now sitting in the
admin account at that Registrar's website, yet the WHOIS database shows
three different Registrars were used for those four names. The two
Registrars that are unfamiliar to me do have a website with a registration
interface, but neither was used on this occasion. What does this mean? It
all depends on why and how it happened, and I would like to know more before
jumping to conclusions.

For example, if the parent Registrar delegated the task to register these
four domains amongst its various subsidiaries as the orders arrived, so that
the one Registrar would not become backlogged whilst other parts of the same
company stood idle, then it was done simply to speed things up for the
customer. That's called good customer service and I don't have a problem
with any company that manages its resources in this way, neither with any
company which expands its resources for this reason. Taking unfair advantage
would have to be a parent company duplicating the application across each of
its subsidiaries, but I don't think you're saying that happened.  Certainly
it wouldn't seem to make much business sense to duplicate work numerous
times just the chance of one registration fee.

So far as a non-existent Registrant Agreement, the one signed at the parent
company would be assignable.  The situation is no different than if a
Registrar had been sold to another entity, to which the Registrant does not
have to consent by the way. If you want to nitpick, then I guess the admin
account for these four domains ought to be split across the three Registrars
to which they are now assigned, rather than remaining in the one parent
company account, but what an Admin nightmare. No thanks. That's not in the
anyone's best interests.

The customers go to the Registrar that they feel provides the best service
and if they all go to the same one, then that Registrar is going to use
whatever resources are available to them to best advantage to keep those
customers coming back.  You've obviously put a lot of time into this
document, and the auction aspect is another issue altogether, but otherwise,
I honestly don't see what you're getting at. In a free market economy, we
don't have a duty to make sure the little guy can compete with the big guy
do we?

For those who don't know me, I am not affiliated with any Registrars other
than as a paying customer.

Best Regards,
Joanna

Joanna Lane
www.propertyangels.com





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>