ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    UDRP's reversed? Trademark Law Breached | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 14 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re:budweiser.beer
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Thursday October 02 2003, @06:13PM (#12356)
    User #2810 Info
    What we would have gotten is all of them, a price increase and SiteFinder and WLS, and no doubt there are other improvements to the namespace yet in store.

    The fact that the internet was once a public resource seems to have now been completely forgotten whilst we argue over the spoils with a 900 lb. gorilla. Wholesale prices should not go up, they should go down, and they would if there was no price floor (which some see wrongly as a price cap).

    VeriSign pleads poverty, etc. but the simple fact is that ICANN has been completely useless at promoting competition, VeriSign is still the dominant (near monopoly) player yo these many years later. Do you think it was a coincidence that VeriSign announced SiteFinder on the eve of ICANN getting an unprecedented new three year lease on life? If they had announced it a few months ago (which they could well have done, as I've said, .tv, .cc and others have already done the same thing) and provoked this storm of protest, perhaps ICANN might have come under closer scrutiny. The whole thing stinks of corruption and insider trading, as does most anything ICANN touches. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:budweiser.beer by fnord
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  
    Re:budweiser.beer
    by RFassett on Thursday October 02 2003, @08:03PM (#12357)
    User #3226 Info | http://www.enum.info
    "What we would have gotten is all of them, a price increase and SiteFinder and WLS"

    we do not have the price increase, something Verisign seemed to argue for at one time before "new registry services" came about. I feel this all could have been negotiated. Instead, I know for a fact we have 2 out of 3 along with the consequences.

    "The fact that the internet was once a public resource seems to have now been completely forgotten"

    should we pick when the NSF chose to no longer subsidize NetSol or when Verisign paid $15B for the rights to com/net/org? Or should these watershed events in DNS just be ignored?

    "Wholesale prices should not go up"

    show me how to buy a decent .com domain name for under $500...if Verisign lowered the wholesale price to $2 or $1, this reality would not change. The reality is that Verisign cannot tap into the artificial spread between retail and wholesale under the very straight forward DNS transaction model. As a result, they have looked outside the tradiional model to find ways to do so...ways many are now saying "is not there place" or "an abuse of their position". The fact that they are unable to capitalize on the market value of .com under the simple DNS transaction model is the reason the $6 is a price cap.

    "VeriSign pleads poverty"

    I have not heard Verisign plead poverty. I do however recognize that they have a fiduciary responsibility as a publicly traded company with a right to adjust to changing market conditions and to deliver year over year financial objectives. If this conflicts with the "custodial role" some expect Verisign to sit back and play (while others around them shake down the consumers), well the decision for com/net registry operations to be performed "for-profit" was made a very long time ago.

    "but the simple fact is that ICANN has been completely useless at promoting competition"

    The people advising ICANN that wild cards are not stable are the same ones that have been advising ICANN to proceed cautiously with new registry competition "for reasons of stability". In my opinion, these are not business people and it shows nearly every day with all the crap that goes on that would make any back alley racketeer proud...but the overriding concern for DNS stabilty has been maintained, or has this now been compromised?

    "The whole thing stinks of corruption and insider trading"

    No, I disagree. The straight forward DNS model does not allow Verisign to tap into the artificial market value (or the unlocked value) of a .com registration. So they have found other ways to capture the market value of .com. Simple as that to me regardless of whether I agree or disagree with Verisign's action. I do believe these actions could have been avoided and that the wholesale price was the proper place to negotiate as much.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com