[registrars] Registry Sensitive or Proprietary Information

["Michael D. Palage" <Michael@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul,

While I support your candidacy to the Non-Com, I do think you disclosure
statement needs to be a little more forthcoming along the lines of what Tim
Ruiz did in disclosing GoDaddy's joint venture with Afilias.  In addition to
eNom's involvement in the marketing of .TV names, it is my understanding
that you were also recently pursuing the .ME registry contract as well.
While I admire the vertically integrated distribution chain building
(registry, registrar, and after market) that DemandMedia is building, the
process by which many elected registrar representatives claim that they have
no access to registry sensitive or proprietary information is a little
suspect and a personal sore point for the reasons set forth below. 

Rob Hall asked a couple of months ago where this language originally came
from, let me now take the time to set the record straight on the origins of
this exact language. This language originated in connection with the
backlash within the registrar constituency when GNR sought accreditation as
an ICANN accredited registrar. Now I defended at that time the right of a
registry to own a registrar, however at that time most of the registrar
constituency was not exactly supportive of my position. Times have changed
and we now have registrars advocating for registries to be permitted to own
registrars. No doubt because next year with the new TLD process, many of the
new applicants will be registrars or their sister companies :-)

Now in response to this newly proposed language that was adopted by the
constituency, it was deemed that my work as a consultant to Afilias barred
me from continuing to stand as chair of the registrar constituency.  Now the
nature of the "registry sensitive and/or proprietary information" that it
was deemed that I had access to was the registrar application form that
stated what the minimum account balance a registrar would maintain prior to
a registry contacting them to replenish their account. 

Now looking back I kind of laugh because today large registrars that receive
the volume discounts made possible through the new registry agreements, are
the only ones that have access to some of the most tightly guarded
information in the industry, specifically, the nature of these volume
discounts and marketing arrangements. When you look at the recent actions of
GoDaddy and eNom to enter directly/indirectly the registry market, and
Pool.com's exclusive deal to provide auction services to DotAsia it should
be clear that these deals have to involve at least SOME form of registry
sensitive or proprietary information. 

Another reason why I raise the issue of registrars entering into the
registry marketplace is because I have been advocating publicly on behalf of
.MUSEUM and .POST that registries need some additional flexibilities
regarding their distribution models. Obviously I have heard loud and clear
the registrar constituency opposition to this approach. However, the
continued blurring of the lines between registrar and registry is an issues
that needs to addressed if ICANN is going to artificially enforce through
contracts a registry registrar distinction. 

Bruce Tonkin, hopefully you are reading this email, and it is possible for
you to ask ICANN staff to provide the community with a public update on the
economic study that the ICANN Board approved last year on 18-Oct-2006, see
http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-18oct06.htm. While I commend staff on
the open and transparent process by which they are going about selecting a
provider to draft the new TLD RFP, things have been a lot less clear in
connection with this economic study. 

Best regards,

Michael





-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul Stahura
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 1:40 PM
To: Registrars Constituency
Subject: [registrars] stahura conflicts statement



Thank you for the seconds for the nomination committee seat.  Below is my
statement:

I am a fulltime employee of eNom where I'm the founder/CEO.
I am also the COO, and board member, of eNom's parent company, Demand Media,
Inc.  eNom is an accredited registrar that is registering names in all major
gTLDs and ccTLDs.  eNom also owns a number of other registrars which are
primarily used to catch names in the drop for our customers.  eNom also
provides back-end registrar services for other ICANN accredited registrars.
eNom is a minor shareholder of Afilias.  I am/was a member of the ICANN
whois taskforce.  I was the registrar's elected rep to the nomcom for 2007.
I am not and never have been in possession of any registry sensitive or
proprietary information.

Thanks again,
Paul