Exclusive License

["Leo Smith" <barter@ntplx.net>]

Hi Kent...

Kent Crispin said:
>"Suppose, as someone proposed, there was a TLD called .law, 
>: intended for legal professionals.  In a monopoly case I can't really 
>: go somewhere else and get a domain in .law"

While it is true that you could not get .law except from the .law licensee,
another licensee/registry might offer your law firm another gTDL, such as
..legal, or .atty, or .court. In a free market economy,  a
licensee/registry
for .law must compete for customers in the legal profession against other
registries offering .legal, .atty or .court.

The senior partner in the law firm, whose responsibility it is to secure a
SLD name best suited for the law firm, at the best price, has the freedom
to choose between .law, .legal, .atty or .court...each offered by a
different registry for a price set by the registry. The question of whether
to go with .law for $1,000 a year, or with .legal for $500 a year, or with
.atty for $50 a year, now becomes a matter of choice for the law firm.

Kent Crispen wrote:
>: And believe me, no one would be 
>: arguing for monopoly TLDs if they didn't think they had a chance at 
>: an exclusive lock on a valuable name.

I agree that having an exclusive lock on a good name is valuable, and it is
the value that attracts the capital investment needed to operate the
registry.

The radio station that gets the exclusive right to the public airwave of a
certain frequency must still compete with other radio stations for
advertising dollars.

To foster competition, .law must compete with .legal and .atty, and IAHC's
role would be to ensure that the competing gTDLs applicable to the legal
profession are assigned to competing registries (as opposed to allowing one
registry to control all three).