RE: [wg-c] Give NSI .shop and take back .com

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

>2.  I assume that NSI wants to run the new registry in order to prevent
>another rival from emerging.  I assume that NSI's suggestion the
>registry be owned by the other registrars is also consistent with making
>it hard for another rival to emerge.  I don't think I am going out on a
>limb here.  With its current control of the gTLD space, why wouldn't one
>expect NSI to try to protect its monopoly?  That's what monopolies
>usually do.  

Of course. They don't want a competitor like Image Online Design
to have any chance of getting its .web registry into the roots. That
seem obvious from their behaviour over the past year as well as
their voting record and proposal.

>3.  Was NSI allowed to vote in the Names Council votes on the new
>registries?  (I haven't seen the tallys).  What do the ICANN bylaws
>provide in terms of conflicts of interest for the Names Council?  Is
>there anyone on the Names Council who doesn't have an "intereset" in
>this issue, if not a "conflict" of interest?  I'm not sure how ICANN
>deals with conflicts of interest.  It seems as though it kind of rewards
>conflicts, by giving you more votes, board seats, etc, than people
>without direct commerical interests in the outcome.  

I couldn't agree more.

--
Christopher Ambler
chris@the.web