[NA-Discuss] statement on pre-registration draft for discussion
beaubrendler at earthlink.net
Mon Jun 13 12:01:55 UTC 2011
Yes, I understand that objection -- I'm not sure I really got my own point across. I am hoping someone who has some knowledge of how Verisign used pre-registration 10 or more years ago to capture market share might help us out here on that part of the draft, because it's that I was trying to refer to...
>From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy at seltzer.com>
>Sent: Jun 10, 2011 7:25 PM
>To: Beau Brendler <beaubrendler at earthlink.net>, NA Discuss <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] statement on pre-registration draft for discussion
>I agree with the general sentiment of avoiding confusion -- more, and
>more accurate information is better.
>I disagree with the sentences below, specifically as regards
>"artificially creating demand." If the service acts as an indication of
>demand, we can dispute its accuracy (lots more people may "pre-register"
>if its free than might pay money for a registration, or vice versa, they
>might not want to show their hands early) but I don't think it's
>insidious for that reason. I see nothing wrong with letting people try
>to measure or justify demand for new TLDs however they like.
>On 06/10/2011 06:24 PM, Beau Brendler wrote:
>> While United Domains says the pre-registration service is free and non-binding, the NARALO is concerned the offer of such a service could create artificial demand which could then be used to justify additional rounds of TLD creation and release, or might serve to confuse consumers.
>Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 914-374-0613
>Fellow, Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy
>Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
More information about the NA-Discuss