Hi, I agree with Avri here. It is not like they are charging anything for the pre-registrations. From what I see these pre-registrations are in no way binding and essentially only constitute an expression of interest by the potential registrant that would allow the registrar to send him a notice once the TLD becomes available. It seems to me to be more of a tool to generate interest in new TLDs in general and to measure which TLDs may generate enough interest to warrant the cost of implementation. I do not really see the harm. Volker Greimann
I guess I do not understand why they are harmful in and of themselves.
Certainly if they are false advertising in any way, that is an issue. But if they are an investment method or come with a money-back guarantee, I do not understand the public harm as long as they are sold with an appropriate description.
a.
On 6 Jun 2011, at 13:10, Beau Brendler wrote:
Eric B-W wrote:
"offers of "pre-registration" by non-parties to registry application projects are contrary to the public interest, and may harm the targeted registry application projects, for which they have private redress."
After three years in ALAC, I don't recall this topic coming up, or the ALAC making a statement on it.
I would support drafting a statement that pre-registrations in this mode are contrary to public interest -- though as chair I don't want to step forward and do that without some discussion and consensus.
-----Original Message-----
From: ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net Sent: Jun 6, 2011 9:50 AM To: dannyyounger@yahoo.com Cc: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Pre-registrations
Danny,
I do not know if the ALAC offered advice to the Board on the subject at some prior point in time.
Similarly, I do not know if the ALAC has offered advice to the FTC or any other agency of a political jurisdiction on the subject at some prior point in time.
If so, then I suppose that the ALAC advice can be checked for currency and either updated and referenced, or if current, simply referenced again.
Application projects like the 2004 Catalan project, or the 2000 Cooperatives project, should engage in communications to their prospective communities, as the default, the current situation, and still a problem for cooperatives, is that no practical alternative exists to Verisign's for-profit "com" label.
How close pre-application communications offering pre-service information, and of necessity, to meet the ICANN direct fee and additional costs which are identified in the current DAG, also solliciting participation, whether unconditional, or in exchange for some current value, or expectation, can come to "pre-registration" of a hypothetical, I can't speculate upon.
The United Domains campaign is clearly not an instance of a single application project, or a cooperating group such as ECLID (Scotland, Wales, Brittany, Galacia, and the Autonomous Basque Region) communicating to their respective communities.
I'm not optimistic concerning ICANN's current CEO instructing staff counsel to make a determination that "pre-registration" volates the current registrar contract, but I think offers of "pre-registration" by non-parties to registry application projects are contrary to the public interest, and may harm the targeted registry application projects, for which they have private redress.
Eric ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
------ Pick your poison: Kool-Aid or Hemlock!