[ALAC] Comment on proposal for the removal of existing gTLD-Registrar cross-ownership .

Titi Akinsanmi titi.akinsanmi at gmail.com
Mon Jun 4 09:02:29 UTC 2012


+1 this has my support in particular the caveat that price caps be not
removed. We have enough hurdles without creating even more of one for
developing economies playing catch up on the issues of Internet real estate.

TT

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 6:36 AM, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> Hi Alan,
>
> Thanks for doing this. I agree with your rationale ... so much so, in fact,
>  that I would strengthen the ALAC comment in line with it.
>
> So, instead of saying
>
> "the ALAC supports the removal of cross-ownership constraints for existing
> > gTLD operators. Nevertheless, [we don't like the prospect of removal of
> > price caps]"
>
>
> I would suggest
>
> "the ALAC supports the removal of cross-ownership constraints for existing
> > gTLD operators, on the condition that existing regulations related to
> price
> > caps are left unchanged."
>
>
> (or something like that).
>
> In other words, I would link our support to the promise to leave the price
> caps untouched.
>
> - Evan
>
>
>
>
> On 3 June 2012 19:05, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>
> > I was asked to evaluate whether a comment of the Proposed Revised
> > Process for Handling Requests for Removal of Cross-Ownership
> > Restrictions on Operators of Existing gTLDs warrants ALAC comment,
> > and if so to draft such a comment. Following consultation with
> > selected ALAC and At-Large members, I believe that a comment is
> warranted.
> >
> > Unfortunately other commitments have prevented me from submitting
> > such a comment until today, and the first stage of the comment period
> > ends on June 6th.
> >
> > I would suggest that if there is no substantive ALAC request to not
> > submit this comment, that it be submitted prior to the deadline with
> > the stated proviso that it is undergoing ALAC comment and approval.
> > That would allow the ALAC to revise it if needed, and accept or
> > reject it prior to the conclusion of the 2nd phase of the comment period.
> >
> > The details of the proposal and comment period are at
> >
> >
> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/revised-cross-ownership-restrictions-16may12-en.htm
> > .
> >
> > My concern is that one of the options provided is that existing
> > registry operators (and specifically .com, .net and .org) can either
> > request amendment of their agreements to remove cross-ownership
> > restrictions, or can transition  to the agreement to be used by all
> > new gTLD operators. If they chose the latter path, along with the
> > removal  of the restrictions on cross ownership, they would also
> > remove the price caps that are in existing agreements. This I feel
> > could be of great detriment to Internet users.
> >
> > My proposed comment follows.
> >
> > Alan
> > ==========================
> >
> > The ALAC and At-Large have multiple opinions on whether the removal
> > of Cross-Ownership Restrictions for gTLD Operators will be to the
> > benefit or detriment of users, or in fact, the domain ecosystem.
> > There is, however, a unified position that whatever the environment
> > is, with certain constraints, there should be a level playing field
> > for all gTLD operators.
> >
> > As such, the ALAC supports the removal of cross-ownership constraints
> > for existing gTLD operators.
> >
> > Nevertheless, the ALAC does have one concern with the proposal, and
> > that is the option for existing gTLD operators to transition to the
> > new gTLD agreement. That transition would be subject to limits
> > related to competition issues raised by the removal of the
> > cross-ownership restrictions. The document is silent on other results
> > of such a transition, and particularly the removal of price caps on
> > existing operators.
> >
> > The ALAC does not believe that there is sufficient proof at this time
> > to indicate that the new gTLD environment will so significantly
> > change the gTLD market so that price caps are no longer required for
> > the dominant gTLDs. As such, no change driven by the removal of
> > cross-ownership restrictions should at the same time remove the price
> > caps in the current agreements for dominant gTLDs without substantive
> > community involvement.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >
> > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> > ALAC Working Wiki:
> >
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Evan Leibovitch
> Toronto Canada
>
> Em: evan at telly dot org
> Sk: evanleibovitch
> Tw: el56
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>



-- 
Mrs. Titi Akinsanmi

Consultant/Researcher
Mobile: +27 83 300 7105
titi.akinsanmi at gmail.com
Impacting My Generation



More information about the ALAC mailing list