Re: [ga] Tiered (Variable) Pricing

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

All,
   
  

"Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    Karl,
Major snippage>>>
   
    The main point I wanted to make is this: when people refer to ICANN, they often mean ICANN staff and Directors when in fact it is everyone who is involved in ICANN processes and there are many within that broader definition who support a very regulatory ICANN.

  major snippage>>>

  Chuck

  Let us see; we recognized GNSO, now we have Staff and Directors.
  Excuse me but who else is within that broader definition????
  And do not tell me the people who are customers.
    Hmmmm
  e
   
  

Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com)

 -----Original Message-----
From:   Karl Auerbach [mailto:karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:   Friday, September 01, 2006 09:19 PM Eastern Standard Time
To:     Gomes, Chuck
Cc:     ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:        Re: [ga] Tiered (Variable) Pricing

Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> With regard to tight regulation of business practices, don't you think
> there are quite a few people in the community who want the tight
> regulaton of business practices?

To which I reply - why should they be allowed to dictate the rules to
the rest of us?  Who made them the legislature of the internet?  What is
the source of authority?

J.D. Rockefeller felt that his ruthless suppression of divergent
business practices in the oil refining and distribution industry (there
was a definite reason why it was called *Standard* Oil) was in the best
interests of consumers and the industry because it eliminated the
wasteful effects of competition.

His position has been soundly rejected by nearly every country on the
planet.

It was more than a century ago in the US when we decided that
Rockefeller's philosophy was contrary to our national principles.

The idea of competition contains within it the notion that those who
don't fit into the mold established by the incumbents don't need to ask
permission from those incumbents.

So what I am saying is that ICANN is trying to swim upstream against
well established national policies against guilds and
groups/combinations that try to impose their will on the marketplace and
the products, services, vendors, and sales terms and prices of that
marketplace.

Yet that is what ICANN is doing with regard to new TLDs and the
excessive regulation of existing TLDs.

When, for example, with IOD get to go forward with .web?  They've lost a
decade, including the .com bubble - the hypothetical lost revenue is
very large.  And will I ever have a realistic chance of getting my .ewe
into the ICANN/NTIA root zone?

I draw one exception - protection of those people who have been locked
into TLDs (Thomas Rossler just wrote a nice concise description of this
effect at
http://log.does-not-exist.org/archives/2006/09/01/2082_on_registry_pricing_persistence_and_stability.html#more
)

The sooner we get enough real diversity in domain name product offerings
that the consumer can be said to have had a real choice to get the
product he/she wants, the sooner we can transform that kind of
protection into a fading legacy.

                --karl--









 		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.