Hi Evan I am pretty much with you in this case. Under registrar's hands at least there are contract to work with in case of abuse. Other private companies will be free to do whatever they want in detriment of the public. My suggestion is - if someone has a viable proposal to add to the registrar contracts, post it at public comment to allow the debate. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Alameda Santos 1470 #1407 Tel - +55113266.6253 Mob- +55118181.1464 vanda@uol.com.br P Before print think about the Environment "The information contained in this message - and attached files - is restricted, and its confidentiality protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the sender immediately. Please be advised that the improper use of the aforementioned information will create grounds for legal action." "As informações existentes nesta mensagem e nos arquivos anexados são para uso restrito, com sigilo protegido por lei. Caso não seja o destinatário, favor apagar esta mensagem e notificar o remetente. O uso impróprio das informações desta mensagem será tratado conforme a legislação em vigor." -----Mensagem original----- De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Evan Leibovitch Enviada em: quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2008 16:44 Para: Danny Younger Cc: At-Large Worldwide Assunto: Re: [At-Large] Question Hi Danny,
Does the ALAC intend to launch a policy-development process on whether and how to restrict GTLD registries
or registrars or both from engaging in warehousing of and/or speculating in domain names?
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/02-20 -2008/0004758927&EDATE= I am in complete agreement that the warehousing of domain names is an issue of public concern; however I am personally not sure how to adequately address this in a way that actually serves the public good. If a registrar isn't warehousing popular names (or near-misspellings or popular names, etc), then someone else is. From the public POV, I can't see how the "wild west" character of .COM (and possibly other TLDs) would be any better if all these domains were in the hands of a private squatter rather than a registrar. Did the registrar have special access to search domains? Only to the point that it's cheaper for them to register, and they probably developed automated tools before private registrants did. In any case, Tucows has been around this field for a very long time; the size and "quality" of its stable of names owes more to its early involvement than the fact it's a registrar. Would policies that force registrants out of the domain-warehousing business help? Not if the result is simply the sale/auction of domains to warehouses run by non-registrar squatters. The bigger problem of public perception and confidence, at least from my view, is the treatment of domain names as chattel/commodity rather than identification. And simply regulating registry/registrant ownership of domains does not change that. I would argue, for instance, that domain names should be subject to the same "use it or lose it" regimen as trademarks, for much the same reasons. (IMO, parking does not constitute "use"). As a counter-example: When one registers a domain with CIRA (under .ca), there needs to be some kind of demonstrated link between the owner and the requested domain. I'm sure the process isn't perfect, but it demonstrates how, at the registry level, abuses can be minimized through core allocation policy. Thus, the problem is at the registry level with .COM allowing -- indeed encouraging -- a free-for-all. Rather than retroactively trying to fix that, perhaps the answer is to encourage gTLD alternatives that will offer the public greater confidence. One would hope that with a more-open, more competitive approach to gTLDs the world's dependence on .com -- and especially its perception as the 'global default TLD' -- may diminish. That would IMO be the biggest blow to squatters and warehousers -- registrants and otherwise. Having said this, I would welcome any process to produce policy initiatives that might (realistically) improve the status quo -- to advance to the GNSO or anywhere else. If ALAC isn't interested in your offer we can certainly accommodate you within NARALO and advance resulting policy initiatives within ALAC that way. At that point our challenge is finding people who care about the issue, have the time to be well grounded in it, and are articulate enough to advance policy change. Evan Leibovitch Chair, NARALO _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
