[NA-Discuss] New gTLDs: Assignment Sucks

[Danny Younger]

Consider the following list of registry reserved names:

d-o-t-p-r-o-s-u-c-k-s.*.pro
d-o-t-p-r-o-s-u-c-k-s.pro
dot-pro-sucks.*.pro
dot-pro-sucks.pro
dotprosucks.*.pro
dotprosucks.pro
hostway-sucks.*.pro
hostway-sucks.pro
hostwaysucks.*.pro
hostwaysucks.pro
netnation-sucks.*.pro
netnation-sucks.pro
netnationsucks.*.pro
netnationsucks.pro
p-r-o-n-a-m-e-s-s-u-c-k-s.*.pro
p-r-o-n-a-m-e-s-s-u-c-k-s.pro
p-r-o-n-a-m-e-s-u-c-k-s.*.pro
p-r-o-n-a-m-e-s-u-c-k-s.pro
pronamesucks.*.pro
pronamesucks.pro
r-e-g-i-s-t-r-y-p-r-o-s-u-c-k-s.*.pro
r-e-g-i-s-t-r-y-p-r-o-s-u-c-k-s.pro
registeryprosucks.*.pro
registeryprosucks.pro
registriprosucks.*.pro
registriprosucks.pro
registry-pro-sucks.*.pro
registry-pro-sucks.pro
registryprosucks.*.pro
registryprosucks.pro
registryservices-sucks.*.pro
registryservices-sucks.pro
registryservicessucks.*.pro
registryservicessucks.pro
registrysolutions-sucks.*.pro
registrysolutions-sucks.pro
registrysolutionssucks.*.pro
registrysolutionssucks.pro
v-i-s-u-c-k-s.*.pro
v-i-s-u-c-k-s.pro
visucks.*.pro
visucks.pro

The problem, of course, is that the management of the .pro registry really does suck.  At last report this global domain had only around 8000 registrations under management.  First the registry was owned and operated by the registryPro subsidiary of register.com; later those assets were assigned to Registry Services Corporation, a Nevada corporation fully owned by Hostway Corporation.

At issue is the assignment process.

Subsection 5.11 of the .pro Registry Agreement provides that "Registry Operator may assign this Agreement as part of the transfer of its registry business if such transfer and assignment are approved in advance by ICANN...";

Did any of us see the assignee's business plan for the TLD?  Of course not.  In keeping with ICANN's notion of transparency, only new gTLD applicants need to submit a business plan, assignees do not.  No one in the public had any right to review the details of the planned takeover of the .pro registry... we had no opportunity to scrutinize an application or to post any challenges or concerns -- a classic example of back-room deal-making that totally excludes the general public.

What is needed is a substantially higher level of transparency in the assignment process.  In my view, assignees should be required to publicly disclose details to the same degree as any new gTLD applicant.