Dear Olivier

Please see inline:

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:21 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
Dear Christian,

On 12/07/2018 11:40, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
Worth pointing out this note is proposing a tax basis for DNS not a cost
recovery mechanism. Who gets this tax revenue? Who gets to set it? ICANN
does not have the credentials.

IMHO the "cost recovery basis" is a red herring for the simple reason that it is impossible to calculate what a TLD will really cost ICANN in the long run. Is it just the cost of processing the application, or is it the cost of fixing problems related to that TLD such as the need to have more ICANN compliance staff for more TLDs with a higher than normal amount of misuse of domains under that TLD?

The ICANN model is already a tax revenue model where ICANN taxes every domain sold and Registries, Registrars and their agenda collect that money on behalf of ICANN pretty much like VAT.

It need not be called a tax revenue model, but by a term such as "DNS fees" payable for every domain, required to maintain the DNS as global, stable, secure and fair. It seems uniformly subsidized at present level for the benefit of the global Internet user at ​18 cents per domain through the Registrar after 25 cents per domain indirectly collected from gTLD registries, but not from all Registries.

This could be more, much more, after providing for even zero fees or/and lower fees (10 cents or so) for the first 10,000 names by a new Registry / Registrar, some exceptionally limited Community TLDs, to actually become a dollar as total direct and indirect Registrant fee to ICANN.

Also, what happens when someone pays US $ 13 million or an unknown sum in an unspoken of transaction? A dollar to ICANN? Could be a million as premium fee. Quite a moot point, could be voluntary for Registries.

The rationale arises from considering, in concept, not as much by legal assertion,  all names as "owned" by All Users with ICANN as the Trustee, and the Registries / Registrars as lessors of the name for a year, two, ten or more, with fair and routine consideration by ICANN  in accordance with business conventions for routine extensions to continue operations in their respective space, and for the Registrant similar considerations to extend the registrations.

ICANN's revenues are disproportionately low which constrains it's mission unacknowledged.

Sivasubramanian M


What about setting higher application fees for brand TLDs?

Corporations, especially the ones who desire their own TLDs, spend hundreds of million to build up their brands, and some brands spend in billions on advertising.  

The current gTLD application fee has been arrived so as to make the process approachable by applicants across the world, by small applicants and individuals. Brands are on the top end of this spectrum. Yes, there could be a different fee structure for brands of such global scope that they prefer to have that brand name as global gTLD.


I gather that the place to discuss this is the subsequent procedures PDP, if that has not already been discussed.
Kindest regards,

Olivier
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list
At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org


--
Sivasubramanian M
Please send all replies to 6.Internet@gmail.com