Re: [ga] WLS Questions - Spcl Attn. Nancy Victory and Karen Rose

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

John and all assembly members,

John Berryhill wrote:

> I'm trying to understand this notion of how a monopoly WLS, which guarantees
> only one person a crack at an expiring name, is "fair" relative to multiple
> competing services, and would appreciate hearing from someone who (a)
> believes it is fair, and (b) is not associated with SnapNames or Verisign.

  Yes it is very difficult to understand!  The close association
now between Versisign and Snapnames would in part explain
their particular interest of course.

>
>
> Chuck Gomes has said that something like 50% of SnapNames customers are
> speculators instead of "average" domain name registrants.  Leaving aside the
> question of how a population of 50% of anything is not "average", or the
> methodology used to read the minds of the other 50% to determine their
> motivation, then can someone clue me in to how 50% of WLS position holders
> are NOT going to be speculators?

  In effect 50% of proposed WLS position holders either way would
be speculators..  My question is and was to verisgn is what
is an "Average Domain Name Registrant"?  I have yet to receive
any answer, regardless of it's actual validity or considered validity.
So perhaps as Nancy Victory suggested in her statement to the
Senate hearing yesterday, we should direct these questions to
the GAC, which our US representative is Karen Rose.  Karen?
Nancy?, Can you answer these questions in a straight forward manner
please?  ( of course I am not holding my breath awaiting and answer)...

>
>
> Snapbacks are $69 a pop, and we are told half of them are owned by
> speculators.  So, the point here is that SnapNames wants to have 50% fewer
> customers?  Or they want to charge 100% of them twice as much money in order
> to get rid of the "bad" customers while keeping the "good" customers?

  Two very good questions here as well John...  And again perhaps
Nancy or Karen could answer them...  Nancy?  Karen?

>
>
> And with the "price high enough to discourage speculation" idea, what is the
> evidence that speculators don't have more money than these "average"
> registrants for whom we are trying to make things "fair"?

  Ore vice versa.  As a matter of fact what is the difference if any between
a speculator and Verisign and SnapNames defines them, which remains
undefined by either of them?

>
>
> And if we aren't going to have a dispute resolution procedure for people who
> take up WLS slots on expiring domain names that are someone else's
> trademarks, then what is the point of making the identity of WLS slot
> holders known?

  The only logical point I can see is that the IP Legal community,
or IP ambulance chasers, can easily define whom these folks are
and can more easily have a tool to defend their Trademarks.

>
>
> I have to take my hat off to the guy with enough chutzpah to tell a Senate
> subcommittee that ICANN was strangling consumer choice and competition by
> refusing to introduce a monopoly service that would replace several
> competing services to do the same thing.  Doing that and avoiding dizziness
> at the same time is an admirable feat.

  Yes, that was very interesting and high speed spin.  But I believe that
no one bought off on his testimony very much...  But it was hoot!  >;)

>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html