Re: [ga] Re: On new TLDs

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Okay, I'll bite, answers below
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Hugh Dierker 
  To: Karl Auerbach ; kidsearch 
  Cc: Danny Younger ; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 7:41 PM
  Subject: Re: [ga] Re: On new TLDs


  Someone explain to me these portions of these reason to set up anything but first come first serve at a set price;

  Morally: When dealing with people of questionable moral behavior as indicated by past transgressions, you have to consider putting rules into place to circumvent that behavior. Example of past behavior; Reverse domain name hijacking.

  Ethically: "Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants" (Omar N. Bradley). So, unfortunately, we have to have rules as stated above to the question of morals which is a synonym of ethics anyway, so the question is redundant.

  Globally: American Corporations have more money for the most part. American Corporations have the motives in place to attempt to control the market as they have demonstrated over and over again with regards to technology. Yes, there are foreign corporations that can bid against them, but for the most part, besides those who already have TLDs, they will be at a disadvantage.


  Internationally: Well since global means the whole world and international only means between two or more nations, I don't understand how this isn't also redundant.

  Financially: He who has the gold makes the rules approach. We want new TLDs to be introduced not stifled. If the current owners of TLDs do not want more TLDs in the marketplace, because it might have the effect of driving down the price of registering domain names due to market flooding, then it might behoove them to grab up TLDs to keep them from being available, leaving us again at square one. The equivalent of oil companies purchasing patents for products that would make automobiles more fuel efficient to keep those products off the market.

  Fairness: Rules to make sure everyone has an opportunity to start a new TLD might be needed to keep a handful of companies from monopolizing the majority of good/viable TLDs. I'm not talking about how much is to be paid for a TLD, I'm talking limits on how many one company can start to give TLD ownership as wide a field as possible, therefore insuring competition rather than stifling it.

  Socially: The "society" of Internet Users would be best served when there is plenty of competition in the marketplace. Rules intended to increase competition are necessary to achieve that goal.

  Politically: First come first serve in regards to TLDs is a much different concept than first come first serve for domain names. Domain names are affordable enough that anyone in the world can get one conceivably. If the process that is created by ICANN allows a handful of US corporations to dominate the TLD market, then the outcry from other countries will increase. They already say they don't want the US to control the Internet. You think they would sit still for US corporations to control the TLDs?

  The same goes for why not E-Bay type auction with preset percentages of money going to preset places. All for that, with limitations on the number one entity can buy. Even WITH that rulke some companies will find a way to get around it. Without the rules, it will be pandemonium.

  The same goes for selling the rights to a registry to the highest bidder and let them go for it. Same answer.

  What is with all this social engineering socialism? I hate to break it to some folks but people without money cannot afford to buy things that cost money. Again, going to the highest bidder isn't the problem. The problem and part of ICANN's mission is to foster competition. You cannot foster competition by decreasing the number of companies that sell domain names. Without limitations on the number of tlds a company can control, you will have less companies competing.

  If this were clothes or water Ok, but let us not play food for oil. Not sure what this has to do with it.

  e

  Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

    On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, kidsearch wrote:

    > Karl, sorry to be such a pain, but I still don't feel that answers my
    > question. What is to keep a few big companies from buying up all the
    > good/viable TLDs as soon as the process is available, effectively cutting
    > out the "open to everyone" idea?

    In a pure auction situation the names would go to those with money.

    In an auction modified with a lottery some portion of the names would be 
    distributed, by random chance, among those who have bought relatively 
    inexpensive lottery tickets (e.g. $5).

    Yes, lotteries can be manipulated - the rich folks can buy lots of tickets 
    and thus increase their chances, the rich folks can use strawman to hold 
    those tickets, the rich folks can buy the rights from the winners, etc.

    But at least the lottery creates some chance that the big guys won't get 
    every name.

    Besides, if we find that happening we can then adjust to deal with the 
    concrete situation - like perhaps engaging in a one-time process to grant 
    a pile of TLDs to non-commercial applicants.

    If we try to get a perfect system we will be waiting for new TLDs until 
    the sun freezes over. We should strive for a system that is adequate, not 
    one that is perfect.

    --karl--






------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Shopping
  Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping