Re: DNS report released

[Andy Oram <andyo@ora.com>]

Thanks for opening up the issue. I'm working with a few CPSR people to
develop a response to the Green Paper; we'll praise its goals and general
philosophical approach but call for changes or clarifications on some
details. We're still vigorously discussing it. 

The issue of most interest to this mailing list is trademarks. We think the
Green Paper seriously falls down on that issue; it assumes that domain names
should reflect trade marks, which is its big mistake, and then goes on to
suggest a system of researching the issue that pretty much ensures the big
trademark holders scare off everybody else. I'd be afraid of what happens if
a company with the trademark Commercial Pigs Seeking Registration gets the
domain cpsr.com; my organization may have to give up cpsr.org!

Now, as to your point about the NSI monopoly.

The Green Paper separates the function of registrar (selling a name and
putting it in DNS) from registry (administering the servers that run DNS).
The Paper clearly wants competition among registrars, so there goes NSI's
main monopoly. As you say, though, Gordon, NSI could still have a monopoly
on the registry (the administrative function). Not forever, but until the
authorities set up in the Green Paper decide that competition is feasible in
that area.

Now, I'm not sure how much abuse a registry could perpetrate. All they do is
administer servers. The probably derive income from registrars. Is there
potential for price-gauging?

(And I'm not sure that particular issue belongs on this list. Feel free to
post to cyber-rights@cpsr.org, and I think cybertelecom@aol.com would be
interested too.)

Andy