Re: [atlarge-discuss] Products for Shanghai

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

Danny, Hans and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

  This is a pretty good brief Danny.  It could be used to aid in
proposing a resolution for Shanghai but this organization.  However
time is very short to do so...

  Will you be attending in Shanghai Danny?  How about you Hans?
If not, two or our [INEGroup] members will be as I understand it.
So our [INEGRoup] members could present such a resolution
via proxy if acceptable I believe.  I will see whom it is that
will be attending in Shanghai from our [INEGRoup] members
and make them aware as well as ask them to consider it...

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Hans,
>
> Re:  http://www.fitug.de/atlarge-panel/0210/msg00170.html
> In response to your request for a 1-page analysis of a relevant issue, I have
> taken the liberty of preparing a preliminary issue brief for consideration:
>
> Resellers as a Source of Registrant Confusion
>
> At the November 2001 Marina del Rey Names Council session a representative of
> the Business Constituency remarked that fully 70% of all domain name
> registrants may be unaware of who their registrars are (owing in great
> measure to the rapid proliferation of ISPs and other resellers that provide
> registration services), and it may now be noted that the consequences of this
> consumer confusion have already begun to deleteriously affect the entirety of
> the domain name industry -- as such, this is a matter which should be of
> concern to the ICANN Board.
>
> At issue is the rampant confusion ultimately made visibly manifest through
> the transfer of sponsorship process.  When a registrant decides to take
> advantage of lower domain name pricing made possible via ICANN's efforts to
> enhance competition at the registrar level, such a registrant will
> predictably attempt to transfer his existing registration to another sponsor
> at the conclusion of the registration period.  Invariably, these registrants
> will then receive correspondence from an entity with whom they have had no
> other prior contact (their own losing registrar) and either don't know how to
> respond to the letter, or will ignore the letter as another piece of daily
> junk mail.  Often this confusion then results in the subsequent denial of the
> transfer request by those registrars that adhere to a NACK policy, and this
> in turn serves to make a bad situation even worse by facilitating the
> development of an unnecessary acrimony between these registrants and the
> respective registrars.  Those registrants held hostage by this process
> accordingly begin to reevaluate the desirability of maintaining domain names,
> and the regular and steady shrinkage in the CNO bears testimony to the
> private response of the registrant community to this ongoing abusive
> situation.
>
> Sixteen months ago, a representative of the Enom registrar made the following
> comment:  "I believe that in this extremely competitive situation we find
> ourselves in, some of us are trying to protect our market shares by "making
> sure" the registrant really wishes to leave, and inadvertently, by making it
> more difficult for the registrants to switch, these registrars may be
> reinforcing the willingness of the registrants to switch. A terrible spiral
> consisting of an increasing desire to switch and an increasing difficulty to
> switch increasingly exasperates and frustrates all of our customers."
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/msg00653.html
>
> To end this vicious cycle which has become only worse over the course of
> time, direct action by the ICANN Board is required.  In addition to
> considering the recommendations soon to be offered by the Names Council
> Transfers Task Force, it would be prudent for the Board to consider measures
> that would enable registrants to readily know who their registrar-of-record
> actually is -- such measures would go a long way toward reducing potential
> registrant confusion.  There are at present domain name resellers that don't
> even cite the name of the ICANN accredited registrar in their Terms of
> Service contract, but this situation is a matter that can be readily
> rectified by Board action.  Just as registrars are bound by contract to
> ICANN, so too can resellers be bound to contractual requirements which would
> force them, at the very least, to clearly identify to the registrant the
> ICANN accredited registrar responsible for their domain name sponsorship.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders 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: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de