ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [ga] price policy

  • To: Veni Markovski <veni@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [ga] price policy
  • From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:37:21 -0700
  • Cc: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Reply-to: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Web-Based Email 4.8.5

<div>&gt; should there be some regulation for the minimum required price
for TLD?</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Veni,</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Since you asked, here are my thoughts.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Last year I realized that due to increased travel I would not be able
to take care of my yard properly myself. So I contracted that out. My
yard is still my reponsibility, and if the contractor doesn't do their
job I can get out of the agreement - or even cancel it at my
convenience with notice. Also, I took bids from a few contractors and
the resultant contract specifies the services to be performed and at
what price. It allows for additional costs based on perceived needs of
the contractor with my permission, or if I should request additional
services. There is no way I would have considered a contract that could
not be cancelled or had an open ended pricing structure.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Now, I know no one cars about my yard care problems. But the point is
that I see ICANN contracting for Parent Zone services for gTLDs in much
the same way. These agreements should be contracts for a service at a
price. It's true that ICANN is not paying that price, consumers
are.&nbsp;But it's also true that ICANN is a non-profit public benefit
corporation (under CA law) and has committed to operate for the benefit
of the Internet community as a whole -&nbsp;I believe it's reasonable to
assume that they should not be committing that Internet community to
unreasonable contract terms with Registry Operators, including open
ended pricing structures.&nbsp;It's also true that ICANN is ultimately
responsible for the security and stability of the Internet DNS of which
the Parent Zones are an incredibly important part - they should not
abdicate their responsibility by handing the Parent Zone DNS entirely
over to third parties with no option to ever rethink their
decision.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><BR>Tim<BR></div>
<DIV id=wmMessageComp name="wmMessageComp"><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: [ga]
price policy<BR>From: Veni Markovski &lt;veni@xxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date:
Tue, October 10, 2006 9:06 am<BR>To: ga
&lt;ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>Everyone has opinion on the price
policy for TLDs.<BR><BR>I hear arguments about the roof of the prices,
but I haven't seen <BR>anything on the foundation. So, my questions is,
should there be some <BR>regulation for the minimum required price for
TLD?<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>Sincerely,<BR>Veni
Markovski<BR>http://www.veni.com<BR><BR>check also my
blog:<BR>http://blog.veni.com </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>