Re: [At-Large] ALAC Draft Statement on Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization - V. 1.3
What you received before is most definitely not an issues report I'm afraid. An Issues Report is a specific thing which is regulated by the Bylaws in the way I outlined lower in the thread below. To recap, in order to have an Issues Report, you must ask the GNSO Council for one in the way below-referenced. Since the report you received originally written by Bruce Beckwith is not the result of such a motion to the GNSO, it doesn't qualify. On 28/03/07, Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com> wrote:
Izumi AIZU wrote:
2007/3/29, Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com>:
I like the substance of the comment, but the procedure is wrong. We voted at our March 6 teleconference to commence the PDP, so this is the statement to be sent to the GNSO requesting it.
Woops, because we voted yesterday to write a request to ICANN Staff for Issue report. No one reminded the Vote on March 6. Which one should we follow?
The March 6 vote puts us further into the process. We should call what we already received from staff an Issues Report and forward this statement to the GNSO Council at this meeting to start the PDP.
--Wendy
izumi
--Wendy
Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
Just one comment down below of a technical nature:
On 28/03/07, Izumi AIZU <iza@anr.org> wrote:
Hi,
Here follows and attached is the third version. I messed up with the wiki, changing the link page title made it impossible to keep the history - thus this is a kind of new page now. I will try to find ways to fix it... in the mean time. I changed the title from "Comments" to "Statement". We still need more inputs and reactions from you guys!
Thanks, izumi
Here is the wiki URL: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?al_2007_r_1
ALAC STATEMENT ON DOMAIN TASTING AND MONETISATION AND THEIR IMPACTS ON THE INDIVIDUAL INTERNET USERS
Version 1.3, Mar 28
On behalf of the ordinary Internet users, the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), with inputs from the worldwide At-Large Structures and other friends, would like to make the following statements on Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization.
We think Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization are two different issues, though certain areas may have some relationship, and therefore we like to discuss them separately.
The need to articulate the issue first for Domain Tasting We assume that Domain Tasting utilizing the existing Five-day Add Grace Period is an abuse that results in confusion of the ordinary Internet users and gives an unfair advantage to speculators.
At this point of time, we feel there still needs more concrete information to prove these problems actually exist and are affecting the ordinary users and their experience in using the Internet.
This paragraph is still slightly out of kilter with what the process in the Bylaws actually requires.
What you are actually to do is raise an issue by transmitting a request to the GNSO Council to commence a PDP.
Then 15 days after receiving a "properly supported motion from an Advisory Committee" the staff will create an issues report.
"properly supported" according to Dan Halloran means supported by the committee in the normal way it resolves on questions of substance - e.g majority vote.
You can find the details here: http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA
ALAC will draft a formal request shortly to ask ICANN staff to prepare the Issue Report. At the same time, we like to work together with other constituencies or groups who share the similar concern to come to a consensus position.
Upon receiving the Issue Report by the staff, GNSO must make the decision whether a formal PDP is necessary or not.
In addition, here are some possible actions you can do voluntarily now:
With the User Consituency, business and non-commercial: Find the best ways to protect the interest of the end users, as registrants as well as just as general users who do not register domain names but just use domain names to communicate each other or find useful information on Internet. How to provide safeguard for the domain names they registered, what are the rights of the registrants, for example.
With the Registrars Constituency: Finalize and implement Registrars Code of Conduct that prohibits unfair speculation and exploitation on Domain name registration including the use of five day Add Grace period. In case full consensus is difficult to achieve, some voluntary Code of Conduct or Best Practice or some kind of Self-certification may be a good alternative to assure user confidence.
With Registry Constituency: gTLD and ccTLDs Consider how to avoid user confusion and unfair practices by abolishing the five day add grace period. Adding small fee, such as 25 cents per Domain to those registrants who kept their names using add grace period may be another solution.
With ICANN Board: We suggest ICANN Board to consider how to prohibit unfair speculation, enhance consumer trust to Domain Name registration system, for example, initiating a third party study on the impact of Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization/speculation to the ordinary Internet users. ALAC is more than happy to assist such study,
On Domain Monetization We note that there is a meaningful difference between Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization. Monetization is a straightforward arbitrage between the cost of domain registrations and the revenue from as much pay-per-click traffic as the domain owner can get from people who visit web sites in the domain. It's a fundamentally sleazy business, since the web sites have no useful content and the way they get the traffic is basically by tricking people, either via typos or recently expired domains. More importantly, the presence of such website makes web-surfing by ordinary users far more difficult and confusing than they should be.
We do not think it is appropriate in this case to make ICANN as a regulator to watch and prohibit the Domain Monetization practices per se. Instead, on behalf of ordinary Internet users, we call upon those commercial enterprises such as Google or Overture to take appropriate measures such as to stop paying for clicks on pages with no content, thereby dealing with a problem that is not limited to typo and expired domains. We've seen click arbitrage, people buying Google ads to drive traffic to pages that are simply other Google ads. This kind of self-generating traffic for pay-per-click advertising is confusing and unnecessary for ordinary Internet users and, in the long run, not healthy for the development of Internet as a whole.
Since Domain monetization is a relatively new phenomena, the impact to the ordinary users and the wider Internet community is hard to measure at this point. It seems clear, however, that it does not improve the user experience at all. We think it is worth to keep watching on how it develops and may seek for specific actions when we have clearer understanding of measurable impact.
Background and Rationale on Domain Tasting "Domain tasting" is the term used to describe the use of the five-day add grace period to register domains without paying for them and find those domains which generate certain traffic for pay-per-click advertisements. We think these are unfair acts: somewhere between larceny and extortion, because the registration cost is zero and the purpose of these registrations is just to make money by taking advantage of automated bulk registration to exploit the domain names, which are in essence 'public goods', and not the real property of anyone.
As many people have noted, this practice is exploiting a loophole that shouldn't exist in the first place. There was a great deal of debate both in the ICANN community about the deletion grace period, but none at all about add grace which was apparently tossed into the package by an ICANN staffer without asking anyone. So says Karl Auerbach, who was on the board at the time, and we haven't seen anything to the contrary from any other board member.
As Bob Parsons, CEO and Founder of Go Daddy, wrote in his blog: Millions of good .COM domain names – on any given day over 3.5 million and climbing — are unfairly made unavailable to small businesses and others who would actually register and use them in ways for which the names were intended. Many times businesses accidentally let their domain names expire. When they go to renew them, they find they have been snapped up – and taken away with a huge expensive hassle to follow – by an add/drop registrar.
The usual explanation of domain tasting says that the registrars register millions of domains, watch the traffic, and then after 4.9 days they delete the ones that don't seem likely to make back the US$6.00 registration fee. Often they just delete them all and then reregister what they can a few minutes later until they find the domains that produce enough traffic to yield a return well above the registration fee.
The add grace period is just a mistake. The problem it purports to solve is not and never was an important one. If you let an important domain expire, you risk losing the entire investment made in that domain over many years. But if one registers a domain by mistake, the most one risks is the ten or twenty dollars you paid to register it.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
www.alac.icann.org www.icannalac.org
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: 718.780.7961 // fax: 718.780.0394 // cell: 914.374.0613 Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: 718.780.7961 // fax: 718.780.0394 // cell: 914.374.0613 Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/
-- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
Which means we've once again been misled, and I misspoke in reliance on an earlier statement. Nonetheless, we voted March 6 to commence a PDP, and we should now, today, transmit our request to Bruce Tonkin and the GNSO. --Wendy Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
What you received before is most definitely not an issues report I'm afraid. An Issues Report is a specific thing which is regulated by the Bylaws in the way I outlined lower in the thread below.
To recap, in order to have an Issues Report, you must ask the GNSO Council for one in the way below-referenced. Since the report you received originally written by Bruce Beckwith is not the result of such a motion to the GNSO, it doesn't qualify.
On 28/03/07, Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com> wrote:
Izumi AIZU wrote:
2007/3/29, Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com>:
I like the substance of the comment, but the procedure is wrong. We voted at our March 6 teleconference to commence the PDP, so this is
the
statement to be sent to the GNSO requesting it.
Woops, because we voted yesterday to write a request to ICANN Staff for Issue report. No one reminded the Vote on March 6. Which one should we follow?
The March 6 vote puts us further into the process. We should call what we already received from staff an Issues Report and forward this statement to the GNSO Council at this meeting to start the PDP.
--Wendy
izumi
--Wendy
Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
Just one comment down below of a technical nature:
On 28/03/07, Izumi AIZU <iza@anr.org> wrote:
Hi,
Here follows and attached is the third version. I messed up with
the
wiki, changing the link page title made it impossible to keep the history - thus this is a kind of new page now. I will try to find ways to fix it... in the mean time. I changed the title from "Comments" to "Statement". We still need more inputs and reactions from you guys!
Thanks, izumi
Here is the wiki URL: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?al_2007_r_1
ALAC STATEMENT ON DOMAIN TASTING AND MONETISATION AND THEIR IMPACTS ON THE INDIVIDUAL INTERNET USERS
Version 1.3, Mar 28
On behalf of the ordinary Internet users, the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), with inputs from the worldwide At-Large Structures and other friends, would like to make the following statements on Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization.
We think Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization are two different issues, though certain areas may have some relationship, and therefore we like to discuss them separately.
The need to articulate the issue first for Domain Tasting We assume that Domain Tasting utilizing the existing Five-day Add Grace Period is an abuse that results in confusion of the ordinary Internet users and gives an unfair advantage to speculators.
At this point of time, we feel there still needs more concrete information to prove these problems actually exist and are affecting the ordinary users and their experience in using the Internet.
This paragraph is still slightly out of kilter with what the process in the Bylaws actually requires.
What you are actually to do is raise an issue by transmitting a request to the GNSO Council to commence a PDP.
Then 15 days after receiving a "properly supported motion from an Advisory Committee" the staff will create an issues report.
"properly supported" according to Dan Halloran means supported by the committee in the normal way it resolves on questions of substance - e.g majority vote.
You can find the details here: http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA
ALAC will draft a formal request shortly to ask ICANN staff to prepare the Issue Report. At the same time, we like to work together with other constituencies or groups who share the similar concern to come to a consensus position.
Upon receiving the Issue Report by the staff, GNSO must make the decision whether a formal PDP is necessary or not.
In addition, here are some possible actions you can do voluntarily now:
With the User Consituency, business and non-commercial: Find the best ways to protect the interest of the end users, as registrants as well as just as general users who do not register domain names but just use domain names to communicate each other or find useful information on Internet. How to provide safeguard for the domain names they registered, what are the rights of the registrants, for example.
With the Registrars Constituency: Finalize and implement Registrars Code of Conduct that prohibits unfair speculation and exploitation on Domain name registration including the use of five day Add Grace period. In case full consensus is difficult to achieve, some voluntary Code of Conduct or Best Practice or some kind of Self-certification may be a good alternative to assure user confidence.
With Registry Constituency: gTLD and ccTLDs Consider how to avoid user confusion and unfair practices by abolishing the five day add grace period. Adding small fee, such as 25 cents per Domain to those registrants who kept their names using add grace period may be another solution.
With ICANN Board: We suggest ICANN Board to consider how to prohibit unfair speculation, enhance consumer trust to Domain Name registration system, for example, initiating a third party study on the impact of Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization/speculation to the ordinary Internet users. ALAC is more than happy to assist such study,
On Domain Monetization We note that there is a meaningful difference between Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization. Monetization is a straightforward arbitrage between the cost of domain registrations and the revenue from as much pay-per-click traffic as the domain owner can get from people who visit web sites in the domain. It's a fundamentally sleazy business, since the web sites have no useful content and the way they get the traffic is basically by tricking people, either via typos or recently expired domains. More importantly, the presence of such website makes web-surfing by ordinary users far more difficult and confusing than they should be.
We do not think it is appropriate in this case to make ICANN as a regulator to watch and prohibit the Domain Monetization practices per se. Instead, on behalf of ordinary Internet users, we call upon those commercial enterprises such as Google or Overture to take appropriate measures such as to stop paying for clicks on pages with no content, thereby dealing with a problem that is not limited to typo and expired domains. We've seen click arbitrage, people buying Google ads to drive traffic to pages that are simply other Google ads. This kind of self-generating traffic for pay-per-click advertising is confusing and unnecessary for ordinary Internet users and, in the long run, not healthy for the development of Internet as a whole.
Since Domain monetization is a relatively new phenomena, the impact to the ordinary users and the wider Internet community is hard to measure at this point. It seems clear, however, that it does not improve the user experience at all. We think it is worth to keep watching on how it develops and may seek for specific actions when we have clearer understanding of measurable impact.
Background and Rationale on Domain Tasting "Domain tasting" is the term used to describe the use of the five-day add grace period to register domains without paying for them and find those domains which generate certain traffic for pay-per-click advertisements. We think these are unfair acts: somewhere between larceny and extortion, because the registration cost is zero and the purpose of these registrations is just to make money by taking advantage of automated bulk registration to exploit the domain names, which are in essence 'public goods', and not the real property of anyone.
As many people have noted, this practice is exploiting a loophole that shouldn't exist in the first place. There was a great deal of debate both in the ICANN community about the deletion grace period, but none at all about add grace which was apparently tossed into the package by an ICANN staffer without asking anyone. So says Karl Auerbach, who was on the board at the time, and we haven't seen anything to the contrary from any other board member.
As Bob Parsons, CEO and Founder of Go Daddy, wrote in his blog: Millions of good .COM domain names – on any given day over 3.5 million and climbing — are unfairly made unavailable to small businesses and others who would actually register and use them in ways for which the names were intended. Many times businesses accidentally let their domain names expire. When they go to renew them, they find they have been snapped up – and taken away with a huge expensive hassle to follow – by an add/drop registrar.
The usual explanation of domain tasting says that the registrars register millions of domains, watch the traffic, and then after 4.9 days they delete the ones that don't seem likely to make back the US$6.00 registration fee. Often they just delete them all and then reregister what they can a few minutes later until they find the domains that produce enough traffic to yield a return well above the registration fee.
The add grace period is just a mistake. The problem it purports to solve is not and never was an important one. If you let an important domain expire, you risk losing the entire investment made in that domain over many years. But if one registers a domain by mistake, the most one risks is the ten or twenty dollars you paid to register it.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
www.alac.icann.org www.icannalac.org
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: 718.780.7961 // fax: 718.780.0394 // cell: 914.374.0613 Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: 718.780.7961 // fax: 718.780.0394 // cell: 914.374.0613 Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: 718.780.7961 // fax: 718.780.0394 // cell: 914.374.0613 Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/
No, according to the bylaws, the request for an issues report goes to ICANN staff. Once the report has been received by the ALAC, the ALAC can choose to send it to the GNSO with the request that the GNSO initiate a Policy Development Process.
To recap, in order to have an Issues Report, you must ask the GNSO Council for one in the way below-referenced.
participants (3)
-
Bret Fausett -
Nick Ashton-Hart -
Wendy Seltzer