Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz contract
Veni Markovski wrote: I am surprised, and concerned about the ratio of smoke and noise to actual information. Danny asked a question. I don't care whether one characterizes it as private or as public, it remains a good question. Now, we have had a bit of very useful information from Jeff Neuman about the terms in the contracts about "disproportionate deletes" and the fact that he believes that additional policy making will be required to define that term. Of course, when that term is defined, the contracts gives the registry the choice whether to take advantage of its right to take money from the quite busy registrar (since only registrars, not net users, get to utilize these various grace provisions.) What is missing from this is an answer from you about your position on all of this or your perception of the sense of ICANN's staff or the board on this. In particular I'd certainly be interested in your position on the fact that this "tasting" exercise has demonstrated that the actual registry costs of processing a name registration are significantly less than the registry fee that ICANN requires registrars to pay, and which is passed through to internet users to the tune of several hundred millions of dollars, every year, in excessive registry fees. Question: Do you feel that those of use who acquire names for full term (i.e. one year or more) ought to pay a registry fee (of $6, going to $7+ for .com) even though the actual cost to the registry to process the transaction is on the order of $0.02? I.e. why should each of us who acquires a full-term domain name be forced to pay an extra %5.98, going to $6.98, especially when the tasters get it for free? Remember, that when we multiply this excessive fee over the entire set of full-term registrants in .com alone we are talking about an excess fee that amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars per year. --karl--
|