Re: [ga] A Windfall for VeriSign?

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 01:21 a.m. 18/10/2007, Danny Younger wrote:

> "Since revenue will result from this allocation,
> comments regarding the potential uses for this revenue
> are also requested."
>
> On what basis has ICANN Staff concluded that revenue
> will necessarily result from this allocation?  If the
> community determines that "first come first served" is
> the proper allocation methodology, then "revenue" will
> not necessarily accrue to either ICANN or the
> registries.
>
> How comfortable are all of you with the notion of
> ICANN Staff predetermining or meddling in the outcome
> of what should be an open public policy process?

"Revenue will result."
You can condemn it as chutzpah or applaud it as honesty but it is clear 
that this is again one of those times that any outcome of an  "open public 
policy process" is already pre-determined.
If that is the case, let's make the best of it.

This revenue must *not* accrue to the empire builder, nor to the TLD "owners".

I propose that it is earmarked for a fund to enable the creation and 
maintenance of a genuine registrant constituency with advocacy and 
representation on the ICANN Board.





-joop-