Hello All, In connection with a discussion that took place on yesterday's CPWG call, I decided to send the following communication to ICANN's General Counsel in an individual capacity. Best regards, Michael From: Michael Palage Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 4:13 PM To: John Jeffrey Subject: Anti-Trust/Competition Concern wrt Transfer Policy Review PDP WG (22-Aug-2023 Call) Hello John, I would like to bring to your attention some concerns about the substance of yesterday's Transfer Policy Review PDP WG. Although I raised this concern during today's At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG), this comment is being submitted in an individual capacity. During yesterday's call registrars and registries were engaged in discussions regarding registry pricing (both floors and ceilings) in connection with ICANN Approved Transfers. A copy of the recording is available here - https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP/2023-08-22+Transfer+Policy+Review... Based on the portions of the call that I listened to live, I think ICANN staff did an appropriate job walking a very fine line when they referenced fees, including I recall a suggestion to remove the fee reference from the existing policy. However, I believe there were multiple references to fee minimums and caps imposed by Registries that were concerning, especially when enforced via an ICANN policy document. Recently, I have been active in other standards bodies and trade associations. I have noticed a growing best practice of these organizations to include a standard reference to the organization's anti-trust policy at the beginning of most calls/events. Therefore, I would like to propose the following action items: * I do not believe that ICANN has a public Anti-Trust/Competition policy. My apologies if I have somehow missed this. If one does exist I would greatly appreciate a pointer to this document. If one does not exist, then ICANN should strongly consider developing a public Anti-Trust / Competition policy. * I believe the standard ICANN preamble text that is read before each session/call (e.g. "Those who take part in the ICANN multistakeholder process are to comply with the expected standards of behavior" be amended to include a specific reference to the Anti-Trust / Competition policy when one is adopted. * It would seem advisable for someone from ICANN legal to monitor these calls when the agenda specifically envisions a discussion of fees as it did today. [cid:image001.png@01D9D5DD.0EA5B5D0] Best regards, Michael
