[nc-transfer] Registries questioning of TF policy
Jeff Newman suggests that the TF Report goes beyond policy recommendation as
More specifically, the constituency unanimously believes that the Report
delves into matters that are beyond the scope of any policy task force and
certainly are not appropriate for the policy consensus process. These
matters include, but are not limited to: (1) whether a Registry Service can
be introduced by a Registry Operator; and (2) the price of a Registry
Service. We believe that such issues are related to the business of the
individual registry and are more appropriate for the market place to
regulate rather than ICANN.
1. On the question of whether the TF should rightfully consider the WLS
The question is answered in our report and the answer is yes, due to the
expected harm that will arise from the elimination of competition - one of
the fundamental principles of ICANN (enhancing competition)
2. On the question of suggesting "the price of a registry service"
The TF have not recommended a price, buy rather the approach that the ICANN
Board should take to establishing the price - which is that it should be
cost-based - and noting that from our understanding of the service we would
the costs of executing a WLS request to lower than exercising a request to
register a name. To which some specific WLS actions (notification and
transparency) should be added.
This recommendation on price is a policy statement, noting that the
provision of monopoly sole source services are usually regulated on a
I would note further that it is not the wish of the BC to have ICANN
increase its regulatory role and hence this is another reason for rejecting
VGR's request to set up this monopoly service.
I trust this explanation of the "policy" recommendations made by the TF
helps clarify the wording of the report - regardless of whether you agree or
support the actual recommendations.
BC Rep on the Transfers Task Force