[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [icann-eu] Domain Name Economics
- To: Thomas Roessler <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: [icann-eu] Domain Name Economics
- From: Joop Teernstra <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 22:37:47 +1200
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- In-Reply-To: <20010605141436.E11886@sobolev.does-not-exist.org>
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
At 14:14 5/06/01 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> Representing Users' and Domain Name Holders' interests
> From the above, we can conclude that as long as domain name holders are
> sort of satisfied by at least some registrars' offers, it's unlikely that
> the root monopoly of which these registrars are part would break.
>Thus, there are close to no market-driven feedback channels for users or
>domain name holders. Users and domain name holders are, in particular,
>normally not among the possibly destructive players I listed above.
>Thus, they can only exercise influence by allying with destructive
>players. Now, let's go over the list of possibly destructive players:
>- ISPs. As long as supporting the monopoly doesn't mean you are losing
>customers to competition which doesn't support the monopoly, there is no
>incentive to attempt to break it.
>- ccTLDs. Since the more powerful ccTLDs can be assumed to be among the
>TLDs which are unlikely to be attacked during a root split, they are
>among those players on the market which are most probably least
>interested in the monopoly, and possibly most interested
>in destabilizing it.
Thank you for your thoughts, Thomas.
From what is happening after Stockholm now, I guess that you are not alone
with these conclusions.
It is time for a fresh approach and closer ties of the DN holders'
organizations with the ccTLD's.
--Joop Teernstra LL.M.--
the Cyberspace Association and
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners