An Open Letter to the IAHC

[jp@PalmerOwns.The.Earth (John Palmer)]

An open letter to the IAHC:

OK - I have some time this Sunday morning, so I am going to quiz
you on how in the hell this will work.

WHY would anyone want to be a registry when there is NO INCENTIVE?

How does a registry make any money when it doesnt own a particular
resource to sell??


For instance, lets say that I own the rights to a cool gTLD, such
as .XYZ. People who want a domain in that gTLD come to me and I
charge them $50 per year. They CANNOT GET a 2LD under .XYZ anywhere 
else. Bottom line: I have a commodity that I can sell.

Now, if someone else can also register people in .XYZ (maybe
thousands of registries), how do I make any money - in fact, 
how does anyone make any money?? 

If you have owners, then someone is responsible, ultimatly
for making sure all of the name servers are in place (and that
there are resources [ie: $$$] for running nameservers and WHOIS
databases). They subcontract or join a registry guild and offer
their gTLD's for shared registration. 

Otherwise, no one is guaranteed any $$$ and there is no incentive
for anyone to work hard at all. MORE IMPORTANTLY, we still end up
with no accountability for keeping the resources stable for a gTLD.
No incentive == No accountability.

Someone please explain why anyone would want to volunteer to 
become a registry when they have no lock on a source of income because
they dont have exclusive rights to own a gTLD property. 

Analogy: I am Disney. I develope a piece of intellectual property
(for instance _THE LION KING_). Now, if the law allowed any tom,
dick or harry to duplicate the movie and sell them, then how is
Disney going to make any money off of the property that they develop??
Disney, when coming up with _THE LION KING_, did it on a FIRST COME,
FIRST SERVE basis - that is - they came up with the idea before 
anyone else, developed their product and then marketed and sold it. 

I came up with USA and EARTH first, I developed them and marketed
them. 

Why is it any different from Disney and _THE LION KING_?

Disney, by creating _THE LION KING_ and by defending its 
intellectual property rights, does not in any way shape or form
stifle or hinder creativity in the motion picture industry. Anyone
else can come up with other ideas and make movies out of them. 
It only seems reasonable that the restriction be in place that NO ONE
ELSE can, without permission, infringe on Disney's intellectual 
property rights.

That means - if you want to use their idea somewhere, ask their
permission. Pay whatever they ask. Or, if they say NO, live with it. 

AGN, by creating USA and EARTH, and by defending its intellectual
property rights, does not in any way shape or form, stifle or hinder
the DNS or the internet. Anyone else can come up with other gTLDs and 
develope their gTLD properties. It only seems reasonable that the
restrictions be in place that NO ONE ELSE can, without permission,
infringe on AGN's intellectual property rights.

That means - if you want to register a domain in USA and EARTH, ask
AGN's permission. Pay whatever they ask. Or if they say NO, live
with it. 

Now, AGN cannot charge $2500/yr for a domain - why? Because ANY
one can own a gTLD and the end user will have an UNLIMITED number 
of options out there. This is called FREE MARKET COMPETITION.
It is THE ONLY ECONOMIC MODEL THAT HAS EVER WORKED.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Shared Registries:

I think the idea of a network of "generic" registries which
are able to register people into multiple gTLD's is a good idea.
Its like the clearing and settlements system that MasterCard/Visa/
AMEX/Discover use. 

You need:
   1> To develope the data exchange standards for Registration
      Action Messages (RAM's)
   2> Allow for a method of financial settlements.

In Number 2: Someone will own a gTLD and will join the registry
group (CORE?) and allow people to register in their gTLD. 
      The gTLD owner allows registration in bulk for $40
      The registry charges $50
      CORE? gets 2% of that. ($1).
      The registry keeps $9 and pays $40 to the gTLD owner.
      (Prices may vary - these are just examples).

I am developing models for this proposal as the USA and EARTH 
geograpical sub-TLD components will be HUGE and I would like to
allow registries to register people into various geographical
areas of these gTLD's

For instance: Perhaps some ISP in Paris would like to sign up 
to be a registrar for Paris.FRANCE.EARTH. Or a national Italian
ISP would like to be a registrar for ITALY.EARTH. Or a Chicago
ISP (Hi Karl) would like to be a registrar for Chicago.Illinois.USA
or Illinois.USA. 

As I said, I will need to develope a shared registry system for my
own gTLD's as they lend themselves to regional registrations. 

Depending on wether or not I consider IAHC worthy (depends on their
draft of Dec-31), I may make my sharing code public domain. I am
a software engineer by trade and have developed many complex systems
such as these (including working on part of the MC/VISA settlements
code). I am willing to help, but IAHC must respect FCFS and must 
acknowlege that the concept of private property extends to gTLD's

If not, I will continue on my own (and with other like minded 
individuals and organizations) to develope my gTLD properties and 
will vigoroursly defend these properties in court.

I would much rather be part of the community, but will be a rebel
if people like the IAHC aim to deprive me of the benefits of my
hard work and investment. After all, the hard work and investment
is an investment in the internet as a whole, not just in my future.

Closed or opened. Fragmented or unified. 

The ball is in your court.

John Palmer