One or two PDPs?

[Avri Doria]

On 26 Jan 2010, at 08:14, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> Assume a new gTLD .foo. With JM/CO a consumer can buy TLD .foo from ANY registrar, not just the cross-owned one. So if the JM/CO registry-registrar combination engages in bad practices or offers lousy service, consumers can switch. No market power. 


assume a transliteration of .com into an IDN script by the incumbent.  still no market power?

and as i pointed out previous, just because something is Vertically integrated does not preclude others from selling it, they are still constrained by the requirement to treat all registrars equally - even if one of those with a RAA is VI'ed into the company.

> Another point you seem to have lost sight of while getting confused about the term vertical integration: when we talk about JM/CO in the DAG, we are talking about NEW gTLDs. New gTLDs have no market power, and indeed have huge handicaps relative to incumbent TLDs. To say that their ability to enter the market should wait 3 years while we figure out whether to allow vertical integration and carve out a regulatory distinction between private and public TLDs is absurd, frankly. It just makes no sense. 

in my opinion this is complete  FUD.

> It seems to me that Avri is the only person who refuses to accept this fact, whereas several in the constituency have expressed support for separate proceedings. I think our Council reps need to acknowledge this and move on accordingly.

I believe this is a false statement and requires more careful reading of the email we have received.  Also a sample of 4 is not all that statistically significant.

Finally, I think that the NCSG/NCUC has never taken a position on Councilors being bound by a few voices on the list, but rather are chosen/elected for their ability to listen to the discussion and make up their own minds.  That is why we have elections: they listen and interact, they make their decisions based on what they think is best for Non Commercial interests ,and we vote them in or out depending on our judgement of how well they have done that.  Certainly the 3 council members chosen by the Board are not bound by NCUC discussions - though of course one would expect them to listen and make up their minds based on what they had heard.

a.


ps. my dear friend Milton,  your frequent use of  the word 'obviously' in your email is downright oppressive.  those who disagree with you don't see the obvious? come on! that is called intellectual bullying.