Re: [wg-c] Discharging employees no longer needed after lossof contract. (Formerthread "registry contracts".)

["Kevin J. Connolly" <CONNOLLK@rspab.com>]

"Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@psi-japan.com> wrote 11/15/99 10:04AM 
>At 08:32 15-11-1999 -0500, Eric Brunner wrote:
>>If operators have no title interest in registry data, and the mechanism
>>for renewal is competitive bid on price with nominal non-price conditions
>>which resolve to capitalization, then at each rebid, each operator will
>>have only their initial capitalization and accumulations, direct as well
>>as indirect, from registry operation.
>
>One aspect of this concept of moving a registry from one operator to 
>another (as proposed by Kent's proposal) is that, in many political 
>jurisdictions, the losing operator will have major responsibilities for 
>employees it no longer requires.  In lots of places you can't just 
>discharge employees because you lost a contract.
>
>Comments?
>
>BobC
>
The pure economic answer is that jurisdictions which do not so bog down 
their businesses with such regulations will have a comparative advantage 
and for that reason will (and, from the perspective of free market economics,
_should_) attract a larger share of the domain name registration business 
than those which impose social welfare obligations on the employer.

The legal answer is: tell me (or any other cartilaginous-skeletoned brethren 
of my profession) in which jurisdictions you intend to site your domain name 
registration business, and I or they will be happy to develop strategies 
which minimize your exposure to this risk.

The policy answer, I submit, should be the decision how to structure the 
future of the domain name system should be inelastic with respect to 
national laws and customs of businessmen; that the rules should be 
uniform, developed in the interest of the Internet as a whole; and that the 
responses adopted by different nations will depend on their own choices 
about the values entailed by responding to the changing economic 
landscape and/or preserving their own traditions and practices.

Kevin J. Connolly
The opinions expressed are those of the author, not of Robinson Silverman 
Pearce Aronsohn & Berman LLP
This note is not legal advice.  If it were, it would come with an invoice.
As usual, please disregard the trailer which follows.

**********************************************************************
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
and/or other applicable protections from disclosure.  If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
munication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communi-
cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to helpdesk@rspab.com
**********************************************************************