2007/3/15, cheryl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cheryl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Thank you Izumi, for both your draft and an excellent working example
of how such a draft can activate (and make easier) direct input into
ALAC processes by both RALO's and ALS's... I know I always find it
easier to get our AUstralian constituency to respond to a draft or
white paper (or fill out a short survey) rather than find the time to
answer open ended "what is you opinion on / of ???" questions...
That is quite true. I am happy to be a part of the process.
May ISOC-AU as an ALS in the APRALO distribute this draft text as a
request for comment through our mailing list to Members and via our
related contacts in both business and general consumer peak bodies and
lists, here in .au; and presuming you will permit us to reproduce,
when is the deadline for feedback and response?
Sure, that is more than welcome. AND, though we have not
set the fixed deadline, we like to read this at the ICANN Lisbon
meeting as our consensus of ALAC/RALO - so for that, we need
to hear from your perhaps one week from now, meaning next
Wednesday or so.
thanks again,
izumi
Kindest regards,
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
Quoting Izumi AIZU <
iza@xxxxxxx>:
> Dear ALAC/RALO/ALS people,
>
> At the last ALAC conference call, I volunteered to write some draft
> resolution for ALAC on Domain Tasting (and Domain monetization).
>
> With my limited knowledge, I rather hesitate, but put forward the following
> as a very crude draft. I owe much part to John Levin's comment (on internal
> list months ago), who unfortunately left ALAC recently. I hope John still
> watch this open list and make further contribution, together with all
> others.
>
> I repeat this is very very crude, and I am aware that some porposals may not
> be readily accepted by you guys, especially in the area of domain
> monetization.
>
> I still feel that the speculation is not for the interest of ordinary users,
> perhaps OK with Domainers as new and innovative industry. For that, I really
> like you to come up with clear and convincing ideas and solutions. This
> draft is just a step stone for that.
>
> Thanks,
>
> izumi
>
>
>
> *Draft Resolution on Domain Tasting
> ICANN AtLarge Advisory Committee (ALAC)
>
> V.
0.8
> Mar 12 2007*
> *
>
> *
> On behalf of the ordinary Internet users, AtLarge Advisory Committee (ALAC)
> would like to propose the following actions to be taken by the ICANN
> Community on Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization.
>
> *To gNSO Council:*
> Start a Policy Development Process on Domain Tasting. We believe that Domain
> Tasting is an abuse of existing Five-day Add Grace Period which results
> confusion for the ordinary Internet users and give unfair treatment to
> peculiar speculators. We propose to abandon the five day "Add Grace period".
>
>
> *To Registrars Constituency:*
> Finalize and implement Registrars Code of Conduct that prohibits unfair
> speculation and exploitation on Domain name registration including the use
> of five day Add Grace period.
>
> *To Registry Constituency:*
> We request the registries to consider how to avoid user confusion and unfair
> practices by abolishing the five day add grace period. Adding small fee,
> such as 25 cents per Domain to those registrants who kept their names using
> add grace period may be one solution, but we are not fully convinced.
> *To ICANN Board:
> *We request ICANN Board to seriously consider how to prohibit unfair
> speculation, enhance consumer trust to Domain Name registration system, by
> a) Initiating a third party study on the impact of Domain Tasting and Domain
> Monetization/speculation to the ordinary Internet users.
> b) Initiating review of Registry ? Registrar Contract that will promote the
> fair trade and restrict unfair speculation.
>
> *Background and Rationale:*
> Domain tasting uses the five day add grace period to register domains
> without paying for them. We think they are unfair acts: somewhere between
> larceny and extortion, because the registration cost is zero and the purpose
> of these registrations is just to make money taking advantage of automated
> bulk registration to exploit the domain names which are the public goods in
> essence.
>
> As many people have noted, it's exploiting a loophole that shouldn't be
> there in the first place. There was a great deal of debate both in the
> ICANN community and on the ICANN board about the deletion grace period, but
> none at all about add grace which was apparently tossed into the package by
> an ICANN staffer without asking anyone. So says Karl Auerbach, who was on
> the board at the time, and I haven't seen anything to the contrary from any
> other board member.
>
> As Bob Parsons wrote in his blog:
> *Millions of good .COM domain names ? on any given day over 3.5 million and
> climbing ? are unfairly made unavailable to small businesses and others who
> would actually register and use them in ways for which the names were
> intended. Many times businesses accidentally let their domain names expire.
> When they go to renew them, they find they have been snapped up ? and taken
> away with a huge expensive hassle to follow ? by an add/drop registrar. *
> (http://www.bobparsons.com/adddropscheme.html)
>
> The usual explanation of domain tasting says that the registrars register
> millions of domains, watch the traffic, and then after
4.9 days they delete
> the ones that don't seem likely to make back the US$6.00. Often they just
> delete them all and then reregister what they can a few minutes later until
> they find the ones which produce enough traffic that yields well above $6
> cost.
>
> The add grace period is just a mistake. The problem it purports to solve is
> not and never was an important one. If you let an important domain expire,
> you risk losing the entire investment made in that domain over many years.
> But if one registers a domain by mistake, the most one risks is the ten or
> twenty dollars you paid to register it.
>
> *On Domain Monetization*
> We note that there is a meaningful difference between domain tasting and
> domain monetization. Monetization is a straightforward arbitrage between the
> cost of domain registrations and the revenue from as much pay-per-click
> traffic as the domain owner can get from people who visit web sites in the
> domain. It's a fundamentally sleazy business, since the web sites have no
> useful content and the way they get the traffic is basically by tricking
> people, either via typos or recently expired domains.
>
> We do not think it is appropriate in this case to make ICANN as a regulator
> to watch and prohibit the Domain monetization practice. Instead, we like to
> ask those commercial activities such as Google or Overture to stop paying
> for clicks on pages with no content, thereby dealing with a problem that is
> not limited to typo and expired domains. We've seen click arbitrage, people
> buying Google ads to drive traffic to pages that are simply other Google
> ads. This kind of self-generating traffic for pay-per-click advertising is
> confusing and unnecessary for ordinary Internet users and , in the long run,
> not healthy for the development of Internet as a whole.
>
> END