[ICANN-EU] Re: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs

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

Anupam and all,

Anupam Chander wrote:

> Let's see... 44 x $50,000...  A nice tidy $2.2 million.  But it's likely to
> be a lot more.  As Jamie points out, many applicants sought multiple new
> TLDs, for which (as I read the rules) they would have been required to pay
> $50k for each new TLD sought.

  Well just today it was reported that ICANN's June legal bill from Jones
and Day is over $110k.  And ICANN also has some other outstanding
past due bills as well...  That $2.2m will not likely last long at ICANN's
spending rate...

>
>
> Can someone give a precise figure as to what ICANN collected?
>
> As Milton's pointed out before, there are definite economies of scale in
> assessing applications.  It seems hard to justify multi-millions to review
> these applications, when there are earlier intimations that they will only
> approve less than a dozen.

  We [INEGRoup] agree that the $50k fee for application is far to high.
Something around $1k to $2k would be more reasonable.  Reviewing
these application's cannot cost $50k to review EACH!  And no refund
if your application is rejected or otherwise not approved....

>
>
> Given the high entry barrier, it's not surprising that the vast majority of
> applications are from the rich United States, a number more from Europe, and
> only a handful from Asia--and not one from Africa or Latin America.  That
> is, the entry barrier effectively serves to prevent access not only for the
> consumer oriented interests in the richer nations, but also for almost all
> interests, commercial or not, in the poorer parts of the world.

  As I indicated above, we[INEGRoup] feel that the entry barrier or
application fee is far to high, and there is no refund of ANY kind.
This may be why Asia, Africa, and Latin America interests have not
filed an application.  It may be that they are much smarter than US
and EU business interests...

>
>
> ICANN can still serve the interests of humankind by not privileging the
> entities that proposed the TLDs when it decides who will administer the TLDs
> it awards.  (I.e., thanks very much for caring enough about the Net to enter
> a proposal and give us $50k, but that doesn't mean that you will necessarily
> administer that domain, and certainly does not mean that you will have any,
> even fleeting, monopoly on such registrations--which might have been
> expressed, for example, through practices that honor prior registrations.)
> Otherwise, we risk proving yet again the old adage that the rich get richer.
>
> Anupam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bounce-ncdnhc-discuss-3843@lyris.isoc.org
> [mailto:bounce-ncdnhc-discuss-3843@lyris.isoc.org]On Behalf Of James
> Love
> Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 6:38 AM
> To: ncdnhc-discuss@lyris.isoc.org; nc-tlds@venice.essential.org
> Subject: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs
>
> http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm
>
> And, many applications involve more than one string.  Paul Garin's
> Name.Space asks for the most strings.  There are several non-commercial
> TLD applications, and several applications that compete for the same
> strings.  Popular TLD strings are .biz (5), .kids (4), .tel (4), .inc
> (3), and .nom (2).  There are only 2 applications for .web, one of which
> asked for three strings.
>
> There is one .union application, and one .museum application.  The
> co-op and .coop proposal is by the Cooperative League of the USA.
> Novell is seeking .dir.  Nokia is seeking eight TLD strings, including
> mobile. The Association Monegasque des Banques is seeking .fin.  The
> Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiques is seeking
> air.  The International Air transport Association wants .travel.   Core
> is seeking .nom, but has competition from a 7 member group that includes
> Lycos, .tv, Korean firms 7DC and SK Telecom, onlincenic from China and
> the dotNOM consortium.
>
> Jamie
> --
> James Love  mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org
> Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036
> voice 1.202.387.8030  fax  1.202.234.5176
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: achander@ucdavis.edu
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1799I@lyris.isoc.org
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: Jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1799I@lyris.isoc.org

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members 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:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208