Re: [ga] A Windfall for VeriSign?

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Danny Younger wrote:
> "Since revenue will result from this allocation,
> comments regarding the potential uses for this revenue
> are also requested."
I agree with you that this statement ought to have been stated as one 
possible result.
And I wonder whether ICANN's vaunted "staff" has also considered the 
negatives to ICANN.  For example, what happens if o.com gets stuck in 
ICANN's UDRP or in the twisty-turny maze of registrar/inter-registrar 
procedures - The name holder might believe that for the money it pays 
that it deserves more respect and that ICANN is liable for loss of 
revenues during any outages of o.com.  Far fetched, yes, but possible. 
The kind of thing that staff ought to at least mention.
I am getting a strong feeling that many of us consider this carve-out of 
short names as being the harbinger of something significant - whether it 
be the transformation of registrars into peddlers of the low-quality 
domain name goods, with the Tiffany grade names going through special 
registry/ICANN sales channels, or whether it be that ICANN will use the 
proceeds to add to to it's already large size.
                        --karl--