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

Wed Jun 6 17:54:40 UTC 2012

Staff has their arms full at the moment, so let's 
let the statement get posted as currently 
written. Once that is done, I will revise for 
voting and later re-posting during the reply 
period) which ends on the Thursday of the Prague meeting, so plenty of time).

Alan

At 06/06/2012 01:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>Ah. OK. Thanks for the explanation.
>
>It may be too late to make this point element 
>clearer in the first paragraph of the statement 
>as Carlton has suggested, given the severe 
>timeline constraints. Nonetheless, I can support 
>it given what you've said, with or without the modification.
>
>- Evan
>
>
>On 6 June 2012 11:47, Alan Greenberg 
><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>Evan, perhaps I am missing something, but here is my take.
>
>The comment says that the ALAC is in favour of 
>removing the cross-ownership constraints. This 
>is not conditional (it is for some of us a 
>statement grudgingly made because of a 
>preference for maintaining ownership limits 
>everywhere - but THAT decision was already irrevocably made).
>
>The concern is not with the removal of ownership 
>constraints, but with one of the methodologies 
>to implement this - namely the wholesale 
>transition to the new gTLD contract form.
>
>The comments says we support removing the 
>cross-ownership rules, but NOT by the wholesale 
>move to the new contract which makes a LOT of 
>other changes, most benign to users, some good 
>(such as thick whois) and some bad, such as the lifting of price caps.
>
>Alan
>
>
>At 06/06/2012 10:30 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
>
>
>On 6 June 2012 03:53, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
>
><
>
><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>ocl
>
>at gih.com> wrote:
>
>
> > thank you for your kind follow-up on this. I understand that this
>
>was
>
> > a short comment period but have so far only see positive feedback
>
>about the
>
> > text.
>
>
>That said, I'm still ambiguous about the wording.
>
>
>Apparently, we're concerned about the price cap, but not enough to
>
>affect
>
>our approval of the policy. Tacking on "major" is IMO
>
>pointless. Either the
>
>issue is significant enough for ALAC to make support conditional on
>
>maintaining price controls, or it isn't. The wording of the statement
>
>allows our advice to be comfortably accepted as "support" and
>
>the trailer
>
>concern ignored.
>
>
>The policy can be revisited after the gTLD rollout and we can determine
>
>if
>
>monopoly power still exists.
>
>
>It's not likely I would vote in favour of the statement as worded. But
>
>I'm
>
>just one vote.
>
>
>- Evan
>
>
> >  With today being the deadline for submitting comments and
>
> > with only positive feedback received both on the ALAC but also the
>
>wider
>
> > At-Large list, I have given the green light for staff proceed as
>
>follows
>
> > TODAY:
>
> >
>
> > - submit this final version to the public comment process, with a
>
>note
>
> > that the statement is currently undergoing ALAC ratification,
>
> > - create a wiki page for the comment with the first draft of your
>
>text
>
> > and the final version, as submitted,
>
> > - cut/paste all comments received on the ALAC and the At-Large lists
>
>and
>
> > display them as a comment on this Wiki page.
>
> >
>
> > This process ensures a better transparency and archiving of the
>
> > discussion for future reference, if needed.
>
> >
>
> > Kind regards,
>
> >
>
> > Olivier
>
> >
>
> > On 06/06/2012 04:15, Alan Greenberg wrote :
>
> > > In light of Evan's comment, have made a change to the
>
>statement. Not
>
> > > exactly what he suggested, but I think in the same direction.
>
> > >
>
> > > I note that if a comment is to be submited by the ALAC, even a
>
> > > preliminary one, it must be done in the next 22 hours.
>
> > >
>
> > > 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.
>
> > >
>
> > > However, the ALAC does have one major concern with the
>
>proposal. The
>
> > > option for existing gTLD operators to transition to the new
>
>gTLD
>
> > > agreement would remove cross-ownership constraints, but it
>
>would also
>
> > > have a very significant other effect that has not been the
>
>subject of
>
> > > virtually any public discussion. Specifically, it would remove
>
>the
>
> > > price caps in the existing agreements, and that is not
>
>something that
>
> > > should quietly be slipped in without careful analysis.
>
> > >
>
> > > 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
>
> > >
>
><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>ALAC at
>
>atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>
> > >
>
>
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> > >
>
> > > At-Large Online:
>
><http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>
> > > ALAC Working Wiki:
>
> >
>
>
>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC
>
>)
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > Olivier MJ CrÃ©pin-Leblond, PhD
>
> >
>
><http://www.gih.com/ocl.html>http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > ALAC mailing list
>
> >
>
><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>ALAC
>
>at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>
> >
>
>
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> >
>
> > At-Large Online:
>
><http://www.atlarge.icann.org>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
>
>
>
>
>----------
>Previous message: 
><http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002135.html>[ALAC] 
>Comment on proposal for the removal of existing 
>gTLD-Registrar cross-ownership .
>Next message: 
><http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/002137.html>[ALAC] 
>Comment on proposal for the removal of existing 
>gTLD-Registrar cross-ownership .
>Messages sorted by: 
><http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/date.html#2136>[ 
>date ] 
><http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/thread.html#2136>[ 
>thread ] 
><http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/subject.html#2136>[ 
>subject ] 
><http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/2012/author.html#2136>[ 
>author ]
>----------
><https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>More 
>information about the ALAC mailing list
>
>
>
>
>--
>Evan Leibovitch
>Toronto Canada
>Em: evan at telly dot org
>Sk: evanleibovitch
>Tw: el56
>