Re: [ga] price policy

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

--- Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Veni Markovski wrote:
> > $ 1 each, or at $ 6 each. But in anycase - the bigger point is if
> ICANN 
> > should regulate or not. I asked Karl similar question, but haven't
> heard 
> > from him.
> 
> Simple answer - and the same one that I've been saying since 1997 ---
> It 
> is *not* ICANN's role to regulate any aspect of business, economic, 
> social or legal policy except insofar as there is a direct, clear,
> and 
> compelling technical necessity.

<snip>

>    - Evaluation of the business models of domain name registries and 
> registrars (except perhaps for the legacy .com/.net/.edu/.org/) is
> not 
> ICANN's job.

In case folks missed Vint Cerf's quote in my earlier message:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg04899.html
http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/07/17/HNnetneutralitypioneers_1.html?BROADBAND

"What's worse than a regulated monopoly? The answer is, an unregulated
monopoly."

Of course ICANN must regulate monopoly registries. Given the tiered
pricing debate for .biz/info/org, see:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/icann_tiered_pricing_tld_biz_info_org_domain/

let's not be so quick to throw .biz and .info domain name registrants
under the bus, and not give them the same degree of protection and
certainty .com registrants receive. I personally am not big on .biz or
.info, but people who registered domains in those TLDs certainly were
not pleased with the idea of unregulated registry prices, as seen in
the public comments:

http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-28jul06.htm

It's not as though those TLDs are country based, and that registrants
can appeal to their national governments. The custodian or guardian of
those TLDs is ICANN. If they're not up to the task, they shouldn't have
approved .biz or .info in the first place.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/