Re: [ga] New gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 2

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

Jeff and all,

  Sorry Jeff, but your response is a bit too much in the direction
of self preservation, and reasonable motive to be sure, than it is
towards the interests of consumers/registrants.  Why would you
appear to trade renewal caps for broader caps if there truly wasn't
a reasonable expectation of NueStar planning to raise prices for
new or all registrations, including renewals, hummmm?

  Nice try at a well worded deflection, but no cigar.  Try again.
Yes I smell profit motive or outright greed rather than consumer/registrant
concern in your deflective statement in response below.  Seems to me
that sucking off the hind tit of Uncle Sam at taxpayers expense with .US
isn't enough, eh?   So your dog below doesn't hunt...  Oh yes, before I
forget to mention, no price caps means extra fees for ICANN's coffers
which are already significant.  Figures don't lie, but liars figure, eh?

"Neuman, Jeff" wrote:

> All,
>
> We posted a response to George on CircleID.  Here is the response for
> you all to view:
>
> The author of this post has taken NeuStar's comments to the CRAI Report
> out of context.  The original CRAI Report stated that restrictions on
> Registry/Registrar cross-ownership should only be loosened if the
> particular registry was not subject to price caps.  Our comment was
> relating to that statement.  .BIZ has price caps simply because of a
> legacy situation and not because a previous economic study stated this
> should be so.
>
> If ICANN had adopted that recommendation by CRAI for new TLDs (which
> apparently it has not according to the new Applicant Guidebook), our
> comments simply meant that ICANN needed to re-examine whether price caps
> were appropriate for .biz given that .biz represents such a small
> overall market share for TLDs.  We are confident that such an economic
> study would show that price caps were not necessary and therefore, a
> relaxation of cross ownership restrictions would be just as appropriate
> for .biz as it would be for new TLDs.
>
> Our comments did not state that we intended to, or would ever, raise
> prices to the extremes the author suggests.  After all, NeuStar is
> subject to market pressures to which perhaps the dominant market share
> registry is not.
>
> The author's post seems to boil down to a concern for the renewal price
> of a domain name, as that price could potentially disadvantage a
> registrant who has built up brand equity in its domain name.  NeuStar
> sympathizes with this comment and has suggested to ICANN and others in
> numerous conversations that perhaps a cap on renewal pricing for all
> TLDs is appropriate and warranted.  After all, if the initial price of a
> domain name registration is too high, market forces will push a
> potential registrant to another TLD.  However, if the renewal price is
> as the author suggests, then that could hurt the consumer.
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.: NeuStar, Inc.
> Vice President, Law & Policy
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
> the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
> and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
> have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately and delete the original message.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of George Kirikos
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:16 AM
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ga] New gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 2
>
> Hi folks,
>
> --- On Wed, 2/18/09, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >   Nice catch George.  Any yes this is voluminous.  As such,
> > I can't see any reasonable way in which it could be properly
> > implemented or adhered to.
>
> I submitted slightly longer comments to CircleID that might be of
> interest:
>
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090219_tiered_pricing_continues_in_new_g
> tld_guidebook/
>
> In particular, DOJ made two specific recommendations, namely
>
> (1) ICANN Should Give Greater Consideration to Consumer Interests before
> Creating New gTLDs and Renewing Registry Agreements, and
>
> (2) ICANN Should Revise The RFP Process and the Proposed Registry
> Agreement to Protect Consumers from the Exercise of Market Power. In
> fact,
> ICANN has done the exact opposite, ignoring consumer interests and
> tilting
> these agreements even more in favour of existing and prospective
> registry
> operators than the prior drafts.
>
> It is time for the NTIA/DOJ to take decisive measures now to prevent
> further damage through ICANN's utter disregard for the public interest.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.leap.com/

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"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