[lac-discuss-en] [At-Large] Vistaprint is abandoning .vista

[Sivasubramanian M]

Dear Olivier

Please see inline:

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:21 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>
wrote:

> Dear Christian,
>
> On 12/07/2018 11:40, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
>
> Worth pointing out this note is proposing a tax basis for DNS not a cost
> recovery mechanism. Who gets this tax revenue? Who gets to set it? ICANN
> does not have the credentials.
>
>
> IMHO the "cost recovery basis" is a red herring for the simple reason that
> it is impossible to calculate what a TLD will really cost ICANN in the long
> run. Is it just the cost of processing the application, or is it the cost
> of fixing problems related to that TLD such as the need to have more ICANN
> compliance staff for more TLDs with a higher than normal amount of misuse
> of domains under that TLD?
>
> The ICANN model is already a tax revenue model where ICANN taxes every
> domain sold and Registries, Registrars and their agenda collect that money
> on behalf of ICANN pretty much like VAT.
>

It need not be called a tax revenue model, but by a term such as "DNS fees"
payable for every domain, required to maintain the DNS as global, stable,
secure and fair. It seems uniformly subsidized at present level for the
benefit of the global Internet user at ​18 cents per domain through the
Registrar after 25 cents per domain indirectly collected from gTLD
registries, but not from all Registries.

This could be more, much more, after providing for even zero fees or/and
lower fees (10 cents or so) for the first 10,000 names by a new Registry /
Registrar, some exceptionally limited Community TLDs, to actually become a
dollar as total direct and indirect Registrant fee to ICANN.

Also, what happens when someone pays US $ 13 million or an unknown sum in
an unspoken of transaction? A dollar to ICANN? Could be a million as
premium fee. Quite a moot point, could be voluntary for Registries.

The rationale arises from considering, in concept, not as much by legal
assertion,  all names as "owned" by All Users with ICANN as the Trustee,
and the Registries / Registrars as lessors of the name for a year, two, ten
or more, with fair and routine consideration by ICANN  in accordance with
business conventions for routine extensions to continue operations in their
respective space, and for the Registrant similar considerations to extend
the registrations.

ICANN's revenues are disproportionately low which constrains it's mission
unacknowledged.

Sivasubramanian M


> What about setting higher application fees for brand TLDs?
>

Corporations, especially the ones who desire their own TLDs, spend hundreds
of million to build up their brands, and some brands spend in billions on
advertising.

The current gTLD application fee has been arrived so as to make the process
approachable by applicants across the world, by small applicants and
individuals. Brands are on the top end of this spectrum. Yes, there could
be a different fee structure for brands of such global scope that they
prefer to have that brand name as global gTLD.


I gather that the place to discuss this is the subsequent procedures PDP,
> if that has not already been discussed.
> Kindest regards,
>
> Olivier
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org



-- 
Sivasubramanian M
Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20180713/004afc26/attachment.html>