Re: An Open Letter to the IAHC

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

John,

  Hay very good peace!  I enjoyed it alot.  If I may, I have some 
comments below yours.  (See below your comments)

John Palmer wrote:
> 
> 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??

  Exactly the point I have made several times to this list.
> 
> 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.

  This is very good.  The incentive = accountability rule is a 
cornerstone of our and the worlds political economic system.
Without this principal, no commerce will exist extant for long.
> 
> 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.

  This is exactly correct.  Well put!  Without that ownership,
there is no advantage to either an registry or a potential customer
of that registry.
> 
> 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.

Yep!

Regarads,

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

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. 
Phone :972-447-1878
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com