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

Christian de Larrinaga cdel at firsthand.net
Fri Jul 13 07:56:59 UTC 2018

The challenge with a tax model is that ICANN is not representative. No
MS is not representative it is a process methodology. ICANN has been
captured for some years by those who have a financial interest in acting
as middle men controlling who gets a domain name rooted by the DNS root
server operators.

There should be no branding in the DNS - none. It is not technically
capable as it stands of representing brands. Branding could be supported
and integrated with the DNS. But the domain name itself is not the
mechanism to use.

We've had over two decades of noise around IPRs in the DNS domain names.
None of the solutions to this are anything more than band aids to try to
stop a bit of bleeding. The emergence of brand TLDs has created
opportunities to cut an artery or two. But the idea you cure somebody by
putting up the price of the surgery does not look like a good idea for
the patient. It looks self serving for the surgeon.

Over the longer term as I said there are better ways to architect brand
services than putting up the price to make more band aids.

The short term problem is ICANN has misstepped by pushing for brand TLDs
and accumulated a huge amount of money in the process. If it finds out
that it needs to spend some or all of that to fix its mess then that is
not an excuse for passing the buck on to others.

What ICANN should not do is sell more tld's in order to subsidise fixing
those already available. At the end of the day the brands who bought
into and own these domains are responsible for the good conduct and
service to their users. They bought into it and it is to them that their
users should and can seek redress if those brands don't stand up to the
contract they made. ICANN no doubt has some responsibility and possibly
some potential liability but it is a private sector body and has to live
and die as such.



Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond 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.
> What about setting higher application fees for brand TLDs? I gather
> that the place to discuss this is the subsequent procedures PDP, if
> that has not already been discussed.
> Kindest regards,
> Olivier

Christian de Larrinaga
@ FirstHand
+44 7989 386778
cdel at firsthand.net

More information about the At-Large mailing list