Re: [ga] Current Drafted Motion - Another Sort of Speculation?

[jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Chris and all,

  My comments/remarks in response interseprsed below.

-----Original Message-----
>From: chris@xxxxxx
>Sent: Mar 26, 2008 7:38 AM
>To: jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, domain-tasting-motion@xxxxxxxxx
>Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [ga] Current Drafted Motion - Another Sort of Speculation?
>
>
>I disagree, but it may just be semantics. Domain speculation is where 
>someone PAYS for the domain name specuulating that it may be worth more at 
>some point. No different than buying up a corner lot that you think will be 
>valuable real estate someday. They PAY for their registrations. Domain 
>tasters and domain kiters do not pay and hold up thousands or even millions 
>of domain names that could be registered and paid for by legitimate users.

  Semantics here I believe.  However SOME Tasters are using speculation
as a means by which they can make a quick buck if they can sell that
domain as Dominik's earlier example demonstarated.  
>
>The problem that some here do not seem to get is that the domain tasters and 
>kiters have networks. Taster 1 registers a name for 5 days. Taster 2 knows 
>the exact time it will drop and reregisters it for 5 days. taster 3 another 
>5 days, taster 4 another 5 days. These domain names are not out of the pool 
>for 5 days. They are out indefinitely due to the AGP and the easy abuse of 
>it.
Agreed!
>
>Some of the commenters here seem to believe there are a few speculators who 
>use the 5 day grace period to try a domain name and then drop it so it's no 
>big deal. That is far from what is going on. There are large companies 
>involved in keeping thousands of domain names unavailable to users by 
>continually dropping and re-registering domain names for another 5 days over 
>and over again. This has become big business. It is not the work of a few 
>speculators.

Also agreed, but a more egregious form of Tasting.  Than of course
there are registries and registrars that do this as well for whatever
reasons.
>
>Chris McElroy
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <domain-tasting-motion@xxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 12:16 AM
>Subject: Re: [ga] Current Drafted Motion - Another Sort of Speculation?
>
>
>>
>> Dominik and all,
>>
>>  I agree with Dominik here.  The cap is too high
>> by a factor of 10 at least!  Domain name speculation
>> should be eliminated all together given that such are
>> a form of public interest property although that has
>> yet to be defined difinitively under law.  But at a
>> minimum, speculation on Domain Names themselves is
>> a bad practice that should in no way be encouraged.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>>From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
>>>Sent: Mar 25, 2008 6:51 AM
>>>To: domain-tasting-motion@xxxxxxxxx
>>>Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>Subject: [ga] Current Drafted Motion - Another Sort of Speculation?
>>>
>>>
>>>The current motion drafted by the GNSO Council seems to be another
>>>attempt to keep the speculation aspect of AGP. The whole document is
>>>vague and raises more questions than answers.
>>>
>>>1.
>>>a. The 10% AGP cap proposed in the document is still too high. After
>>>calculating the net gains at some, not all, Registrars during the last
>>>month as available at
>>>http://www.webhosting.info/registrars/fastest-growing-registrars/global/
>>>?ob=nc&oo=desc,
>>>the total number of new net-gained domains during last month is greater
>>>than 1,220,000. Provided the very most of the new registrations are .COM
>>>domains and other gTLD domains 1,000,000 domains can be considered a
>>>reasonable estimation of domains that qualify for the 10% cap of free
>>>deletes.
>>>
>>>That is, 100,000 domains per month constantly available for speculation.
>>>
>>>
>>>b. The exemption from the application of such restriction under
>>>extraordinary circumstances is unclear and not specified.
>>>
>>>What are such extraordinary circumstances like?
>>>
>>>Who will be considering and will finally accept the documented showing
>>>of such circumstances?
>>>Are they Registries interested in running the domain business?
>>>
>>>What is the maximum cap after applying the exemption? 100%? Or even
>>>more?
>>>
>>>
>>>2.
>>>What will the oversight activities at ICANN look like?
>>>
>>>Where is the guarantee that the oversight activities will actually take
>>>place and will not be neglected or misused?
>>>
>>>Will the GNSO be responsible for the oversight activities?
>>>The GNSO trapped by financial interests of Registries and Registrars as
>>>clearly demonstrated in the two recommendations presented to the board?
>>>The GNSO that does not even bother to seriously consider the mostly
>>>supported suggestion from the public input, which is elimination of AGP?
>>>
>>>And finally, who will be paying another bureaucratic staff and its
>>>questionable mission?
>>>Registrants?
>>>
>>>
>>>Dominik Filipp, a GA list member
>>>
>>
Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
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
Phone: 214-244-4827