UDRP's reversed? Trademark Law Breached

"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 ]

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