Domain Name Market Manipulations Cause Lockin

[Jim Fleming <JimFleming@doorstep.unety.net>]

On Saturday, April 18, 1998 4:04 PM, Kent Crispin[SMTP:kent@SONGBIRD.COM] wrote:
<snip>
@
@In fact, the only level that really requires lockin is the DNS level
@itself -- it's intrinsic to the design of DNS, but it's not intrinsic
@to anything built on top of DNS.
@
@--
@Kent Crispin, PAB Chair                 "No reason to get excited",

Kent,

I know that people do not like to think about multiple TLD clusters
or the "cloning" of the popular TLDs in various regions. If you DO consider
that reality, then you might add some market complexities to your
models that help to show you why "lockin" is not something CORE
or anyone else can control.

Only the collective forces of the marketplace can prevent lockin. I
claim that we have yet to see where those forces lead us because
groups like PAB/POC/CORE do not want to break from their soviet-style
system. Until true capitalism and free market dynamics are allowed
to work, your concerns about lockin are artificially derived and only
serve to spread fear in the market place that is going to come about
despite your objections.

If you encourage a system that makes TLDs scarce then lockin becomes
more likely. I find it ironic that the PAB/POC/CORE people start by limiting
the number of TLDs and then scream about lockin. Why not first start with
the real problem which is artificial market manipulation? Why not first
start by trying to get all of the people with little or no involvement in
the Registry Industry out of the way ? Why not allow the collective
forces of the marketplace show us what is reality ? Why postpone
the inevitable and help to make the potential problems worse by
contraining the marketplace in such a manner that it literally explodes
with chaos when it finally gets a chance to operate ?

The Registry Industry has yet to see cloning occur. I predict that
we will see it soon with the .COM TLD. The U.S. Government and
NSI are facilitating this via the transition period that we are now in.
As cloning occurs, I predict that companies will become more aware
of the true cost of owning a .COM name. Yes, the price will go up
but not due to any one particular registrar or registry. The price will
go up because of the perceived value, prestige, stability and acceptance
of the .COM TLD. To date, this has never been reflected in a .COM
name cost because of government and industry subsidies.

These price increases would happen in the PAB/POC/CORE models
or other more natural models. They do not happen because of lockin
but because of the collective willingness of .COM owners to seek
a name under that meaningless, generic, tag which has only become
popular because other tags have not been allowed, partly thanks to
PAB/POC/CORE. As the price increases occur, companies will begin
to seek alternative TLDs. If no alternatives are available, then lockin
becomes a problem.

Domain name market manipulations are the real problem. We currently
have a split in the Registry Industry. We have the PAB/POC/CORE
on one side, lead by the ITU and ISOC, and we have the free market
people on the other side. The ITU/ISOC/PAB/POC/CORE group wants
to manipulate the marketplace via their own contrived regulations. The
other groups want to allow the marketplace to seek equilibrium via a
hands-off approach. Clearly, the U.S. Government (your employer) will
be supporting the hands-off approach.

As the Registry Industry progresses (without the manipulations of the
ITU/ISOC/PAB/POC/CORE) in the next few months, I hope that you
are able to differentiate price increases and cloning from lockin. I
suggest that you give the maketplace several years to reach equilibrium.
At least as much time should be alloted as has been afforded to the
ITU/ISOC/PAB/POC/CORE crowd in constraining the marketplace.
Companies have yet to determine the full extent of the damage that
has been done by groups like yours. This will only be possible when
the marketplace is allowed to speak and not some self-appointed
groups of people that continue to promote artificial market manipluations.

-
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation
IBC, Tortola, BVI