Re: [ga] Auctions

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,

I agree with the bulk of your remarks and/or position here Chris.  I
thought that at one time Karl did as well.  I believe he suggested
his version of the auction model as a compromise.  Yet compromising
on restraint of trade is extra legal at present.  Yet auction models have
been used in the past, for instance in the 1980's for frequency range
by the FCC and DOC.  They were discontinued for the reasons that
I have already touched upon.  I know this as I was a bidder in those
days and ended up with a number of those LF frequency's in
perpetuity.  Yet later was requested to divest of the bulk of them
in the interest of free market trade and public interest.  This same
scenario with auctions or "Slots" or "TLD strings/names" threatens
a repeat of that history with perhaps more damaging ramifications
with respect to trade relations, restraint of trade law, and public
interest considerations.

ICANN has no legitimate business in restricting business models via
non-technical means.  In fact I have trouble in even letting or considering
ICANN setting technical requirements in a static manner for running
or managing any TLD, given is lack luster management of the root
servers thus far.  In fact, as has been frequently reported, and even
recently, ICANN has trouble managing it's own web site let alone
setting technical standards.  Even the IETF has similar problems
and would be less than adequate in purposing any technical standard
for registry/TLD management, which has also been shown frequently
in respect to IP address management and technology.

I do believe that ICANN should recommend some Best Practices for
TLD management from a technical perspective ONLY.   But to
in any way require a minimum standard or sudo-regulation regment
would be picarious at best for ICANN to delve into.

kidsearch wrote:

> Why does the answer seem so simple to me? Again, let those who want to
> create a tld, simply register it with ICANN.
>
> If it isn't already taken, if they have the technical capability to mange
> the tld, and they have the desire to market that tld, then let them do so.
>
> Similar to the registering of a domain name, except on a higher level, with
> the added technical requirements. ICANN would be sort of an uber-registry
> for tlds.
>
> It would be ludicrous for a domain name restrar like go daddy or enom to ask
> you for a business plan, or a non-refundable application fee, before
> allowing you to register a domain name. It would be ridiculous for a
> registrar to have "rounds" of domain name releases of names "they chose" in
> advance.
>
> Okay, this month, go daddy will be allocating cheaperwebhosting.com,
> doggrommingmadeeasy.net, and virtualinternetwebnetwork.net. We will be
> taking applications and public comment during the month of february. We will
> then spend another month reviewing the applicants business plans to decide
> who we will allocate the domain name to. If you are not approved to manage
> the domain name you apply for, your application fee will be held by go daddy
> until further notice.
>
> Some people will say that is not a good analogy, but it is a perfect
> analogy. Here is why. If info.com was still available and I registered it. I
> could then start selling subdomains like car.info.com, computer.info.com,
> icann.info.com or any other subdomain someone wished to purchase from me.
> The subdomain is one dot removed from the domain name the same as the domain
> name is one dot removed from the tld.
>
> There is no longer any reason to believe ICANN is doing anything other than
> restricting free enterprise and free trade by not opening up the market for
> tlds. It is no longer acceptable that ICANN should be the one to decide
> which tlds will or will not be created nor is it acceptable that ICANN gets
> to choose who can or cannot run a tld.
>
> Do you present a businesss plan to the city you live in before they allow
> you a business license? No. Does the city ask you to prove you are
> financially stable before issuing you a business license? No, as long as you
> pay the registration fee. If you apply for a business license to open a
> clothing store, does the city ask how you will run your clothing store or if
> you have the necessary expertise to run a clothing store? No. Does the city
> think you will hurt them economically if your clothing store goes out of
> business? No, it's none of their business. Is the city concerned that there
> may not enough demand for yet another clothing store? No, again none of
> their business.
>
> ICANN not allowing me, or anyone else in the world, to create a tld of our
> choice in any language we choose, is a blatant violation of our rights. In
> many countries, America among them, the right to free enterprise still
> exists. ICANN is denying me that right as an American citizen and doing so
> when even their own organization exists under American law.
>
> There are no needs for auctions or rounds or anything else. If you want to
> run a tld, then you register it and start selling domain names. If you fail,
> you fail, just as in any other business venture you take on. Artificially
> restricting namespace to make a few business IP interests happy has to stop.
>
> Chris McElroy
> http://www.newsandmediablog.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Karl Auerbach" <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 3:11 PM
> Subject: [ga] Auctions
>
> > Re:  "Even during my term there were those who were
> > absolutely, totally, and utterly against auctions, and
> > some of those are still on the board."
> >
> > Karl,
> >
> > While we have heard the arguments in favor of auctions
> > (Manheim, Solum, Mueller, yourself, etc.), we have
> > frankly not yet considered the opposing points of
> > view... in part because those privately-held views
> > haven't been made public.
> >
> > For the sake of parity, I am therefore posting the
> > Cross-Constituency view (BC-IPC-ISPCP) that opposes
> > auctions (you may note that I don't agree with their
> > position but I am posting it for the sake of
> > discussion).  This is an excerpt from Philip
> > Sheppard's White Paper on internet domain name
> > expansion (June 2005):
> >
> >
> > "5. The problem with an auction model for new domain
> > names
> >
> > Sell to the highest bidder and hope that they have it
> > right
> >
> > ICANN has indicated it may experiment with an auction
> > model for the allocation of new domain names. This
> > follows a suggestion aired though not justified in a
> > 2004 paper from the OECD telecoms working party
> > (bibliography reference 14). The paper compared an
> > auction model to the laissez-faire model but
> > regrettably did not address the quality benefits
> > inherent in the added-value sponsored gTLD model.
> >
> > On the surface an auction model is more desirable than
> > a 100% laissez-faire approach as the market would
> > decide by price on the viability of success. But the
> > approach has several drawbacks:
> >
> > "X Not so market-driven. An auction model may rely on
> > a third party to dream up the names to auction. Who
> > will that be? ICANN? Who says these will be the right
> > names?
> >
> > "X Introduces bias. A work-around would be to allow
> > the names to be proposed by the first prospective
> > registry and then allow others to bid. But in such a
> > case the latter bidders would always be at a
> > disadvantage with respect to preparedness and their
> > ability to assess the upper limit on a viable auction
> > bid.
> >
> > "X Still no added value. Without the principles of
> > differentiation, certainty and good faith, an auction
> > model has no inherent ability to add value in the
> > public interest.
> >
> > "X Market distortion from market hype. As the global
> > bids for third generation mobile telephony have shown,
> > even experienced companies may be tempted to grossly
> > overbid in an auction model. The Internet has had its
> > share of hype and will continue to do so. The prospect
> > of the ¡§winner¡¦s curse¡¨ is real.
> >
> > "X Potential to be anti-competitive. An auction model
> > has the potential to favour the existing dominant
> > players. Given the current failure of competition at
> > the registry level (84% market share by one company)
> > this is not the model to use today.
> >
> > Summary
> > In short, any supposed benefit from an auction model
> > for new domain names has a disproportionate cost due
> > to the increased likelihood of market distortions.
> >
> > Such an approach is contrary to the public interest
> > and therefore contrary to ICANN¡¦s core values."
> > http://www.bizconst.org/positions/WPnewgTLDsfinal.doc
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k 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
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827