Re: [ga] RE: ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dominik and all,

  I am glad to read that Mr. Twomey and especially the GNSO council is
perhaps considering
further action to actually address Domain Name Tasting, even if it is
very late in doing so.  Our
members concerns remain unchanged in regards that the GNSO is not
representative of the
vast majority of Registrants and by design are unable to be represented
as there is no
Independent Registrant Constituency as has been repeatedly requested and
is grossly
evident to be necessary.  As such, we believe it unlikely that further
action that is definite
and fully comprehensive, to address and eliminate Domain Name
Tasting/Front Running
with further GNSO council consideration of same in the near or far term.

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827

Dominik Filipp wrote:

>
> Dear Mr. Twomey,
> thank you for your response.
> I hope there will be enough attention payed to this sensitive issue as
> well as good will and courage demonstrated to act on it accordingly in
> New Delhi.
> Sincerely,
> Dominik Filipp
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Paul Twomey [mailto:paul.twomey@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 11:45 AM
> To: Dominik Filipp
> Cc: Paul Twomey; Peter Dengate Thrush;
> GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul Levins;
> Denise Michel
> Subject: Re: ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting
>
> Dear Mr. Filipp,
>
> Thank you for your thoughtful comments regarding the recent ICANN
> Board action on the issue of domain tasting.  I would like to respond
> to the two essential questions you raise: 1) why the ICANN Board has
> approved this recommended action on an idea that ?came from the ICANN
> community? and given that there is a pending policy development
> process (PDP) underway in the GNSO Council; and 2) your concern that
> there may be more effective ways to address the issue of domain
> tasting.
>
> First, it is important to note that when the GNSO Council met on 31
> October 2007 in Los Angeles on the topic of domain tasting, it voted
> to do both of the following: 1) to launch a policy development process
> (PDP) on domain tasting; and 2) to encourage ICANN staff ?to apply
> ICANN?s fee collections to names registered and subsequently
> deregistered during the add-grace period?.  Concerns about domain
> tasting were originally raised to the attention of the GNSO Council by
> the At Large Advisory Committee, and the GNSO Council has been
> considering the issue for some time.  As you note, a significant
> amount of data gathering and analysis were performed by ICANN staff
> (Issues Report of 14 June 2007), and by the GNSO Council (Outcomes
> Report of 4 October 2007), prior to taking these actions in Los
> Angeles (these reports can be found at
> <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/>). This action by the Board, as well as
> actions taken subsequently by ICANN staff to address domain tasting in
> the context of the upcoming budget cycle, thus did originate from the
> ICANN community and represent a majority recommendation of the GNSO
> Council.  Note that the GNSO specifically opted to support both of
> these actions at the same time.  The Board?s action is also consistent
> with the GNSO Council?s clear message that a change to the ICANN
> budget be pursued at the same time that the GNSO Council considers
> other options to address domain tasting in the context of the pending
> PDP. The Council does plan to act on the pending PDP and will be
> considering next steps when it meets in New Delhi next week.
>
> Second, you are quite right that there are other policy changes that
> should also be considered, including elimination of the add-grace
> period, as well as other possible changes to the add-grace period,
> such as restricting the use of the add-grace period to a defined
> number of deletes per month, that should also be explored.  As you
> state, these options must be developed as consensus policies through
> the PDP process, and ICANN staff is supporting the PDP as activities
> progress.  Action taken by ICANN to consider charging the annual fee
> on registrar domain registrations in no way precludes further action
> that might be taken by the GNSO Council and ultimately by the Board in
> the context of the pending PDP.
>
> Thank you for your interest in ICANN and specifically your insights on
> this important issue.  It is critical that we consider potential
> unintended consequences as we seek to find effective solutions to
> these problems, and I appreciate your bringing these concerns to our
> attention.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Paul Twomey
>
>
> Paul Twomey
> President and CEO
> ICANN
> On 31/01/2008, at 2:14 AM, Dominik Filipp wrote:
>
>> Dear Dr. Twomey,
>>
>> I have just read the recommended action considered by the ICANN
>> Board on Domain Tasting, which is applying the standard ICANN $0.20
>> fee on re-registration (or disproportionate deletes).
>>
>> I have no idea how the Board has come to this decision, especially,
>> when the Domain Tasting issue is still under debate and the policy
>> development process has not finished yet. I recall that the issue
>> was first opened by introducing the Request for Information on
>> Domain Tasting 10 August 2007 initiated by the ALAC and adopted by
>> the GNSO "to form an ad hoc group for further fact-finding on the
>> effects of this practice". After gathering the initial information
>> the GNSO opened another period for commenting the issue, named GNSO
>> Initial Report on Domain Tasting. The commenting period officially
>> finished on 28 Jan. 2008. I particularly accent the word "Initial"
>> here as the document in its Conclusions and Next Steps on page 24
>> reads:
>>
>> "The practice of domain tasting is of significant concern to many
>> constituencies and community stakeholders. These concerns have been
>> explored for the past several months, as reflected in the Issues
>> Report prepared by ICANN staff, and by the extensive research and
>> data gathering conducted by the Ad Hoc Group of the GNSO Council and
>> reflected in the Outcomes Report. Based on these reports, the GNSO
>> Council has voted to initiate a policy development process to
>> explore the specific policy changes that should be made to curb
>> domain tasting. This initial report is an early step in this
>> process, and will be posted for public comment for 20 days as
>> prescribed by the ICANN bylaws (see
>> http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA). Public comments
>> will then be incorporated into a "Final Report" by ICANN staff and
>> submitted to the GNSO Council Chair within ten calendar days
>> following the end of the public comment period. The Final Report
>> (along with the preceding Issues Report and Outcomes Report) become
>> the underlying foundation for subsequent actions taken by the GNSO
>> Council in formulating recommendations to the ICANN Board regarding
>> policy changes that should be made to address domain tasting."
>>
>> As regards the AGP concept, I again recall that the ICANN community
>> has explicitly expressed a desire to eliminate the AGP as it is
>> apparent in the straw poll (the online survey) held by 15 Sep. 2007.
>> The result of the survey concerning the AGP is summarized on page 16
>> in Outcomes Report of The GNSO Ad Hoc Group On Domain Name Tasting
>> issued on 4 Oct. 2007, and reads:
>>
>> "110 out of 173 (64%) support suggestion A (eliminating AGP), while
>> 25 (14%) prefer suggestion C (registry excess deletion fees charged
>> to registrars for disproportionate deletes), 17 (10%) support B
>> (ICANN 0.20 USD charge to apply to names deleted within AGP) and 20
>> (12%) vote for D (neither A, B or C)..."
>>
>> In other words, the suggestion currently recommended by the Board to
>> consider has gained the least support among all other suggestions.
>> As the survey was accessible to anyone including representatives
>> from Registries, Registrars, Registrants as well as standard
>> Internet users, I consider the result of the survey legitimate.
>> Also the comment contributions in both related mailing lists held on
>> the issue so far indicates prevailing interest in the elimination of
>> the AGP.
>>
>> I therefore cannot find a merit supporting your optimistic words in
>> the sentence "This idea came from the ICANN community and we think
>> it is a viable solution the Internet community has been seeking".
>> But what I have understood of this hurry politely ignoring the
>> legitimate voice is that something is baking behind the scenes.
>> Something like ICANN is tending to give in to a sweet temptation to
>> tacitly participate on the tasting business. To the detriment of the
>> most important part, which are Registrants, and which is the main
>> body making bread for ICANN and as such deserving the respective
>> care and advocate.
>>
>> I, among many others, do not see the re-registration fee an
>> effective solution. I elaborated on this in one of my mails sent to
>> the mailing list and pointed out some ways how successful tasters
>> could 'recover' from the fee provision and keep the business
>> running. Sure, the business will go down but it stays alive as a
>> phenomenon using just more subtle methods to survive. Or profit,
>> with all the malicious side-effects we know about. I think the best
>> solution is to eliminate the problem, not to make it smaller.
>> Moreover, as Karl Auerbach pointed out in a mail posted on the
>> mailing list, the AGP concept was never properly addressed or
>> discussed before approving the registry agreements. In my opinion
>> this means that the credibility of such a concept is rather weak and
>> keeping it alive at any price just reveals speculative incentives in
>> mind.
>> I understand that eliminating the AGP could bring problems, such as
>> typo corrections, credit card frauds, etc., but the fact is that the
>> cons extremely overweigh the pros. After all, the ways how to
>> overcome these problems can still be subject to further discussion
>> during the upcoming policy development process.
>>
>> I would therefore kindly ask you to encourage the GNSO council to
>> fluently and peacefully proceed with the policy development process.
>> Any prediction of how the solution should look like at the moment is
>> premature and controversial. The issue has still to be carefully
>> broken down and properly discussed. Maybe now, under the new
>> leadership, we could find courage to take a deep breath and set out
>> the right direction.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Yours sincerely,
>>
>> Dominik Filipp, a General Assembly List member
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>> Behalf Of GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 8:13 AM
>> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [ga] ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting
>>
>> [To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org]
>> [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org]
>> [To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org]
>>
>> http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-29jan08.htm
>> ICANN Board Recommends Action on Domain Tasting
>>
>> Suggested fee change would effectively eliminate tasting
>>
>> 29 January 2008
>>
>> MARINA DEL REY, Calif.: The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
>> and Numbers is looking to effectively end domain tasting with a
>> proposal to start charging the annual ICANN fee on registrar domain
>> registrations.
>>
>> Domain tasting is the use of the Add Grace Period to test the
>> profitability of a domain name registration. The AGP is a five-day
>> period following the initial registration of a domain name when the
>> registration may be deleted and a credit can be issued to a
>> registrar.
>>
>> "Domain tasting has been an issue for the Internet community and
>> ICANN is offering this proposal as a way to stop tasting," said Dr
>> Paul Twomey, ICANN's President and CEO. "Charging the ICANN fee as
>> soon as a domain name is registered would close the loophole used by
>> tasters to test a domain name's profitability for free."
>>
>> AGP was originally introduced by registries so registrars could
>> avoid costs if a domain name was mistyped or misspelled during the
>> registration process. It is part of the .com, .net, .org, ..info,
>> .name, .pro, and .biz registry contracts.
>>
>> Tasting has been a serious challenge for the Internet community and
>> has grown exponentially since 2004. In January 2007 the top 10
>> domain tasters accounted for 95% of all deleted .com and .net domain
>> names - or
>> 45,450,897 domain names out of 47,824,131 total deletes.
>>
>> The proposal will be part of the ICANN budget process for the fiscal
>> year starting 1 July 2008. The early draft version of that budget
>> will be released for and discussed at ICANN's New Delhi meeting
>> later this month. After public discussions of this proposal and
>> other budget issues, the proposed budget will be released for
>> addition discussions by
>> 17 May 2008 and be voted on at the board meeting to be held during
>> the ICANN meeting in Paris in June. ICANN accredited registrars
>> representing two-thirds of fees collected will be asked to approve
>> the proposal.
>>
>> "This idea came from the ICANN community and we think it is a viable
>> solution the Internet community has been seeking," Dr Twomey added.
>> --
>> Glen de Saint Géry
>> GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
>> gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
>> http://gnso.icann.org
>>