Registrar-registry Integration
One of the topics on the agenda to discuss in Seoul is Registrar-Registry integration - the extend to which registrars and registries can be affiliated (that is, have shared ownership in one way of another) and still market the same gTLDs. Currently such joint ownership is largely prohibited. Earlier versions of the DAG have allowed affiliates of a registry to market the domains in their own TLD (a VAST oversimplification of the issue). The DAG V3 withdraws the specific proposals and opens the issue for community discussion. See Section 2.9 on page 4-5 of the proposed Registry Agreement - http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-agreement-specs-redline-04oct.... Two recent articles talk about the issue: http://www.circleid.com/posts/registry_registrar_cross_ownership_framing_the... - Discussion of Registrar-Registry integration - Moderately balanced but clearly favouring one solution. http://www.circleid.com/posts/vertical_integration_a_view_from_the_bottom_up... - A rebuttal of the above. The issue is not just about business and economic issues. Getting the right answer may be critical, particularly to cultural TLDs and perhaps some IDN TLDs. Alan
As usual, there is more than meets the eye. One aspect that has been conveniently pushed out of the discussion is the link with the provision of backend services. Some parties suggest that this separation should extent to backend services providers. It does not escape anyone's attention that the most vocal proponents of this separation are the big 3 of backend services. Clearly for them, if some registrars would provide backend services to new gTLDs, that would represent more competition in that very profitable area. Right now, Mind and Machines advertises a price of $1.50 per domain name, which is lower than the current offerings. I have no doubt that more competition at the level of backend services would lead to even lower prices. In the end, that would be a benefit for the registrants. Patrick On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:27:28 -0400, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One of the topics on the agenda to discuss in Seoul is Registrar-Registry integration - the extend to which registrars and registries can be affiliated (that is, have shared ownership in one way of another) and still market the same gTLDs.
Currently such joint ownership is largely prohibited. Earlier versions of the DAG have allowed affiliates of a registry to market the domains in their own TLD (a VAST oversimplification of the issue). The DAG V3 withdraws the specific proposals and opens the issue for community discussion. See Section 2.9 on page 4-5 of the proposed Registry Agreement -
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-agreement-specs-redline-04oct....
Two recent articles talk about the issue:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/registry_registrar_cross_ownership_framing_the...
- Discussion of Registrar-Registry integration - Moderately balanced but clearly favouring one solution.
http://www.circleid.com/posts/vertical_integration_a_view_from_the_bottom_up...
- A rebuttal of the above.
The issue is not just about business and economic issues. Getting the right answer may be critical, particularly to cultural TLDs and perhaps some IDN TLDs.
Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu Identica: http://identica.vande-walle.eu
Yes, that is one of the issues (referred to in my line about "business and economic issues"). My note was not meant as a statement of all of the issues, or as taking a position, but the intro to the documents and the discussion we will be having. Alan At 19/10/2009 01:59 AM, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
As usual, there is more than meets the eye. One aspect that has been conveniently pushed out of the discussion is the link with the provision of backend services.
Some parties suggest that this separation should extent to backend services providers. It does not escape anyone's attention that the most vocal proponents of this separation are the big 3 of backend services. Clearly for them, if some registrars would provide backend services to new gTLDs, that would represent more competition in that very profitable area. Right now, Mind and Machines advertises a price of $1.50 per domain name, which is lower than the current offerings. I have no doubt that more competition at the level of backend services would lead to even lower prices. In the end, that would be a benefit for the registrants.
Patrick
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:27:28 -0400, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One of the topics on the agenda to discuss in Seoul is Registrar-Registry integration - the extend to which registrars and registries can be affiliated (that is, have shared ownership in one way of another) and still market the same gTLDs.
Currently such joint ownership is largely prohibited. Earlier versions of the DAG have allowed affiliates of a registry to market the domains in their own TLD (a VAST oversimplification of the issue). The DAG V3 withdraws the specific proposals and opens the issue for community discussion. See Section 2.9 on page 4-5 of the proposed Registry Agreement -
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-agreement-specs-redline-04oct....
Two recent articles talk about the issue:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/registry_registrar_cross_ownership_framing_the...
- Discussion of Registrar-Registry integration - Moderately balanced but clearly favouring one solution.
http://www.circleid.com/posts/vertical_integration_a_view_from_the_bottom_up...
- A rebuttal of the above.
The issue is not just about business and economic issues. Getting the right answer may be critical, particularly to cultural TLDs and perhaps some IDN TLDs.
Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu Identica: http://identica.vande-walle.eu
Alan Greenberg wrote, On 19/10/09 14:25:
Yes, that is one of the issues (referred to in my line about "business and economic issues"). My note was not meant as a statement of all of the issues, or as taking a position, but the intro to the documents and the discussion we will be having. Indeed, I was well aware that you did not make a statement or take a position. I just wanted to add something that neither CircleID posts addressed.
Patrick
participants (2)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Patrick Vande Walle