Site Map

Please note:

You are viewing archival ICANN material. Links and information may be outdated or incorrect. Visit ICANN's main website for current information.

ICANN Meetings in São Paulo, Brazil

Captioning - Domain Name Marketplace Workshop

6 December 2006

Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the Domain Name Marketplace Workshop held on 6 December 2006 in São Paulo, Brazil. Although the captioning output is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.

>>TIM COLE: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE WANT TO GET STARTED HERE MOMENTARILY, BECAUSE WE HAVE A FULL AGENDA AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S PLENTY OF TIME FOR AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION.

SO IF YOU COULD TAKE YOUR SEATS, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, MY NAME IS TIM COLE, AND I'M THE CHIEF REGISTRAR LIAISON FOR ICANN, WHICH MEANS THAT I HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WORKING WITH THE 863 REGISTRARS THAT ICANN CURRENTLY HAS ACCREDITED.

AND I WANT TO THANK YOU TODAY FOR ATTENDING THIS TODAY.

AND I THINK YOU'LL FIND THIS A VERY INFORMATIVE SESSION.

I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO IT MYSELF.

AT THE LAST ICANN MEETING IN MARRAKECH, WE HELD THE FIRST IN A SERIES OF DOMAIN NAME MARKETPLACE WORKSHOPS.

THAT WORKSHOP WAS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE THE ICANN COMMUNITY WITH SOMEWHAT OF A COMMON VOCABULARY, IF YOU WILL, ABOUT THE ACTIVITIES THAT TAKE PLACE IN THE DOMAIN NAME MARKET.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT KNOW A LOT ABOUT THIS AT ICANN MEETINGS -- REGISTRARS AND REGISTRIES -- BUT THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE ICANN PROCESS WHO REALLY HAVE MUCH LESS -- A MUCH LESSER UNDERSTANDING OF THIS MARKETPLACE.

SO WE HAVE PUT THIS SERIES TOGETHER IN ORDER TO HELP EDUCATE AND INFORM THE ICANN COMMUNITY AND THE ICANN DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.

TODAY'S WORKSHOP HAS BEEN SCHEDULED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN THE LAST ONE.

WE'VE LIMITED OURSELVES TO SIX PANELISTS AND THE MODERATOR.

AND OUR INTENTION IS TO ALLOW A FULL HALF HOUR AT LEAST FOR AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION SO WE WANT THIS TO BE A DIALOGUE WITH YOU.

AND I WOULD MENTION THAT WE ARE ALSO BROADCASTING BOTH VIDEO AND AUDIO OVER THE NET, AND WE HAVE A LIVE CHAT ROOM OPEN FOR PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROCESS.

IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN KNOWING WHERE THAT IS, YOU CAN GO TO THE ICANN WEB SITE AND GO THROUGH THE LIVE REMOTE PARTICIPATION LINKS, AND YOU WILL FIND THIS WORKSHOP AND A LINK FOR THE CHAT ROOM TO THIS WORKSHOP.

IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY REGISTERED FOR THAT SOFTWARE, IT'S SIMPLY A MATTER OF CREATING A USER NAME AND YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, AND YOU CAN REGISTER TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS.

WE WILL BE MONITORING THE CHAT ROOM, SO WHEN WE GET TO THE QUESTION-AND-ANSWER PERIOD, IF A REMOTE PARTICIPANT IS INTERESTED IN ASKING A QUESTION, WE WILL BE PREPARED TO BRING THAT QUESTION TO THE MICROPHONE AS WELL.

FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO TURN THE MICROPHONE OVER TO OUR MODERATOR.

IT'S JOTHAN FRAKES, WHO ALSO MODERATED THE SESSION LAST TIME.

HE HAS A HISTORY OF WORKING IN THIS INDUSTRY.

HE'S THE FORMER EXECUTIVE PRODUCER OF TWO DOMAIN NAME ROUNDTABLE CONFERENCES THAT BROUGHT TOGETHER A LOT OF MEMBERS OF THE DOMAIN NAME MARKETPLACE INDUSTRY.

AND HE'S PRESENTLY SENIOR ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE AT DOMAIN SPONSOR.

AND I'M VERY GRATEFUL FOR ALL THE WORK THAT JOTHAN HAS PUT INTO MAKING THIS WORKSHOP POSSIBLE AND FOR HIS OFFERING TO MODERATE.

I ALSO WANT TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE TO THE SPEAKERS, WHO ALL WILL BRING VERY INTERESTING PERSPECTIVES TO THIS TOPIC.

THANK YOU.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, TIM.

MY NAME IS JOTHAN FRAKES.

AS TIM MENTIONED, I'M A SENIOR ACCOUNT MANAGER AT A COMPANY CALLED DOMAIN SPONSOR.

IN THE INTEREST OF FULL DISCLOSURE AND TO MAKE SURE THERE'S INTEGRITY TO THIS SESSION, I DO WANT TO DISCLOSE THAT MY PARENT COMPANY OWNS A REGISTRAR, NAME KING, AND THAT THAT COMPANY DOES PARTICIPATE ON BEHALF OF ITS CUSTOMERS FOR DOMAIN TASTING OR ADD GRACE USE.

I WANT TO THANK ALSO THE PANELISTS WHO ARE HERE WITH ME TODAY, STARTING ALL THE WAY TO MY RIGHT IS TIM RUIZ.

AND HE IS THE VICE PRESIDENT OF CORPORATE DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY AT THE GO DADDY GROUP.

NEXT TO HIM IS HAKON HAUGNES -- I HOPE I GOT YOUR LAST NAME CORRECT -- FROM GNR, THE DOT NAME REGISTRY.

TO HIS -- I GUESS FOR YOUR RIGHT, IS ROB HALL, WHO'S THE CEO OF MOMENTOUS.

NEXT IS PHIL CORWIN, WHO'S HERE REPRESENTING THE ICA, THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION, WHICH HE'LL SPEAK JUST BRIEFLY ON AS HE'S PRESENTING HIS INFORMATION.

NEXT IS PAUL STAHURA, WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OF ENUM.

AND NEXT, BUT -- LAST, BUT NOT LEAST, IS BRET FAUSETT, WITH THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

THIS AFTERNOON, I'D LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE FOR BEING HERE, ALSO TO ICANN AND TIM COLE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THIS TOPIC.

AND I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THESE WORKSHOPS ARE SOMETHING THAT I THINK ARE QUITE GERMANE TO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE BUSINESS.

AND IT BRINGS IN THINGS FROM OUTSIDE JUST WHAT WE TYPICALLY TALK ABOUT AT THE ICANN MEETINGS, AT LEAST NOT IN THE HALLWAYS, BUT BRING IT INTO A DIRECT FORUM.

THE TOPIC WE'LL BE FOCUSING ON TODAY -- ALEX, IF YOU'LL CHANGE THE SLIDE TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THANK YOU.

THE FIRST SLIDE THAT WAS UP WAS TALKING ABOUT THE ENTIRETY OF THE LIFE CYCLE OF A GENERIC TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN.

TODAY'S SESSION SPECIFICALLY HONES IN ON A PARTICULAR TYPE OF ACTIVITY, WHICH HAPPENS IN THE FIRST FIVE DAYS OF A DOMAIN'S LIFE, WHICH IS DURING THE ADD-GRACE PERIOD.

WHAT WE'VE DONE TO SIMPLIFY THIS IS SORT OF OMIT ON THE SLIDE WHAT INFORMATION THIS IS REALLY PARTICULAR TO.

THERE ARE SOME HANDOUTS AVAILABLE ON THE FAR SIDE OF THE STAGE HERE THAT REFLECT WHAT THE SLIDE IS UP ON STAGE.

THIS PARTICULAR ACTIVITY SURROUNDS THE USE OF HOW REGISTRARS WORK WITH THE GTLDS THAT PROVIDE AN ADD GRASS PERIOD.

THE TYPICAL SCENARIO IS THAT THERE IS A PERIOD OF TIME WHEN A DOMAIN IS INITIALLY REGISTERED WHERE A REGISTRAR CAN RETURN THE DOMAIN NAME AND RECEIVE A FULL CREDIT, BOTH FOR THE FEE THAT THEY WOULD PAY TO THE REGISTRY, AND ALSO ANY SORT OF ICANN FEE ARE BOTH CREDITED BACK TO THE REGISTRANT -- OR, RATHER, THE REGISTRAR.

AND THAT IS WITHIN A FIVE-DAY WINDOW.

NOW, THIS IS A PROCESS THAT WAS INITIALLY DESIGNED FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, FOR FRAUD PROTECTION, SHOULD THE REGISTRAR BE PRESENTED A FRAUDULENT CREDIT CARD.

ALSO IN THE EVENT OF A MISREGISTRATION TO ENHANCE CUSTOMER SERVICE FOR THE REGISTRAR CUSTOMER, IN CASE THEY MIGHT HAVE MISTYPED A DOMAIN NAME AND WANTED TO COME BACK AND REREGISTER THE DOMAIN NAME.

AND THERE'S A VARIETY OF OTHER USES THAT THIS WAS INITIALLY INTENDED FOR.

NOW, WHAT'S SEEN TODAY IS THERE ARE ENTITIES, HOLDING COMPANIES, THAT OFFER A DIFFERENT USE OF THIS FIVE-DAY ACTIVITY.

AND IT'S BECOME A VERY HIGH-VOLUME ACTIVITY, AND THERE ARE BOTH PROS AND CONS YOU'LL HEAR TODAY FROM THE RESPECTIVE PANEL ON HOW THIS IS EXACTLY DONE.

I DO HAVE -- I HAD TO RAPIDLY PREPARED SOME DATA POINTS ON JUST HOW LARGE THIS ACTIVITY IS.

AND THEN I'LL GO INTO SOME QUICK TERMINOLOGY.

AND THEN I WILL BE HANDING THE MICROPHONE TO MR. TIM RUIZ FROM GO DADDY.

FROM MY RESEARCH, WHICH WAS DONE FROM PULLING THE COM/NET ZONE FILE, SO I'M SPECIFICALLY GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THOSE PARTICULAR ZONES, I WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY SOME PARTICULAR REGISTRARS AND SOME PARTICULAR DATA POINTS THAT INDICATE THAT THIS IS A HIGH-VOLUME ACTIVITY.

MY DATA, UNFORTUNATELY, IS FROM AN EXTERNAL PERSPECTIVE.

I MAY NOT HAVE THE DEPTH OF INFORMATION THAT I DID AT THE MARRAKECH MEETING.

HOWEVER, I WOULD REFER PEOPLE WHO ARE RESEARCHING THIS TOPIC TO LOOK AT THE TRANSCRIPTS FROM THE MARRAKECH MEETING, WHERE I DID QUOTE NUMBERS.

THERE'S ALSO SOME RESEARCH THAT A GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF KEVIN MURPHY HAS DONE ON HIS BLOG THAT INDICATE NUMBERS THAT WOULD HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND MAYBE SOME OF THE BREADTH OF THE REGISTRATION.

OVERALL, BY REVIEWING THE COM/NET ZONE FILE, BY USING WHOIS, AND REGISTRAR ACCREDITATIONS TO DETERMINE WHICH REGISTRARS ARE PARTICIPATING, REVIEWING THE DOMAIN NAME SERVERS IN THE ZONE FILES, AND USING ACTIVE PING SCAN, IT WAS POSSIBLE FOR ME TO DETERMINE THAT THERE WERE UPWARDS OF 1.8 MILLION DOMAIN NAMES REGISTERED IN THIS PARTICULAR CATEGORY DURING THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER.

I'M MAKING SOME ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THIS INFORMATION, BECAUSE IN MANY CASES, IT'S DIFFICULT TO SEE IF THIS IS A TYPICAL SCENARIO OF A REGISTRATION EITHER, IN STANDARD OR BULK FORMAT, THAT A CUSTOMER IS FACING OR IF IT IS RELATED TO PPC-BASED ACTIVITY.

THE TERMINOLOGY USED IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, THERE ARE TERMS, "DOMAIN TASTING," WHICH IS USED, YOU'LL SEE OR HEAR THAT QUITE FREQUENTLY.

YOU'LL ALSO HEAR MORE SORT OF EMOTIONALLY EVOCATIVE TERMS LIKE "KITING," "MOOCHING," THE THING THAT I'D LIKE TO IDENTIFY IS THAT DOMAIN TASTING IS A REVIEW OF THE DOMAIN'S VIABILITY IN THE PPC MARKET, TYPICALLY, FOR IF A PERSON COULD MAKE ON ADVERTISING AT LEAST THE REGISTRATION FEE OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR USING PREDICTION MODELS BASED UPON A -- THE REVENUE MADE IN THAT FIVE-DAY PERIOD.

A REGISTRANT WOULD THEN KEEP THE NAME, OTHERWISE RETURN IT TO THE REGISTRY AT NO COST.

NOW, TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE DIFFERENT PERCEPTIONS OF THIS, IN THE CASE WHERE THIS IS DONE ONCE, THAT'S OFTEN REFERRED TO AS TASTING.

SAMPLING A DOMAIN NAME, NOT UNLIKE WHEN A PERSON BUYS SOMETHING FROM THE STORE AND RETURNS IT.

THERE'S ALSO THE TERM "KITING," WHICH I WOULD LIKEN MORE TO SERIALLY REREGISTERING A DOMAIN NAME UPON ITS FIVE-DAY WINDOW, YOU RETURN IT AT NO COST.

YOU THEN SUBSEQUENTLY GO BACK AND REREGISTER IT.

AND THEN YOU REPEAT THIS PROCESS, LABYRINTH REPEAT, UNTIL YOU'VE RECEIVE A FREE DOMAIN OVER POTENTIALLY THE COURSE OF A MONTH.

IN THE EVENT WOULD YOU SEE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, YOU WOULD PROBABLY SEE SOMEONE REGISTERING FIVE OR MORE TIMES IN A MONTH THE SAME DOMAIN NAME.

NOW, THE ACTIVITY RELATED TO THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER.

I DON'T HAVE HARD STATISTICS TO PRESENT TO YOU TODAY, UNFORTUNATELY.

BUT I WILL POST IT TO THE PUBLIC LIST ONCE I HAVE SOME INFORMATION SURROUNDING THE VOLUME.

THE SERIAL REREGISTRATION WHERE YOU'RE GETTING THE NAME FOR FREE ACROSS A PERIOD OF A MONTH MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATELY LABELED "KITING" OR SOME OF THE MORE EMOTIONAL -- EMOTIONALLY CHARGED TERMS FOR THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY.

SO THERE IS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN DOMAIN TASTING AND DOMAIN KITING.

I DID WANT TO MAKE THAT REFERENCE, THAT, YOU KNOW, IN MANY CASES, PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY BUYING THESE DOMAINS AND THEY DO, IN FACT, TURN INTO REAL REGISTRATIONS AND ACTUAL ACTIVITY IN THE MARKETPLACE.

AGAIN, I SAW UPWARDS OF 1.8 NEW REGISTRATIONS THAT WERE ACTUALLY CREATED FROM THIS.

I BELIEVE THERE WAS APPROXIMATELY 34 MILLION RAW DOMAINS ADDED THAT RESULTED IN THAT 1.8 MILLION.

I WAS NOT ABLE TO, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, VERIFY THIS.

I'M USING EXTERNAL TOOLS.

SO THIS SEEMS TO BE THE BEST KNOWLEDGE THAT I CAN COME TO ABOUT THIS.

BUT BASED UPON THIS, IT IS A HIGH VOLUME OF REGISTRATIONS THAT ARE OCCURRING IN ORDER TO RESULT IN THAT 1.8.

AT THIS POINT, I'D LIKE TO, YOU KNOW -- HAVING MADE A CLARIFICATION ABOUT DOMAIN TASTING VERSUS DOMAIN KITING, I'D LIKE TO PASS THE MICROPHONE TO MR. TIM RUIZ.

AND IT IS YOURS NOW, TIM.

THANK YOU.

>>TIM RUIZ: THANK YOU, JOTHAN.

FIRST, YOU KNOW, MY REMARKS AND THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE WITH THIS ACTIVITY, I'M MAKING NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN TASTING AND KITING.

SO WHEN I SAY "TASTING," IT INCLUDES EITHER ACTIVITY.

SO JUST KIND OF MAKE THAT CLEAR AT THE OUTSET.

ALSO, WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH DOMAIN MONETIZATION.

SOME ARE CONFUSED THAT OUR CONCERN OVER DOMAIN MONETIZATION.

WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL.

IN FACT, GO DADDY IN A SMALLER WAY DOES PROFIT FROM DOMAIN MONETIZATION OURSELVES.

WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE REGISTRIES OR ANYONE ELSE MAKING A PROFIT FROM DOMAIN MONETIZATION.

SO THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE.

BUT WE DO BELIEVE THAT USING THE ADD-GRACE PERIOD FOR TASTING AS A MEANS OF GETTING TO MONETIZATION IS A PROBLEM AND THAT THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED TO GET THERE WITHOUT CAUSING SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE SEEING TODAY.

WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS, IT'S CREATING CUSTOMER CONFUSION, IT THREATENS CUSTOMERS' CONFIDENCE IN WHAT WE DO AS AN INDUSTRY, AND FOR US, IT'S CAUSING INCREASED SUPPORT COSTS.

COMPLAINTS THAT WE GET BASED ON THIS ACTIVITY TAKE US SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TIME AND RESOURCES TO RESOLVE.

FOR EXAMPLE, A TYPICAL COMPLAINT WILL BE BASED ON A USER COMING IN, CHECKING A FEW DOMAIN NAMES' AVAILABILITY, THEN THEY'LL GO BACK, SPEND SOME TIME REVIEWING THE RESULTS, MAYBE FOR THEIR OWN USE OR FOR THEIR BOSS OR A CLIENT, THEY'LL COME BACK A FEW HOURS LATER, MAYBE A DAY LATER, AND TRY TO REGISTER THE NAMES, AND THE NAMES ARE GONE.

AND THEY'LL FIND THAT THEY'RE REGISTERED WITH, ULTIMATELY, ONE OF THE REGISTRARS WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE TASTING ACTIVITY FOR TASTING PURPOSES.

SO WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME TRYING TO CALM THEIR FEARS THAT SOMEHOW GO DADDY IS SPYING ON WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND USING THE INFORMATION THAT THEY ARE GIVING US TO SOMEHOW PARTNER WITH SOMEONE ELSE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM BY REGISTERING THEIR DOMAIN NAMES AND SOMEHOW MAKING A PROFIT.

SO ONCE WE'VE TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT, WHICH IT NEVER GOES WELL, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN, BECAUSE IT'S SOMEWHAT COMPLICATED, THEN WE SPEND PERHAPS THE NEXT THREE OR FOUR DAYS MONITORING THOSE NAMES SO THAT WHEN WE SEE THEY DROP, IF THEY DO DROP, THEN WE CAN REGISTER THEM FOR THE CUSTOMER AND MAKE OUR CUSTOMER HAPPY, BECAUSE THAT'S ULTIMATELY WHAT OUR GOAL IS, IS TO PLEASE THE CUSTOMER.

A YEAR AGO, WE RECEIVED ABOUT A HANDFUL OF THOSE MAYBE, AT MOST, ON A WEEKLY BASIS, IS WHEN WE BEGAN BECOMING THE MOST CONCERNED.

TODAY WE'RE SEEING IT ON A DAILY BASIS.

IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH FOR SOMEONE TO GO OUT AND PERUSE SOME OF THE DOMAIN NAME FORUMS AND FIND THREADS ABOUT THIS ACTIVITY.

THEY'RE ALMOST ALWAYS NEGATIVE.

THEY ALMOST ALL INCLUDE SOME OF THE THINGS I JUST DESCRIBED, AND EVEN ACCUSATIONS THAT REGISTRARS ARE SOMEHOW IN SHADING DEALINGS WITH EACH OTHER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF REGISTRANTS.

SO WE SHARED THIS INFORMATION WITH OTHERS, WE'VE SHARED THIS INFORMATION WITH THE REGISTRIES, WE'VE SHARED THIS INFORMATION WITH ICANN, OUR CONCERNS OVER, AND OVER.

THE LAST WORKSHOP AS WELL.

THE FEEDBACK WE GET IS THAT THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS IS STILL RELATIVELY SMALL, THE PROBLEM ISN'T REALLY THAT PERVASIVE, OR THAT THE PROBLEM IS JUST THAT THE TYPICAL INTERNET USER DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE INDUSTRY.

AND WE AGREE, THAT MAY ALL BE TRUE.

BUT THAT'S REALLY OUR POINT.

WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS FIND A SOLUTION BEFORE THESE PROBLEMS DO BECOME PERVASIVE.

WHY DO WE NEED TO WAIT UNTIL THERE'S A NEED TO ACT?

WE BELIEVE OUR REPUTATION AS AN INDUSTRY IS AT STAKE, THAT TASTING IS ON SUCH A LARGE SCALE IS JUST A NUMBER OF THE MANY PROBLEMS THAT CONSUMERS FIND THAT THREATEN THEIR CONFIDENCE IN WHAT WE DO AS AN INDUSTRY AND IN E-COMMERCE IN GENERAL.

FINALLY, I WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF POINTS ABOUT THE STATISTICS THAT JOTHAN REFERRED TO.

I THINK I'D TAKE ARGUMENT WITH THOSE A LITTLE BIT, THAT 1.8 MILLION OF THOSE WERE RELATED TO TASTING OR THAT WERE REGISTERED AS A RESULT OF TASTING.

THE REASON IS, LOOKING -- WE LOOKED BACK AT THE FIRST SEVEN MONTHS OF 2006, AND WE USED THE ACTUAL REGISTRY REPORTS PUBLICLY POSTED ON ICANN'S WEB SITE FOR THE DATA.

AND WHAT WE FOUND WAS THAT, IN THAT SEVEN-MONTH PERIOD, 205 MILLION NEW DOMAIN NAMES WERE REGISTERED.

OF THOSE 205 MILLION, 197 MILLION WERE DELETED.

SO THE COM FILE GREW BY JUST APPROXIMATELY 8 MILLION DOMAIN NAMES.

BUT WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE TOP TEN REGISTRARS BY NUMBER OF DELETED DOMAINS, THEY MADE UP 92 -- OVER 92 -- PERCENT OF THOSE 197 MILLION DOMAIN NAMES THAT WERE DELETED.

AND THEN LOOKING AT THE TOP TEN REGISTRARS NOT INVOLVED IN TASTING, THEY MADE UP APPROXIMATELY ABOUT 5 MILLION OF THOSE NEW REGISTERED DOMAIN NAMES.

SO THE ACTUAL NEW DOMAIN NAMES BY NON-TASTING REGISTRARS IS PROBABLY EVEN HIGHER.

SO TO US, THAT INDICATES THAT THE NUMBER OF REGISTRATIONS ON A MONTHLY BASIS THAT ARE ACTUALLY REGISTERED AND KEPT BY TASTERS IS PROBABLY SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER THAN 1.8 MILLION.

NOT INSIGNIFICANT, AND WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHY REGISTRIES HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WANTING TO TRY TO STOP THIS ACTIVITY, BECAUSE IT IS STILL A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF REVENUE.

HOWEVER, WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS, LET'S FIND A BETTER WAY, LET'S FIND A SOLUTION WHERE EVERYONE CAN STILL GET WHAT THEY WANT AND WE DON'T HAVE THIS END RESULT OF CONFUSING OUR CUSTOMERS AND THREATENING THEIR CONFIDENCE IN WHAT WE DO AS AN INDUSTRY.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, TIM.

AND I'LL MAKE SOME -- JUST A BRIEF COMMENT THAT THE NUMBERS THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT ARE SPECIFICALLY JUST COM AND NET, AND THEY ARE FROM AN EXTERNAL PERSPECTIVE AND MAY NOT REFLECT MANY OTHER ACTIVITY.

BUT I'D WONDER, TIM, IS YOUR SOURCE STUFF OF ALL GENERIC TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS OR JUST COM/NET.

>>TIM RUIZ: I SHOULD HAVE CLARIFIED.

IT'S JUST DOT COM.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU.

NEXT ON OUR PANEL IS MR. HAKON HAUGNES.

IS THAT CORRECT?

>>HAKON HAUGNES: YES, THAT'S FINE.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THAT'LL WORK.

WITH A NAME LIKE JOTHAN, I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL.

HAKON IS HERE FROM GNR, WHICH IS THE REGISTRY FOR DOT NAME.

AND HE'LL BE SPEAKING A BIT TODAY ON THIS TOPIC AS WELL.

THANK YOU, HAKON.

>>HAKON HAUGNES: THANK YOU, JOTHAN.

ACTUALLY, WHEN WE THINK ABOUT DOMAIN TASTING, WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT A PRACTICE THAT IS LIMITED TO ONE OR, AT MOST, A COUPLE OF REGISTRIES.

IN FACT, MOST REGISTRIES, INCLUDING THE DOT NAME REGISTRY, HAVE NO DOMAIN TASTING TODAY.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO REALIZE HOW, IN OUR VIEW, DOMAIN TASTING ACTUALLY HAPPENS OR WHY IT HAPPENS.

IT'S BECAUSE PEOPLE TYPE INTO THE URL FIELD STRINGS THAT END WITH DOT COM OR THEIR LOCAL CCTLD, OR SOMETIMES THE BROWSER, SOME OF THE OLDER BROWSERS, ARE SET UP TO APPEND DOT COM, DOT NET, OR DOT ORG.

FROM A REGISTRY POINT OF VIEW, WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT OCCURS ON VERY FEW TLDS.

SO IT HAPPENS ON THE TLDS THAT ARE A BIT HIGHER UP THE FOOD CHAIN.

SO FOR SOME REGISTRIES, DOMAIN TASTING MAY BE RELEVANT AND IT MAY NOT BE.

WHAT'S IMPORTANT FOR A REGISTRY IS TO ENSURE TECHNICAL STABILITY AND THE OPERATION.

BUT STABILITY AND THE OPERATION IS NOT NECESSARILY THREATENED BY DOMAIN TASTING.

A REGISTRY ALSO NEEDS TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT ITS BRAND IMAGE AND THE USER PERCEPTION OF THE TLD.

IT NEEDS TO AVOID CLUTTER.

IT NEEDS TO AVOID CUSTOMER CONFUSION.

AND -- BUT I THINK ABOVE ALL, ESPECIALLY THE NONINCUMBENT TLDS, FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, WE NEED REGISTRAR AND MARKETPLACE INNOVATION.

AND DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODELS WILL SUIT DIFFERENT REGISTRIES.

AS AN EXAMPLE, FOR DOT NAME, FREE TRIAL IS IMPORTANT.

FREE TRIAL IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY COMMON IN CONSUMER MARKETING.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT CONSUMERS NEED VERY OFTEN TO EMBRACE NEW SERVICES.

A LOT OF SERVICES TO CONSUMERS ARE SOLD USING FREE TRIAL.

THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW THE EXACT SAME FUNCTION CAN HAVE DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT RESULTS ON DIFFERENT TLDS.

SO IS DOMAIN TASTING A PROBLEM?

IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE REGISTRY.

AND REGISTRIES ARE DIFFERENT.

AND ONE SOLUTION OR ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.

SO FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, WE THINK THE DOMAIN SPACE NEEDS TO GROW.

IT IS GROWING TODAY WITH DOMAIN TASTING, AS WE'VE SEEN, SOME OF THESE NUMBERS ARE FAIRLY LARGE.

YOU CAN ARGUE THAT UTILITY-WISE, THE DOMAIN TASTING PRACTICE MIGHT NOT CREATE AN IMPORTANT GROWTH IN THE NAME SPACE.

WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS TO SUPPORT INNOVATION AND INVOLVE THE MASS MARKET INDIVIDUALS SO WE CAN GROW THE ENTIRE NAME SPACE DRAMATICALLY.

WE KNOW THAT CONSUMERS ARE BECOMING ACTIVE ON THE INTERNET.

WE KNOW THAT USER-GENERATED CONTENT AND SOCIAL NETWORKS ARE GROWING DRAMATICALLY.

AND ADDRESSING OF INDIVIDUALS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

WE CAN END UP WITH 500 MILLION FOR EVERY NETWORKED INDIVIDUAL.

BUT IN ORDER TO GET THERE, WE NEED TO SUPPORT BUSINESS INNOVATION IN THE MARKETPLACE.

EACH REGISTRY WILL HAVE TO ACHIEVE AND SUPPORT THAT INDIVIDUALLY.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, HAKON.

AND DID YOU MENTION, IS YOUR BUSINESS RULE THE SAME AS COM/NET?

IS IT FIVE-DAY GRACE?

YOU MENTIONED A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME.

WAS IT 90 DAYS?

>>HAKON HAUGNES: DEFINITELY.

ACTUALLY, IT'S NOT AN ADD-GRACE PERIOD AT ALL.

FOR US, IT'S A FREE TRIAL PERIOD.

ADD-GRACE IS A VERY PARTICULAR NAME, BUT ON DOT NAME, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FREE TRIAL PERIOD FOR CONSUMERS.

IT CAN BE LONGER THAN FIVE DAYS.

IT CAN BE 60 DAYS, IN FACT, CONSUMERS NEED TIME TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY NEED A DOMAIN NAME FOR.

SO THAT'S WHY THE FREE TRIAL PERIOD HAS TO BE CORRESPONDING.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: BUT AS FAR AS A TYPICAL REGISTRATION SCENARIO WITH A STATUS QUO REGISTRAR, YOU HONOR A FIVE-DAY ADD-GRACE, SIMILAR TO COM OR NET?

>>HAKON HAUGNES: ABSOLUTELY.

WE HAVE THAT SAME POLICY.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: OKAY.

>>HAKON HAUGNES: BUT IT HAS NOT RESULTED IN ANY DOMAIN TASTING, FOR THE SAME REASON I MENTIONED BEFORE, THAT DOMAIN TASTING IS A PRACTICE WHICH OCCURS BECAUSE INDIVIDUALS ARE PROGRAMMED TO END SOMETHING IN DOT COM OR THEIR LOCAL CCTLD CCTLD AND NOT DOT NAME.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

NEXT ON THE PANEL IS MR. ROB HALL FROM MOMENTOUS.

ROB, WE APPRECIATE YOU'RE HERE TODAY.

THANK YOU.

>>ROB HALL: THANK YOU, JOTHAN.

I'VE BEEN ASKED TO SPEAK TODAY ON THE -- TO ADVOCATE THE PRO POSITION DURING MY TALK TODAY.

I'M, ACTUALLY, AS YOU MAY RECALL FROM MY TALK IN MARRAKECH, FAIRLY NEUTRAL ON THIS ISSUE.

BY WAY OF DISCLOSURE, WE OWN A COMPANY CALLED POOL.COM WHICH IS ACTIVE IN THE SECONDARY MARKET.

ALSO OWN A LARGE GROUP OF REGISTRARS.

AND LAST WEEK, AFTER ICANN APPROVED THE REGISTRY SERVICE OF TASTE-TESTING FOR DOT ORG, WE RELEASED A PRODUCT CALLED CATCH AND RELEASE, WHICH ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS SOMEONE TO TEST THE NAME FOR THE FIVE DAYS AND CHARGES THEM A FEE FOR THAT TEST, AND THEN DELETES IT.

AND I'LL TALK A BIT ABOUT THAT LATER.

I THINK IN MARRAKECH I STATED THAT THIS IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE AND THERE ARE MANY FACETS TO IT AND MANY DIFFERENT CONSTITUENCIES HAVE AN INTEREST IN IT AND WE HAVE TO DO BE CAREFUL NOT TO HAVE A QUICK REACTION OR DO SOMETHING WITH A KNEE-JERK REACTION THAT WILL CAUSE UNEXPECTED RESULTS, AND I'M AFRAID I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENED.

ON OCTOBER 22ND ICANN APPROVED THE DOT ORG TASTE TESTING SERVICE, OR SERVICE THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO TRY A DOMAIN FOR FIVE DAYS FOR A FEE OF FIVE CENTS. I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THAT APPLICATION FOR A BIT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S THE RIGHT SOLUTION AND I DON'T THINK IT WILL PERFORM THE WAY THEY EXPECT IT WILL. IN FACT, I THINK IT WILL DO THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEIR INTENT WAS.

SO ON THE APPLICATION ITSELF, I WAS SURPRISED ICANN APPROVED IT. ON THE FACT THAT A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS IN THE APPLICATION, I THINK, WERE MEANT TO GET OTHER CONSTITUENCIES AND OTHER PEOPLE INVOLVED.

FOR INSTANCE, THE APPLICATION HAS QUESTIONS SUCH AS DID YOU TALK TO OTHER CONSTITUENCIES. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES. AND I WAS SHOCKED TO SEE THE ANSWERS TO A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS WERE NOT APPLICABLE OR NO, AND I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTABLE BY ICANN.

THE INTERESTING OUTCOME OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS IS THAT DOT ORG IS NOW $3.65 A YEAR BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY A PENNY A DAY. YOU CAN KEEP DROPPING AND ADDING IT ALL YEAR LONG. AND EVEN WORSE, ICANN DOESN'T GET ITS 25 CENTS FOR THAT DOMAIN REGISTRATION FOR THE YEAR. SO ICANN HAS FOUND A WAY TO DO IT OUT OF REVENUE FROM THIS NEW SERVICE AS WELL, BUT IT'S MOOT, BECAUSE FOR MOST DOMAINERS, DOT ORG IS ONLY A DOLLAR NOW, BECAUSE THERE IS A SPECIAL RUNNING THAT IF YOU LIVE IN THE CARIBBEAN, WHERE MOST OF THEM DO, DOT ORG IS ONLY A DOLLAR.

I THINK THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO GET TOGETHER ON THIS AND LOOK AT THIS VERY CAREFULLY. I THINK WE WILL SEE -- I FEAR WE WILL SEE OTHER REGISTRY SERVICES SIMILAR TO THIS FROM OTHER REGISTRIES, AND I DON'T THINK THAT WILL HAVE THE DESIRED OUTCOME THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS OR THE COMMUNITY DESERVES.

AT POOL WE HAVE BEEN A LITTLE OVERWHELMED BY THE RESPONSE TO OUR PRODUCT AND BOTH IN THE SHEER VOLUME OF IT BUT ALSO THE PEOPLE USING IT. IT WAS DESIGNED FOR THE SMALL TO MID SIZED DOMAIN OWNER BECAUSE THIS USED TO BE AVAILABLE ONLY TO THE PEOPLE WHO OWNED THEIR OWN REGISTRARS. IT WASN'T OFFERED AS A SERVICE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

THE INTERESTING VARIATION WE SAW OTHER THAN THE TYPICAL OF WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT OF INDIVIDUALS AND DOMAINERS WANTING TO TRY DOMAINS, IS THAT THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWYERS ARE ALSO NOW STARTING TO TEST VARIATIONS OF THEIR NAMES. AND IT'S NOT TO SEE IF THERE IS PAY-PER-CLICK TRAFFIC, BUT IS THERE ANY TYPE-IN TRAFFIC AND DO THEY WANT TO BUY THE NAME. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE EXPECTED. WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE MORE FOR THE PPC, BUT WE ARE NOW SEEING IT JUST FOR THE ANALYSIS OF THE TRAFFIC MARKET.

WE ARE ALSO SEEING THE TASTE TESTING MOVE TO NEW TLDS. SO IT STARTED WITH COM AND NET. IT STILL IS VERY POPULAR THERE. CERTAINLY WE ARE SEEING IT MOVE TO ORG AND INFO BUT WE ARE SEEING IT MOVE TO THE COUNTRY CODES.

AS I GATHER THE DOMAINERS FEEL THAT THE NAMES ARE TAKEN IN THE MORE POPULAR TLDS, THEY ARE LOOKING TO THE SMALLER TLDS AND STARTING TO WANT TO TEST THERE.

THE OTHER INTERESTING PHENOMENA IS THIS WILL TEND TO INCREASE AND REPEAT, SO THIS SERVICE IS NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. AND THE THING THAT WILL CAUSE IT TO REPEAT AND INCREASE IS THAT THE FACT THAT THE ADVERTISERS ARE STARTING IT TO INCREASE THEIR SPENDING IN THE PAY-PER-CLICK WORLD.

SO A DOMAIN THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN WORTH $4 THIS YEAR AND SOME WOULD SAY IT'S NOT WORTH KEEPING, WE ARE GOING TO THROW IT BACK, A WEEK FROM NOW MIGHT HAVE AN ADVERTISER THAT WANTS TO PUT HIS ADS ON IT THAT'S WILLING TO MAKE THAT DOMAIN WORTH 6 OR $8 THAT MAKES IT VIABLE FOR THE DOMAINER. THIS IS GOING TO GO ON AND ON AND REPEAT AND IT'S THE VALUE OF THE DOMAIN AND WHO IS ADVERTISING ON IT AND WHAT THE END-USER ADVERTISERS ARE WILLING TO PAY A GOOGLE OR YAHOO! OR OTHERS OUT THERE.

WE ARE CONCERNED THAT WE HAVE SEEN ONE USE FOR IT, AND THAT'S THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWYERS USING IT FOR TRAFFIC. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER USES BUT THE MARKET WILL ADJUST AND FIND NEW USES AND WE ARE WATCHING CHOSE TO SEE WHAT THOSE ARE.

THE IDEAL SOLUTION, I BELIEVE, IS TO FIND WAY TO MEAT THE MARKET AND THE DEMAND IN THE MARKET. MARKETS HAVE A TENDENCY TO FIND SHORT GAP WAYS AROUND THEM TO STIFLE THEM AND THAT'S NOT A SOLUTION GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY AND ICANN. THERE OBVIOUSLY IS DEMAND OUT HERE FOR THIS. THERE OBVIOUSLY IS DEMAND OUT HERE FOR THIS. THEY SHOULD FIND A PRODUCT OR A WAY TO SOLVE AND MEET THE DEMAND IN A WAY THAT MAKES ALL THE CONSTITUENCIES HAPPY.

WE NEED TO BE MORE INCLUSIVE OF OTHER CONSTITUENCIES. FOR THE REGISTRY SERVICE APPLICATION TO SAY THERE ARE NO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES, FOR EXAMPLE, IS DISTURBING BECAUSE THIS IS A HUGE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUE AND I'M SURE THE IP COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE A SAY AND WANT SOME INPUT INTO WHAT'S GOING ON.

THE SECONDARY MARKET IS ALSO RAPIDLY CHANGING AND THAT WILL AFFECT THE TASTE TESTING PERIOD AS WELL.

REGISTRARS ARE NOW OWNING THEIR OWN PORTFOLIO AND NOW CONSIDER DOMAINS IN THEIR MANAGEMENT TO BE THEIR PROPERTY AFTER EXPIRING. DOMAINS ARE NO LONGER HITTING THE RGB OR DELETING AS THEY HAVE IN THE PAST COUPLE YEARS, AND TASTE TESTING IS JUST A SMALL PART OF THIS SECONDARY MARKET AND WE NEED TO KEEP THE LARGER PICTURE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING AND THE MARKET IN MIND FOR A SOLUTION.

AND ALSO WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THE CONSUMER WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE INTRICACIES OF THE MARKET LIKE WE DO, AND DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE LIFE CYCLE OF THE VEIN, WHETHER IT'S NOT AVAILABLE FOR A YEAR, NOT AVAILABLE FOR FIVE DAYS. THEY JUST DON'T GET THE INTRICACIES OF HOW A DOMAIN OPERATES AND HOW IT BEHAVES AND WHY IT MIGHT NOT BE AVAILABLE TODAY AND MIGHT BE AVAILABLE TOMORROW AS MANY OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM UNDERSTAND.

AND WE NEED TO DESIGN A SOLUTION THAT WORKS FOR CONSUMERS AND MEETS THE MARKET DEMAND.

I THANK ICANN FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF SPEAKING TODAY AND I LOOK FORWARD TO TAKING QUESTIONS AND I REALLY DO HOPE -- I KNOW LAST TIME WE DID THIS THE QUESTIONS AND THE DEBATE THAT FOLLOWED WERE GREAT, AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO ASK.

THANK YOU.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, ROB, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR BREVITY SO WE CAN GET TO THOSE QUESTIONS TOWARDS THE END.

THE NEXT IS PHIL CORWIN WHO IS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE ASSOCIATION WHICH IS AN ASSOCIATION OF DOMAIN OWNERS AND WEB SITE DEVELOPERS.

PHIL.

>>PHIL CORWIN: THANK YOU, AND THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME TO BE PART OF THIS DISCUSSION TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION.

I AM GOING TO GET TO TASTING BUT I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A MINUTE JUST TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THE ICA IS, SINCE WE ARE A NEW PLAYER ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE AND OTHER RELATED ISSUES. AND I WANT TO START BY SAYING THAT MY PERSONAL VIEW OF ICANN, TO PARAPHRASE WHAT CHURCHILL SAID ABOUT DEMOCRACY, I THINK THAT ICANN IS PROBABLY THE WORST FORM OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE EXCEPT FOR ALL THE OTHERS. AND BECAUSE OF THAT VIEW, I WORKED PRO BONO BEHIND THE SCENES WITH MEMBERS OF THE U.S. CONGRESS I KNOW LAST YEAR TO HELP ASSURE THAT ICANN REMAINED INDEPENDENT AND THAT THE PRIVATE NON-PROFIT MODEL OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE IT EMBODIES CONTINUES AND HOPEFULLY THRIVES.

THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION IS A NEW TRADE GROUP FORMED TO REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF PROFESSIONAL DOMAIN NAME HOLDERS. THESE ARE INDIVIDUALS AND COMPANIES WHO BUY AND SELL DOMAIN NAMES AND MONETIZE THE WEB SITES THEY REPRESENT THROUGH ADVERTISING AND, INCREASINGLY, THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONTENT TO ENCOURAGE RETURN VISITS TO THOSE WEB SITES.

BY OUR ESTIMATE, AND NUMBERS ARE HARD TO COME BY, BUT WE BELIEVE THE VALUE OF THE SALES OF DOMAIN NAMES IN THE SECONDARY MARKET ARE SOMEWHERE RIGHT NOW IN THE RANGE OF 500 TO 700 MILLION U.S. DOLLARS PER YEAR AND THE STANDALONE VALUE OF DOMAIN NAMES APART FROM ANY COMMERCE TAKING PLACE AT THE WEB SITES THEY REPRESENT IS SOMEWHERE IN THE RANGE OF 5 TO 10 BILLION U.S. DOLLARS. AND WE EXPECT THESE NUMBERS TO INCREASE EXPONENTIALLY BECAUSE, AS ROB MENTIONED, WE ARE JUST BEGINNING TO SEE MAJOR ADVERTISERS DIRECT SIGNIFICANT VOLUME OF ADVERTISING DOLLARS TO THE INTERNET. AND WE EXPECT THAT TO GROW QUITE RAPIDLY OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS. SO I THINK THE NUMBERS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WILL BE MUCH LARGER EVEN A YEAR OR TWO FROM NOW.

WE VIEW REGISTRANTS ARE THE BOTTOM, WE ARE THE BOTTOM IN THE BOTTOM-UP CONSENSUS PROCESS.

THE FEES WE PUT INTO THE SYSTEM SUPPORT EVERYONE ELSE: THE REGISTRARS, THE REGISTRIES, AND ICANN ITSELF.

AND I DO HAVE TO SAY THAT THE SPARK THAT REALLY IGNITED THE CREATION OF THIS GROUP WAS GREAT DISQUIET IN THE REGISTRANT COMMUNITY ABOUT THE PROPOSED DOT BIZ, DOT ORG AND DOT INFO TLD AGREEMENTS.

I AM NOT GOING TO REVIEW THE SUBSTANTIVE ARGUMENTS. WE MADE AN OPPOSITION TO THE ADOPTION OF THOSE AGREEMENTS, OTHER THAN TO SAY THAT WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT FUNDAMENTAL INTERNET POLICY CHANGES SHOULD BE MADE IN PRIVATE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS. AND WE ALSO, WHEN ICANN RECEIVES MORE THAN 1,000 COMMENTS ON A PROPOSAL AND WHEN MORE THAN 99% OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE ADOPTION OF THE AGREEMENTS AND WHEN THE RESULT OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE OF MODEST CHANGES, AT BEST, TO JUST A FEW OF THE POINTS RAISED BY COMMENTERS, WE DO NOT SEE ADEQUATE EVIDENCE OF A TRUE BOTTOM-UP CONSENSUS PROCESS, NOR DO WE SEE ADEQUATE EVIDENCE OF THE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY THAT ICANN COMMITTED ITSELF TO IN EXCHANGE FOR THE GREATER AUTONOMY IT RECEIVED UNDER ITS NEW MOU. AND WE INTEND TO BE WORKING CONSTRUCTIVELY TO GET A BETTER MATCH BETWEEN THE REALITY OF ICANN ACTIONS AND THE RHETORIC.

TURNING TO TASTING. THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION DOES INTEND TO DEVELOP A CODE OF CONDUCT FOR OUR INDUSTRY, AND I THINK IT'S QUITE EVIDENT THAT TASTING WILL QUITE LIKELY BE ONE OF THE FIRST PRACTICES IT ADDRESSES. I'VE CONSULTED WITH THE FOUNDING MEMBERS OF OUR TRADE ASSOCIATION, AND FRANKLY, THE VERY PROFESSIONAL DOMAIN NAME OWNERS HAVE DEVELOPED EXTREMELY SOPHISTICATED METRICS TO DETERMINE WHICH DOMAIN NAMES THEY THINK WILL HAVE SUSTAINED VALUE, AND THEY VIEW BLIND TASTING AS A RATHER CRUDE APPROACH FOR DECIDING WHICH DOMAIN NAMES ARE WORTH HOLDING.

HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE CLEAR FROM THE REMARKS WE HEAR FROM THE FOLKS ON THE PANEL TODAY AS WELL AS CONVERSATIONS I HAVE BEEN HAVING WITH PEOPLE AT THIS MEETING THAT THERE IS NO ANY CONSENSUS ON WHAT ABUSE OF TASTING IS, ON WHAT THE EXTENT IS, ON WHETHER THERE IS NET ECONOMIC OR STRUCTURAL HARM, OR WHETHER AND WHAT THE RESPONSE TO ABUSE OF TASTING SHOULD BE.

I WOULD SAY OTHER THAN I THINK THERE IS GENERAL AGREEMENT THAT WHEN SOMEONE CONTINUES TO HOLD A NAME FOR ONE FIVE-DAY PERIOD AFTER ANOTHER SEQUENTIALLY WITHOUT EVER PAYING FOR THAT NAME, YET ENJOYING THE BENEFITS OF WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY OWNERSHIP, THAT WOULD SEEM TO BE AN ABUSE OF THE GRACE PERIOD THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

I THINK WE NEED BETTER RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE EFFECT OF VARIOUS RESPONSES THAT ARE BEING SUGGESTED TO TASTING WOULD BE. AND WE ALSO HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE EFFECT WOULD BE ON THE VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES WITH INTERESTS ON THIS, IN FACT. I DIDN'T REALIZE UNTIL ROB'S REMARKED TO THAT THERE IS A STRONG IP INTEREST ON WHAT HAS BEEN DONE ON THIS.

SO WE THINK WITHOUT BETTER FACTS AND WITHOUT MUCH BETTER ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE EFFECTS OF VARIOUS RESPONSES WOULD BE, THAT ANY BROAD ALTERATION ON POLICY RIGHT NOW WOULD BE PREMATURE, AND MIGHT WELL DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD, AND MIGHT WELL FULFILL THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

THE GRACE PERIOD HAS BEEN A FUNDAMENTAL POLICY FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND WE DON'T WANT A HALF-BAKED APPROACH, PARTICULARLY AN APPROACH WHICH IS, IN EFFECT, OVERREGULATION OF MARKETS THAT TEND TO BE SELF-CORRECTING.

SO IF THERE IS A CONSENSUS THAT THIS ISSUE MERITS THE CREATION OF A PDP TO ADDRESS IT, THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION WILL BE HAPPY TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT INTERNAL ICANN PROCESS.

IN THE MEANTIME, I THINK WE WILL ALL BE OBSERVING THE RESULTS OF THE RESTOCKING FEE APPROACH THAT HAS JUST BEEN APPROVED FOR DOT ORG. I THINK UNTIL WE SEE THE RESULTS OF THAT APPROACH WE WOULD NOT APPROVE THE ADOPTION OF THAT SAME APPROACH BY THE LARGER, MORE COMMERCIALLY ORIENTED REGISTRIES. AND WE INTEND TO ENGAGE IN CONSTRUCTIVE DIALOGUE WITH ALL THE INTERESTED PARTIES ON THIS ISSUE TO GET A BETTER GRASP OF THE FACTS AND, IN THE PROCESS, TO CLEAR UP MANY OF THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND MISPERCEPTIONS OF THE INDUSTRY THAT THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION REPRESENTS.

MEANWHILE, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SURVEY THE PROFESSIONAL DOMAIN NAME HOLDER COMMUNITY TO BETTER ASCERTAIN THE VIEWS OF OUR MEMBERS AND POTENTIAL MEMBERS ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND ABOUT THE VARIOUS OPTIONS THAT ARE BEING SUGGESTED TO ADDRESS IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, PHIL.

OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SOMEONE TO TALK ABOUT IF THIS IS AN ISSUE OR FOUND TO BE AN ISSUE THAT THERE ARE SOME SOLUTIONS THAT THE MARKETPLACE COULD COME INTO RATHER THAN HAVING ICANN NECESSARILY STIPULATE WHAT THOSE CHANGES SHOULD BE OR WHAT THAT SHOULD BE.

A PERSON I RESPECT IMMENSELY, MR. PAUL STAHURA.

>>PAUL STAHURA: THANK YOU. HOPEFULLY MY PRESENTATION SHOWS UP THERE.

IT'S PLUGGED IN.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: PAUL STAHURA IS GOING TO BE PRESENTING ON THE NAME TASTING AND WHAT HE CALLS CLASS II NAMES OR THE LONG TAIL, SOMETHING HE PRESENTED ON IN MARRAKECH. AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE WORKED OUT OUR TECHNICAL ISSUES, SO HERE YOU ARE, PAUL.

>>PAUL STAHURA: I AM GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME DEFINITIONS BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF VOCABULARY AROUND NAME TASTING. I AM GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME SIDE EFFECTS OR PERCEIVED SIDE EFFECTS OF THE TASTING PRACTICE AND ARE THESE SIDE EFFECTS REALLY PROBLEMATIC OR NOT.

AND IF THERE ARE PROBLEMATIC SIDE EFFECTS, WHAT ARE THE SOLUTIONS.

SO HERE ARE SOME DEFINITIONS. WE HAVE ADD-DELETE WHICH IS REGISTERING A NAME DURING THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD AND THEN DELETING IT DURING THAT PERIOD, AND THERE ARE VARIOUS PURPOSES FOR THAT, LIKE SOME OF THE OTHER PANELISTS TALKED ABOUT. NAME TASTING IS DOING ADD-DELETE BUT CHECKING THE TRAFFIC AND MAKING THE DECISION OF WHETHER OR NOT TO DELETE IT BASED ON THE TRAFFIC. AND THEN THERE'S REALLY TWO TYPES OF NAME TASTING. THERE'S TASTING NEW NAMES AND THEN THERE'S TASTING DROPPED NAMES.

SO MY GUESSTIMATE IS THERE ARE ABOUT 2 MILLION NAMES PER DAY, OR 2 MILLION NAMES EACH DAY THAT ARE IN THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD THAT ARE BEING TASTED. THOSE WOULD BE NEW ADD-DELETES AND THERE ARE ABOUT 20,000 NAMES PER DAY THAT WOULD BE THE DROP-ADD DELETES. AND THEN KEEP RATE I DEFINED AS THE PERCENTAGE OF NAMES THAT EXIT THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD, BUT THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD OUT OF THE BATCH OF THE NAMES TASTED.

SO I PRESENTED THIS GRAPH IN MARRAKECH AND THE NAME TASTERS ARE TRYING TO MONETIZE THIS TORSO AREA HERE. BECAUSE WHEN THEY BUY A NAME, THEY PAY SIX BUCKS TO VERISIGN, IN THIS CASE DOT COM, AND THEN THEY EARN THIS LITTLE TRIANGULAR AREA ABOVE SIX BUCKS. THE GRAPH REPRESENTS THE VALUE OF THE NAME. AND YOU CAN SEE WHEN PPC INCREASES, THIS DARK LINE GOES TO THIS DASH LINE SO THAT THIS -- THESE A AND B LINES SHOOT OUT FARTHER TO THE RIGHT, AND THAT REPRESENTS THE INCREASE IN PPC, OR THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF NAMES BEING TASTED DUE TO PPC.

SO HERE ARE SOME SIDE EFFECTS. WE HAVE USER CONFUSION. I THINK TIM TALKED ABOUT THAT. SOME PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT THERE'S A REGISTRY LOAD POSSIBLE SIDE EFFECT. AND THEN MAYBE THERE'S SOME SIDE EFFECTS AROUND TRADEMARKS.

SO WE HAVE CONFUSION; RIGHT? LARGE QUANTITIES OF NAMES ARE UNAVAILABLE DURING THE FIVE-DAY PERIOD THAT THE NAME IS TASTED.

AND THAT CAUSES A CONFUSION BECAUSE THE NAME IS AVAILABLE ONE MINUTE, THEN IT'S NOT AVAILABLE THE NEXT MINUTE AND THEN IT IS AVAILABLE AGAIN FIVE DAYS LATER. IT'S CONFUSING FOR USERS.

AND THE SECOND BULLET POINT, IT'S POSSIBLE FOR TASTERS TO OBTAIN NAMES WHICH ARE BEING CHECKED AT A REGISTRARS' WEB SITE, LIKE GO DADDY OR ENOM. THIS DATA CAN BE COLLECTED THROUGH A THIRD-PARTY BROWSER TOOLBARS, FOR EXAMPLE, AND THE TASTING OF THOSE NAMES CAUSES PARTICULAR CONFUSION AMONG USERS.

SO ESSENTIALLY A USER GOES TO, LET'S SAY, GO DADDY'S WEB SITE, TIMES IN A NAME, THAT INFORMATION IS CAPTURED BY SOMEBODY ELSE, THEY RUN OFF AND REGISTER IT BEFORE THAT PERSON COULD REGISTER IT THEMSELVES.

AND THE THIRD PIECE OF THE CONFUSION IS MILLIONS OF NAMES MAY BE TASTED ON ANY PARTICULAR DAY.

SO MOST OF THOSE NAMES ARE TEMPORARILY UNAVAILABLE FOR REGISTRATIONS, AND THE KEPT NAMES ARE PERMANENTLY -- WELL, FOR A YEAR, LET'S SAY, UNAVAILABLE.

USERS -- AND THE PROBLEM IS USERS CAN'T GET THE NAME THEY WANT BECAUSE IT'S EITHER BEING TASTED OR WAS CAPTURED AND UNAVAILABLE.

SO HERE IS A SLIDE ON REGISTRY LOAD. MILLIONS OF NAMES ARE BEING ADDED AND DELETED ALL THE TIME. DROP CATCHING, THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 20,000 NAMES PER DAY. BUT TO DO THAT DROP CATCHING YOU HAVE HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF UNSUCCESSFUL ADD COMMANDS FOR EACH SUCCESSFUL ADD. SO YOU THINK THAT WOULD CAUSE A LOAD BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF EPP ACTIVITY THIS, BUT THE UNSUCCESSFUL ADD COMMANDS ARE NOT STORED AT THE REGISTRY, ONLY THE SUCCESSFUL ADDS. SO IT DOESN'T INCREASE THE REGISTRY'S STORAGE REQUIREMENT. WHEREAS NAME TASTING, WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY 2 MILLION NAMES PER DAY, BUT NEARLY EVERY ADD COMMAND IS SUCCESSFUL. AND THOSE ARE WRITE COMMANDS WHICH ARE STORED AT THE REGISTRY SO THERE MIGHT BE LESS EPP ACTIVITY BUT MORE STORAGE ACTIVITY BECAUSE OF NAME TASTING.

THEN WE HAVE TRADEMARKS.

DOT COM ZONE FILE, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FILE, THE ACTUAL FILE, NOT THE ZONE PUBLISHED IN THE DNS BUT THE ACTUAL FILED PUBLISHED BY THE FTP SITE, THAT'S NOT UPDATED IN REAL TIME. SO THE NAME TASTERS, THEY DO A LOT IN FIVE DAYS. EVERY MINUTE COUNTS. SO THIS CAUSES A DELAY AS TO WHEN THE TRADEMARK HOLDERS CAN SEE IF A TASTED NAME IS ACTIVATED OR NOT.

ANOTHER ISSUE IS MARK WATCHING SERVICES DO NOT TYPICALLY REPORT THE NAMES EXITING THE GRACE PERIOD. THEY REPORT THE NAMES ENTERING THE GRACE PERIOD, AND THAT CAUSES, YOU KNOW -- THERE SHOULD BE TWO REPORTS, NOT JUST THE ONES ENTERING BUT MAYBE REPORTS OF THE TRASHING HOLDERS, THE ONES EXITING THE GRACE PERIOD AS WELL.

BUT I THINK THIS THIRD POINT IS THE BIGGEST ONE.

IN ORDER FOR TRADEMARK HOLDERS TO OBTAIN THE TASTED NAME, THEY HAVE TO CONTACT THE REGISTRANT, WHICH THE WHOIS INFORMATION MAY BE DELAYED BECAUSE OF AN OUT-OF-COMPLIANCE REGISTRAR OR WHATEVER, WHICH IS A SEPARATE PROBLEM, BUT THEY HAVE TO CONTACT THAT REGISTRANT AND THEY COULD ONLY OBTAIN THE NAME BY A COURT ORDER OR UDRP OR THEY HAVE TO GET PERMISSION FROM THE REGISTRANT TO GET THE NAME, THE POSSIBLY INFRINGING TRASHING NAME BACK, AND THAT'S A PROBLEM.

SO I THINK THERE ARE A FEW PARAMETERS THAT WE COULD ADJUST AND CREATE A NEW TYPE OF NAME THAT MIGHT HELP US SOLVE THIS PROBLEM IF IT IS ONE.

SO BASICALLY WE HAVE OTHER TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX BESIDES DOT ORG, FOR EXAMPLE, CHANGING THE PRICE. WE HAVE THE ADD GRACE PERIOD. RIGHT NOW IT'S FIVE DAYS, BUT MAYBE WE COULD MAKE THAT ZERO DAYS, OR LIKE HAKON SAYS, IT'S 30 DAYS OR EVEN LONGER.

WE HAD THE TIME PERIOD BEFORE THE NAME APPEARS IN THE ZONE. BACK WHEN, IT USED TO BE 24 HOURS BEFORE NAMES APPEARED IN THE ZONE AND THEN WE CHANGED THAT TO 10 MINUTES. WELL, THAT EXTRA DAY GIVES THE TASTERS A LOT MORE EXTRA TIME. YOU CAN SEE THAT IF WE MADE THAT FIVE DAYS, THEN THERE WOULD BE NO TIME TO TASTE, AND THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THE PRACTICE.

OF COURSE, EACH ONE OF THESE HAS PLUSES AND MINUSES.

THE ICANN FEE, AND WHEN WE CHARGE IT, THAT COULD BE ANOTHER PARAMETER WE COULD ADJUST. RIGHT NOW IT'S 25 CENTS AT THE EXIT OF THE GRACE PERIOD. WELL, MAYBE WE CHARGE 5 CENTS AT THE REGISTRATION AND 20 CENTS AT THE EXIT.

WE ALSO HAVE THE REGISTRY DELETION FEE AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT DOT ORG PROPOSED; RIGHT? AND DOT COM, CURRENTLY IT'S ZERO CENTS. MAYBE WHEN YOU DELETE A NAME DURING THE GRACE PERIOD IT'S FIVE CENTS.

AND MY PERSONAL FAVORITE IS AVAILABILITY DURING REGISTRATION.

RIGHT NOW WHEN YOU REGISTER A NAME, IT'S NOT AVAILABLE. IT'S TAKEN.

BUT MAYBE WE MAKE A NEW TYPE OF NAME WHERE, WHEN YOU REGISTER IT, IT'S ACTUALLY STILL AVAILABLE. TAKES A MINUTE TO GET YOUR MIND AROUND THAT ONE.

SO I'M PROPOSING A NEW TYPE OF NAME, A CLASS II NAME. SO IT WOULD BE A NEW TYPE OF NAME SO THAT THERE WOULD BE TWO TYPES OF DOT COM NAMES, FOR EXAMPLE. THIS NEW TYPE OF NAME WOULD HAVE DIFFERENT PARAMETER SETTINGS THAT CAN GREATLY MITIGATE, MY BELIEF, MANY OF THE SIDE EFFECTS OF TASTING. AND SPECIFICALLY, THIS AVAILABILITY PARAMETER IS MOST IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOU COULD SEE IF A NAME IS BEING TASTED AND THEN IT'S AVAILABLE, THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY CONFUSION OF WHETHER IT BECOMES AVAILABLE, THEN UNAVAILABLE, THEN AVAILABLE AGAIN, LIKE THE ISSUES THAT TIM WAS TALKING ABOUT.

AND THERE ARE OTHER -- -- THERE MIGHT BE OTHER ADVANTAGES UNRELATED TO THESE SIDE EFFECTS THAT MIGHT DERIVE FROM CREATING A NEW NAME.

SO CONCLUSION, WE SHOULD REALLY THINK ABOUT AVAILABILITY. USERS ARE NOT CONFUSED BECAUSE WHEN THE NAME IS TASTED, THEIR NAME IS STILL AVAILABLE. THEY WOULD SEE NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NAME BEING TASTED AND WHEN THAT'S NOT BEING TASTED, BUT AVAILABLE.

THERE WOULD BE LESS LOAD ON THE REGISTRY BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE LESS CHURN. NAMES WOULDN'T GO IN AND OUT EVERY FIVE DAYS.

SO THEREFORE, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO STORE AS MANY COMMANDS, FOR EXAMPLE.

AND THEN TRADEMARK HOLDERS HAVE ANOTHER TOOL BESIDES THESE THREE: UDRP, LEGAL, OR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE REGISTRANT. THEY COULD JUST SIMPLY REGISTER IT AS A CLASS I REGISTRATION.

THANK YOU.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PAUL. AND THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF -- SIMILAR TO THE DOT ORG PROPOSAL, ANOTHER PARAMETER THAT COULD BE ALTERED OR DIFFERENT WAYS THAT COULD BE AFFECTED, JUST AS A MARKET SOLUTION.

NOW, THE QUESTION IS IF THIS IS A PROBLEM, HOW MIGHT THIS BE ADDRESSED WITHIN THE STRUCTURE OF ICANN, IF THAT'S THE COURSE. AND WITH US IS BRET FAUSETT FROM THE ALAC TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ON THAT POINT.

THANK YOU, BRET.

>>BRET FAUSETT: IN THE AT LARGE, WHICH IS ONE OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEES WITHIN ICANN, WE HAVE HAD AN ACTIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT DOMAIN NAME TASTING. AND WHEN WE STARTED THE DISCUSSION, THE PREVAILING VIEW WAS THAT THIS WAS UNIQUELY A REGISTRY ISSUE. THAT THE PRIMARY ISSUES WERE TECHNICAL LOAD ISSUES ON THE REGISTRY, AND THAT REGISTRANTS WERE NOT AFFECTED. AND THAT IF THERE WERE GOING TO BE A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM, IF IT WAS A PROBLEM, IT SHOULD COME FROM THE REGISTRIES THEMSELVES. AND WE HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN PUBLIC INTEREST REGISTRY WITH DOT ORG TAKE THAT APPROACH. AND THEY HAVE PROPOSED A NEW REGISTRY SERVICE THAT'S BEEN APPROVED BY ICANN.

BUT THE MORE WE TALKED ABOUT THE ISSUE, AND RIGHT NOW IT'S PRETTY MUCH JEAN POLLY, ONE OF OUR MEMBERS, WHO LIKE THE PLAY 12 ANGRY MEN WHERE ONE JUROR CONVINCED THE OTHERS TO CHANGE THEIR VOTES, CONVINCED US THAT THERE WERE ISSUES THAT AFFECTED REGISTRANTS. AND YOU HEARD ABOUT THEM TODAY ON THE PANEL. NUMBER ONE IS REGISTRANT CONFUSION, REGISTRATION CONFUSION. I WAS LOOKING AS WE WERE PREPARING TODAY'S TALK AT THE STATISTICS SITE THAT JAY WESTERDAL PUTS OUT DAILYCHANGES.COM. IT SHOWS JUST YESTERDAY, I THINK IT WAS A LITTLE OVER ONE AND A HALF MILLION NAMES WERE DELETED. A SUBSTANTIAL PERCENTAGE OF THOSE ONE AND A HALF MILLION NAMES WERE JUST REGISTERED FIVE DAYS AGO.

SO THAT IS A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF NAMES THAT ARE REGISTERED FOR A VERY BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME.

2% OF THE DOT COM ZONE FILE IS BEING HELD UP IN THESE TEMPORARY REGISTRATIONS. FROM A USER PERSPECTIVE, THAT MEANS WHEN YOU GO TO LOOK FOR SOMETHING, IT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE AND THEN MIGHT NOT BE AVAILABLE, BUT THEN FIVE DAYS LATER, IT'S AVAILABLE AGAIN.

SO THAT'S ONE ISSUE.

THE SECOND ISSUE REGARDS TRADEMARK AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. AND TAKE ALL THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WITH REGARD TO WHOIS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE DATA AND THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING ABLE TO FIND PEOPLE WHEN YOU NEED TO EITHER CORRECT SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE SAID OR PROSECUTE THEM FOR SOMETHING THEY HAVE SAID. TAKE ALL THOSE ISSUES AND NOW APPLY THEM TO A REGISTRATION THAT ONLY LIVES FOR FIVE DAYS, WHERE THE REGISTRANT MAY CHANGE SERIALLY FROM FIVE DAYS TO FIVE DAYS TO FIVE DAYS.

IF YOU ARE AN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWYER, IF YOU ARE A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, YOU ARE LITERALLY PLAYING WHACK-A-MOLE. YOU REALLY CAN'T FIND THE PERSON WHO IS HOLDING THIS REGISTRATION.

SO THAT'S A SECOND REAL REGISTRANT ISSUE, SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE LOAD ON THE REGISTRY.

AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS? AT ONE OF OUR MOST RECENT MEETINGS, THE ALAC APPROVED REQUESTING AN ISSUES REPORT FROM THE ICANN STAFF. AND LET ME PUT THAT IN THE CONTEXT OF THE BYLAWS SO YOU CAN APPRECIATE WHAT THAT MEANS.

IF YOU PUT ICANN BYLAWS INTO YOUR SEARCH ENGINE OF CHOICE, YOU WILL COME TO THE PAGE ON THE ICANN WEB SITE THAT CONTAINS THE BYLAWS. ANNEX A IS THE GNSO POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

AND THE PROCESS ALLOWS ANY ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITHIN ICANN -- AND THAT WOULD BE SECURITY AND STABILITY, AT LARGE, THE GAC -- ANY OF THEM CAN ASK FOR AN ISSUES REPORT FROM STAFF.

AND WE, SHORTLY, PROBABLY WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO, WILL SUBMIT A FORMAL REQUEST FOR AN ISSUES REPORT TO ICANN STAFF.

WHAT THIS DOES IS TRIGGER CERTAIN DEADLINES IN THE BYLAWS.

WITHIN 15 DAYS OF RECEIVING THAT REPORT, ICANN STAFF HAS TO PRODUCE A LIST OF ISSUES THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE PROBLEM THAT WE'VE FORESEEN.

SO WE WILL REQUEST THIS FORMALLY.

15 DAYS LATER, ICANN STAFF WILL PREPARE A REPORT ABOUT ALL THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN DOMAIN NAME TASTING.

THAT REPORT DOES NOT COME BACK TO THE ALAC.

IT COMES BACK TO THE GNSO COUNCIL.

THE GNSO COUNCIL THEN WILL RECEIVE THE REPORT, REVIEW IT, AND THEY HAVE 15 DAYS FROM RECEIVING THAT REPORT TO VOTE ON WHETHER TO CREATE A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

33% OF THE GNSO COUNCIL CAN INITIATE A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

NOW, THIS JUST STARTS THE POLICY PROCESS RUNNING.

AND IF I'M RIGHT ABOUT THE DEADLINES HERE, WE'RE GOING TO REQUEST A REPORT FORMALLY IN THE NEXT WEEK, ICANN STAFF WILL HAVE 15 DAYS TO RESPOND, THE GNSO COUNCIL WILL HAVE 15 DAYS TO RESPOND.

SO SOMETIME AROUND MID-JANUARY, WE MAY ACTUALLY HAVE A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ON DOMAIN TASTING.

THAT DOESN'T PREJUDGE ANY OF THE OUTCOMES.

ONE POSSIBILITY IS THAT THE GNSO DECIDES TO HAVE A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND SIMPLY DECIDES THAT THE BEST THING TO DO IS FOR REGISTRIES TO MAKE THEIR OWN SOLUTIONS OR TO ICANN TO ENGAGE IN A PROCESS OF EDUCATION OF USERS TO EDUCATE THEM ABOUT THESE PROBLEMS SO THEY'RE NOT CONFUSED.

YOU KNOW, THERE ARE GRADATIONS HERE, OF COURSE, AND THERE ARE OTHER POSSIBILITIES THAT THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS COULD ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT, I THINK, PAUL AND SOME OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT AS POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS.

SO THAT'S JUST TO GIVE YOU A FORWARD-LOOKING VIEW OF WHAT'S COMING DOWN THE PIKE.

AND I THINK NOW WE'LL TURN IT BACK TO JOTHAN FOR QUESTIONS.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: BRET, THANK YOU.

AND WE'VE HEARD A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT POSITIONS, WE'VE HEARD A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT DATA POINTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION, ALL REALLY VALUABLE FOR WHAT I THINK IS SOME CONSTRUCTIVE DIALOGUE ON THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC.

WE'VE HIT THE POINT IN THIS PARTICULAR SESSION WHERE WE'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, ACTUALLY, FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO APPROACH THE MIKE, IF THEY'D LIKE TO, TO ADDRESS THE PANEL WITH ANY QUESTIONS.

AND RIGHT NOW, I LOVE THE SIZE OF THE LINE.

HOWEVER, IT APPEARS THAT WE WILL HAVE SOME COMMENT. AND IT LOOKS LIKE OUR FIRST COMMENT IS FROM STEVE METALITZ FROM THE IPC, PERSON I RESPECT GREATLY.

GLAD YOU COULD SPEAK HERE.

>>STEVE METALITZ: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, I'M STEVE METALITZ FROM THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY.

FIRST I'D LIKE TO THANK JOTHAN FOR PUTTING THIS PANEL TOGETHER AND FOR -- I THINK THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF ISSUE THAT SHOULD BE DISCUSSED AT AN ICANN MEETING LIKE THIS.

AND I THINK IT'S BEEN VERY INFORMATIVE, ALTHOUGH I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

I DO WANT TO CLEAR UP A COUPLE OF THINGS, BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN SOME REFERENCES IN SOME OF THE PRESENTATIONS TO THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES HERE.

SO FIRST, LET ME JUST SAY, THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY HASN'T TAKEN A POSITION ON WHETHER THERE SHOULD BE A PDP ON THIS QUESTION.

WE HAVE DISCUSSED IT.

AND I'M SURE WE'LL BE DISCUSSING IT AGAIN IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

BUT WE HAVEN'T TAKEN A POSITION.

ONE OF OUR VERY ACTIVE MEMBERS, THE INTERNATIONAL TRADEMARK ASSOCIATION, DID WRITE TO ICANN, AND IF YOU LOOK IN THE CORRESPONDENCE SECTION OF THE ICANN WEB SITE, THEIR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 16TH, WHICH, AS I RECALL IT, CALLED FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE ADD-GRACE PERIOD REFUND POLICY, IN OTHER WORDS, CHANGE IN THE STATUS QUO.

YOU CAN REVIEW THERE WHAT ENTA HAS SAID ABOUT IT, WHICH REPRESENTS QUITE A FEW INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OWNERS.

THIRD, I CAN ONLY SPEAK PERSONALLY.

I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OWNERS SAYING THAT THEY LIKE THE STATUS QUO AND WANT TO SEE IT DEFENDED AGAINST CHANGE.

WE WOULD CERTAINLY BE INTERESTED IN HEARING FROM ANY OF THOSE AS WE IN THE CONSTITUENCY TRY TO WORK OUT OUR POSITION.

AND, FINALLY, I'M VERY INTERESTED TO HEAR IN THE LAST PRESENTATION THAT ALAC HAS ASKED FOR AN ISSUES REPORT.

WE'LL BE VERY INTERESTED IN REVIEWING THEIR REQUEST AND THE STAFF RESPONSE, AND IN PARTICIPATING IN WHATEVER COMES AFTER THAT.

I THINK BRET HAS CORRECTLY SET OUT THE DEADLINES THAT ARE IN THE PDP.

WE KNOW THOSE DEADLINES, FRANKLY, ARE NOT VERY REALISTIC IN SOME CASES, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY WOULD BE MET IN THIS CASE.

BUT I THINK IT'S A -- I WANT TO COMMEND THE ALAC FOR TAKING THIS ISSUE UP.

AND I THINK IT'S GOOD TO GET THE BALL ROLLING.

AND WE'LL BE VERY INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN WHAT COMES NEXT IN THE ICANN POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, STEPHEN.

AND I DO REGRET THAT YOU COULDN'T PARTICIPATE ALSO ON THE PANEL DUE TO TIMING.

THANK YOU.

OUR NEXT QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE IS FROM ANOTHER PERSON I RESPECT IMMENSELY, SEEMS LIKE A WHOLE LINE OF THEM, MARILYN CADE, FROM THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY.

YES, OKAY.

>>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU.

I DO WANT -- THIS IS MARILYN CADE.

I DO WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO TODAY'S PANEL AND TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE EVENT IN MARRAKECH.

DUE TO OTHER CONFLICTS, ALTHOUGH I WAS IN MARRAKECH EARLY, I HAD TO RETURN TO GENEVA FOR ANOTHER MEETING, BUT I FORTUNATELY BENEFITED FROM BEING ABLE TO REVIEW THE REAL-TIME TRANSCRIPTION.

I PARTICULARLY APPRECIATE THE COMMITMENT THAT ALL OF YOU HAVE MADE AND THAT OTHERS HAVE MADE TO PROVIDE AN EDUCATIONAL OVERVIEW OF A TOPIC THAT I MAY PERSONALLY THINK HAS ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH IT -- AND I DO THINK SO -- BUT I NOTE THAT I THINK WE'RE TAKING THE RIGHT APPROACH TO EXAMINING A TOPIC.

WE'RE EXAMINING THE TOPIC IN AN INFORMATIVE WAY; WE'RE TRYING TO PRESENT A RANGE OF VIEWS AND PERSPECTIVES.

AND WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO LEARN ABOUT THAT TOPIC BEFORE WE EITHER DO AN ISSUES REPORT OR DO A PDP OR TRY TO TAKE DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO ADDRESS THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED.

SO MY COMPLIMENTS TO ALL OF YOU, AND MY COMPLIMENTS ALSO TO THE ICANN OPERATIONAL STAFF AND TO THE ICANN POLICY STAFF FOR HELPING TO MAKE THIS APPROACH HAPPEN.

I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE -- NOT ABOUT THE MONETIZATION OF THE SECONDARY MARKET.

I MIGHT HAVE HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THAT A WHILE BACK, BUT I THINK I'VE KIND OF RATIONALIZED MY OWN EXPECTATIONS WITH CHANGES IN THE INTERNET.

I DO HAVE STRONG CONCERNS ABOUT DOMAIN NAME TASTING AND ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS THAT WE'VE HEARD ABOUT TODAY.

BUT I AM GOING TO LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THE ISSUES REPORT.

IT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN ON MY MIND AS SOMETHING THAT'S NEEDED, AND I APPRECIATE THAT THE ALAC IS BRINGING IT FORWARD.

AND WITHIN THE BC, I'LL BE WORKING TO CONTINUE TO ELEVATE THE AWARENESS ABOUT THE ISSUES SO THAT WE CAN PARTICIPATE APPROPRIATELY IN THE NEXT STEPS.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, MARILYN.

WE HAVE A COMMENT FROM ROB HALL.

>>ROB HALL: MARILYN, I WANT TO SAY I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU.

THE DANGER HERE IS THAT THINGS ARE GOING TO MOVE VERY QUICKLY, AS THEY CAN WITHIN THE NEW REGISTRY SERVICES FUNNEL, IF YOU WILL.

I THINK ONE OF THE LARGEST DANGERS IS, YOU MAY SEE NEW REGISTRY SERVICES FROM OTHER REGISTRIES THAT ARE EITHER THE SAME OR DIFFERENT BEFORE THE COMMUNITY CAN COME TOGETHER.

AND I THINK THE COMMUNITY REALLY NEEDS TO COME TOGETHER AND SAY, "HERE IS A SOLUTION TO THIS," AS OPPOSED TO LETTING INDIVIDUAL THINGS HAPPEN THAT'LL HAVE LONG-TERM RAMIFICATIONS AND MAY ACTUALLY DO THE OPPOSITE TO WHAT YOU WANT.

FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK THE DOT ORG APPLICATION IS GOING TO DO EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.

IT MAKES A LEGITIMATE SERVICE THAT REGISTRARS ARE NOW FORCED TO GO OUT AND SELL TO BE COMPETITIVE.

AND OTHER REGISTRIES MIGHT DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

SO I THINK THIS COMMUNITY NEEDS TO HURRY, 'CAUSE IN A MATTER OF A 45-DAY PERIOD FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A REGISTRY SERVICE, WE COULD SEE VERY DIFFERENT SERVICES OUT THERE BEING OFFERED. AND WE DON'T HAVE THE CHANCE TO GET TOGETHER AND ON THE SAME PAGE.

>>MARILYN CADE: I'LL JUST SAY ONE MORE THING ABOUT MY PERSONAL CONCERN.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE EITHER EXPECTING THE REGISTRIES TO INDIVIDUALLY MANAGE THE PARTS OF THE SPACE THAT NEED TO HAVE SOME CONSISTENCY.

I DIDN'T USE THE WORD "UNIFORMITY."

I SAID "CONSISTENCY."

AND I THINK THAT'S AN AREA THAT WE DO NEED TO THINK ABOUT.

NOT THAT I AM CRITICAL OF ANY REGISTRY FOR BEING CONCERNED ABOUT A PARTICULAR PROBLEM, BUT I THINK, AS I LOOK AT WHAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT THAT HAS SOME COMMONALITY, THERE HAS TO BE AN EXAMINATION OF ACTIONS THAT WILL AFFECT MORE THAN ONE REGISTRY AND WILL AFFECT REGISTRANTS AND OTHERS.

AND SO I HOPE THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU.

JOHN BERRYHILL, ANOTHER PERSON, DEEP RESPECT.

>> JOHN BERRYHILL: MY QUESTION IS PROBABLY GOING TO STAY STUCK ON THIS ISSUE, THAT IS, WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS.

EVERYBODY WENT THROUGH A LOT OF NUMBERS REALLY FAST.

I WANT TO CONFIRM WITH TIM THAT OVER THE SEVEN-MONTH PERIOD THAT YOU MONITORED, THERE WERE 5 MILLION WHAT YOU WOULD CALL REAL END USER REGISTRATIONS AND 3 MILLION THAT WERE KEPT AS A RESULT OF TASTING.

IS THAT WHAT I SHOULD UNDERSTAND FROM YOUR NUMBERS? 'CAUSE HAD YOU --

>>TIM RUIZ: YEAH, BASICALLY.

I MEAN, AND, AGAIN, THAT'S JUST LOOKING AT THE TOP, YOU KNOW, 15, 20 REGISTRARS, PERHAPS, THAT MAKE UP THAT CLOSE TO 5 MILLION.

AND, OF COURSE, THERE'S, LIKE, 260-SOME-ODD REGISTRAR GROUPS.

SO I THINK THE NUMBER MAY BE SOMEWHAT BIGGER THAN THAT.

BUT WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH AND ADD UP, YOU KNOW -- FIGURE THAT OUT SPECIFICALLY FOR EACH REGISTRAR.

BUT IT'S JUST KIND OF AN ESTIMATE.

>> JOHN BERRYHILL: WE ALL SUFFER FROM THE SAME PROBLEM IN TERMS OF FIGURING OUT WHAT THE PROBLEMS ARE.

WHAT THAT BOILS DOWN TO IS 37.5% OF ALL NEW REGISTRATIONS KEPT FOR THE FULL TERM OVER THAT SEVEN MONTHS.

SO THAT'S -- YOU KNOW, THAT'S A -- AN ACTUAL FAIRLY LARGE CHUNK OF THE -- OF THE PAID-FOR DOT COM ZONE GROWTH RATE.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES ME WONDER WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CONCERNS OF DOMAIN REGISTRANTS, I WOULD THINK THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE REGISTERING 37.5% OF THE DOMAIN SPACE IN SEVEN MONTHS, YOU KNOW, WE CAN CALL THEM DOMAIN REGISTRANTS.

SO IT'S NOT -- IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE ALAC ISSUES, YOU KNOW, SAYING THAT -- AND I BELIEVE THAT BRET SAID THAT THERE'S -- I'M GOING TO DEFINE A NEW ONE, WE HAD KEEP RATE.

I'M SORRY GOING TO DO DEFINE A TERM, "FLOAT VOLUME."

HOW MUCH OF THE NAME SPACE IS TIED UP IN TASTING CONTINUE POINT IN TIME.

AND BRET SAID THAT IT'S SOMETHING LIKE 2% OF THE DOT COM ZONE FILE TIED UP IN TASTING.

SO THE PROBLEM OF, "I CAN'T REGISTER THE DOMAIN NAME I WANT," YOU KNOW, WHO COULD IMAGINE NOT BEING ABLE TO REGISTER THE DOMAIN NAME YOU WANT, YOU KNOW, THIS LOOKS LIKE YET A 2% PROBABILITY OF A TAKEN NAME BEING A TASTED NAME, WHILE 98% OF, YOU KNOW, THE TAKEN DOMAIN NAMES THAT I CAN'T GO AND REGISTER AT GO DADDY OR ANYWHERE ELSE ARE FULLY PAID-UP REGISTRANTS THAT WE LIKE I GUESS WE'LL CALL THEM.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN HANG ON TO ANY ACTIVITY WE'RE SUSPICIOUS OF, ANY CHARACTERISTICS WE DON'T LIKE.

WE CAN SAY IT'S USED FOR SPAM, IT'S USED FOR PHISHING, IT CAUSES TOOTH DECAY AND SPINAL CURVATURE.

BUT WITHOUT NUMBERS, YOU KNOW, THESE KINDS OF THINGS AREN'T REALLY MEANINGFUL.

YOU KNOW, CAN DOMAIN TASTING BE USED FOR CYBERSQUATTING?

YES, CYBERSQUATTING IS A FUNCTION OF DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION.

WE CAN GET RID OF CYBERSQUATTING BY ANY FORM OF DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION THAT IT IS A CERTAINTY THAT ANY FORM OF DOMAIN REGISTRATION WILL BE USED FOR ANYTHING THAT ANY OTHER FORM OF DOMAIN REGISTRATION CAN BE USED FOR, WHICH IS SPAM AND PHISHING AND CYBERSQUATTING AND THE WHOLE NINE YARDS.

SO WITHOUT NUMBERS TO QUANTIFY HOW THESE HARMS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM NORMAL DOMAIN REGISTRATION, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALL JUST REALLY JUST SHOOTING IN THE DARK WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, ACCURATE NUMBERS.

THANK YOU.

>>TIM RUIZ: THIS IS TIM, I'D LIKE TO JUST RESPOND BRIEFLY.

JOHN, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU AND WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE INTERNET'S MADE UP OF ONE BILLION USERS, ACTUALLY, A LITTLE OVER ONE BILLION USERS THESE DAYS.

AND THOSE INVOLVED IN THIS PARTICULAR ACTIVITY, YOU KNOW, IN COMPARISON, ARE A HANDFUL.

SO WHILE I AGREE, THEY ARE REGISTERING A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF DOMAIN NAMES THAT SHOULDN'T BE IGNORED, WE'RE NOT ASKING OR EXPECTING THAT THE REGISTRIES JUST, YOU KNOW, KISS OFF A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEIR REVENUE.

WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS, YOU KNOW, CAN WE COME TOGETHER AND FIND A WAY TO GET WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS, GET WHERE THEY NEED TO BE WITHOUT THIS PARTICULAR ACTIVITY THAT'S AFFECTING, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER ONE BILLION USERS ON THE INTERNET.

>> JOHN BERRY HILL: THAT'S CORRECT.

AND OF THOSE ONE BILLION USERS, THE DOT COM REGISTRY IS A SINGLE ENTITY THAT, OF COURSE, IS PROFITING FROM THE 37.5% OF THE TOTAL DOT COM REGISTRATIONS THAT YOU SEEM TO THINK RESULTS FROM THIS.

BUT I THINK WE UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER.

>>TIM RUIZ: WE WOULD LIKE TO EVENTUALLY SEE THEM ALL BE GO DADDY CUSTOMERS.

>>PHIL CORWIN: I RECENTLY READ AN ANALYSIS, AND I WISH I COULD REMEMBER THE SOURCE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS TO THE EFFECT THAT ALL THE COMMERCIALLY VIABLE DOT COM NAMES FOR ADVERTISING PURPOSES ARE ALREADY OWNED BY SOMEONE, SO YOU CAN TASTE DOT COM ALL YOU WANT AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE VERY SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BUY IT FROM THE EXISTING OWNER.

>>BRET FAUSETT: JUST A QUICK COMMENT.

YOU MENTIONED SPAM ANECDOTALLY IN YOUR REMARKS.

I WAS VERY SURPRISED TO FIND THAT THESE TASTED DOMAINS ARE NOT A SOURCE OF SPAM.

I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL PEOPLE KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT IT, INCLUDING JOHN LEVINE ON THE ALAC, WHO'S AN EXPERT IN SPAM, AND HE SAYS, NO, THIS IS NOT A SPAM PROBLEM.

IT MAY PRESENT ALL SORTS OF OTHER PROBLEMS, BUT IT'S NOT A SPAM ISSUE.

AND ALSO, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION, YOU'RE RIGHT.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WILL DO, I HOPE, IS GATHER REAL INFORMATION SO WE'RE NOT ACTING ON THE BASIS OF SORT OF GUT FEELINGS.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANKS, BRET.

AND WE HAVE THREE MORE PEOPLE IN LINE.

MR. BRUCE TONKIN.

I'M GOING TO BE SAYING I HAVE A LOT RESPECT, I THINK, TO EVERYBODY HERE IN LINE.

AND THEN WE DO HAVE ONE COMMENT ON THE ONLINE CHAT.

SO WE HAD A FOURTH PERSON JOIN THE QUEUE.

I'M GOING TO TAKE THE ONLINE QUESTION JUST AFTER THE THIRD PERSON AND THE FOURTH PERSON MAY SPEAK.

SO, BRUCE TONKIN.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: THANK YOU, JOTHAN.

I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT NEXT STEPS AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM OUR CURRENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES OVER THE LAST SORT OF FOUR OR FIVE YEARS.

I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL THAT -- I MEAN, THE ICANN MODEL ESSENTIALLY IS MEANT TO BE RELYING ON MARKET-BASED MECHANISMS, AND WE'VE SEEN THE MARKET, THE GROWTH OF INTERNET ADVERTISING.

AND THAT MARKET IS MOSTLY RESPONDING TO THE RULES WHICH ARE ESSENTIALLY REGISTRATION RULES SET BY CONTRACT, WHICH CURRENTLY SET THINGS LIKE GRACE PERIODS, DELETION PROCESSES, REGISTRATION PROCESSES, AND SO FORTH.

AND I ACCEPT THE IDEA OF DOING AN ISSUES REPORT AND LOOKING INTO SOME OF THESE NEW MARKET CONDITIONS.

AND I THINK THAT'S SENSIBLE.

BUT I JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL THAT WE SET EXPECTATIONS.

I DON'T THINK IT WORKS IN OUR ENVIRONMENT TO HAVE A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THAT ACTUALLY STARTS CREATING DETAILED IMPLEMENTATION, BECAUSE A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WILL PROBABLY -- HAS NEVER TAKEN LESS THAN A YEAR.

IN SOME CASES, IT'S TAKEN LONGER.

AND I THINK WHAT YOU SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON -- AND I'LL BE INTERESTED IN THE VIEWS OF THE PANEL -- IS, WHAT WOULD BE THE PRINCIPLES THAT YOU THINK THE POLICY SHOULD INTRODUCE?

BECAUSE IF WE CAN CREATE SOME POLICY PRINCIPLES THAT WOULD THEN GUIDE APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTRY SERVICE APPROVAL PROCESS, BECAUSE I THINK REGISTRY OPERATORS NEED TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE TECHNICALLY WITH THEIR BUSINESSES.

THEY CAN'T WAIT A YEAR FOR OUTCOMES.

THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO MOVE QUICKLY.

BUT THE ICANN STAFF OR ICANN BOARD NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THOSE SERVICES BASED ON POLICIES.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE PANEL TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT POLICY FOR THIS NEW MARKET IN SORT OF BROAD POLICY PRINCIPLES, BUT THEN ALLOW THE MARKET BEING REGISTRIES, REGISTRARS, REGISTRANTS, ADVERTISERS, TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO INNOVATE AND MOVE THEIR BUSINESSES FORWARD.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, BRUCE.

WE HAVE A REDIRECT.

>>ROB HALL: BRUCE, I AGREE.

I THINK ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS YOU HAVE TO DO IS EXAMINE WHY THERE'S A MARKET AND WHAT THAT MARKET IS AND WHAT THE DEMAND FOR THAT MARKET IS.

BECAUSE IT MAY BE THAT AN INTRODUCTION OF A NEW PRODUCT THAT WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF YET IS THE WAY TO GO TO SATISFY THE DEMAND.

WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE DIFFERENT CONSTITUENCIES REPRESENTED HERE AT ICANN, CERTAINLY I.P., BUSINESS, REGISTRIES, OF A NEED TO KEEP SECURITY AND STABILITY FOREFRONT.

SO IT'S -- I WOULD START WITH -- I AGREE WITH YOU, I THINK THE PDP PROCESS IS PROBABLY TOO LONG, ALTHOUGH THIS WILL CONTINUE TO GO ON, AS I SAID, AN ADVERTISING INCREASES.

WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING AND WHY AND SATISFY THE DEMAND.

AND THAT WOULD BE WHERE I WOULD START WITH THE ANALYSIS, IS WHY ARE PEOPLE DOING THIS?

WHAT'S THE DEMAND?

HOW IS THE DEMAND GOING TO INCREASE OR DECREASE OVER THE NEXT PERIOD OF TIME?

AND IS THERE A WAY TO SATISFY ALL OF THE CONSTITUENCIES WITH A PRODUCT OR A SERVICE THAT WILL MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY?

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: WE HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT FROM HAKON.

>>HAKON HAUGNES: YEAH, BRUCE, I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH YOU THAT A POLICY -- I THINK YOU TOUCHED ON THAT -- A POLICY WILL HAVE TO BE ON BROAD GUIDELINES, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT REGISTRIES ARE DIFFERENT.

AND IF YOU'RE TRYING TO SOLVE A PROBLEM THAT MIGHT EXIST IN ONE SPECIFIC TLD OR ON ONE SPECIFIC REGISTRY, YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL THAT A POLICY IS NOT SO BROAD THAT IT ENCOMPASSES OTHER REGISTRIES THAT MIGHT NEED AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT MECHANISM OR NO MECHANISM AT ALL TO REGULATE BEHAVIOR.

SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO EMPHASIZE AGAIN THAT REGISTRIES ARE DIFFERENT, AND ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: MR. TOM BARRETT WITH ENCIRCA.

>> TOM BARRETT: TO BUILD ON THE PREVIOUS POINTS, I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST FOR FUTURE DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU THINK ABOUT REACHING OUTSIDE OF ICANN AND INCLUDE THE ADVERTISERS AND INCLUDE THE PEOPLE FACILITATING THIS, SUCH AS GOOGLE, YAHOO!, MSN, BECAUSE, IN FACT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT'S DRIVING MOST OF DOMAIN TASTING.

AND THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE, IT'S NOT THE TOTAL PANACEA, BUT THE MORE INFORMATION YOU MAKE AVAILABLE TO THE MARKET, PERHAPS THE LESS ABUSE THAT MIGHT TAKE PLACE.

SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT MAKING THE DNS LOG FILES FROM THE REGISTRIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE RATHER THAN HAVING PEOPLE TRYING TO GUESS THE WHAT MIGHT BE VALUABLE OUT THERE.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, TOM.

>>ROB HALL: TOM, YOU SAY SOMETHING INTERESTING.

I WANT TO JUST FURTHER CLARIFY IT A BIT.

WE TEND TO THINK OF GOOGLE AND YAHOO! AS THE ADVERTISERS HERE.

AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY NOT.

THERE'S AN AD NETWORK.

I HAD THE LUXURY OF ATTENDING THE AD TECH CONFERENCE IN NEW YORK CITY.

AND I WAS AMAZED AT THE HUNGER AND THE THIRST FOR ONLINE ADVERTISING AND HOW THE ONLINE ADVERTISERS ARE STARTING TO UNDERSTAND THE DOMAIN MARKET AND GET IT.

I THINK THAT'S A VOICE THAT'S NOT REPRESENTED HERE WELL, THAT WE CERTAINLY NEED TO REACH OUT TO.

I KNOW THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY IS TYPICALLY MADE UP OF THE POLICY-TYPE ADVISORS AS OPPOSED TO THE SALES, MARKETING, AND ADVERTISING TYPE PEOPLE.

I WOULD LOVE GETTING MORE OF THE ADVERTISING PEOPLE IN.

THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM THE AD NETWORKS WHO HAVE DIFFERENT CRITERIA AND DIFFERENT THINGS THEY LOOK AT FOR PROFIT.

THE CORE OF IT IS THE END USER ADVERTISER AND THEY DO REALLY NEED A VOICE IN THIS.

>>PHIL CORWIN: JUST TO ADD TO THAT, ROB, I WAS AT THE TRAFFIC CONFERENCE IN MIAMI A MONTH OR SO AGO.

THERE WAS A FIRST-EVER PANEL OF MAJOR MADISON AVENUE ADVERTISERS GIVING THEIR VIEWPOINT TO THE REGISTRANT COMMUNITY AND GETTING FEEDBACK IN RETURN.

SO EVEN THERE, THE PEOPLE USING PAY PER CLICK AND THE PEOPLE PLACING THOSE ADS ARE JUST STARTING TO UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER'S BUSINESSES.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: IT'S ALSO SORT OF A TESTAMENT TO THE OUTREACH ICANN IS DOING IN ADDITION TO THESE MEETINGS.

I HAVE SEEN THAT.

I WANT TO COMMEND ICANN ON THE OUTREACH THAT THEY'RE DOING.

>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS STEVE DELBIANCO.

I'M EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE NET CHOICE COALITION.

IT'S A COALITION OF E-COMMERCE COMPANIES AND END USERS.

AND PHIL CORWIN, IN YOUR REMARKS, TALKED ABOUT YOUR MEMBERS OF THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION, THE ADVERTISERS, BEING THE ONES WHO ARE THE BOTTOM OF THE BOTTOM-UP CONSENSUS PROCESS.

I THINK OTHERS IN THE PANEL HAVE DISAGREED BECAUSE THEY WENT TO SAY THAT THE REAL BOTTOM COULD INCLUDE THE REGISTRANTS AND THE ACTUAL USERS.

AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT SEGUED TO BRET SUGGESTING THAT THE ALAC IS LEGITIMATE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT CONFUSION, NOT TO YOUR BOTTOM, BUT TO OUR BOTTOM, CONFUSION TO THE USERS ON THE INTERNET.

AND, BRET, AS YOUR REQUEST FOR STAFF TO COME UP WITH A STUDY OF THE ISSUES, OR THE GNSO COUNCIL, TO CONSIDER A PDP, WHAT I WONDER ABOUT IS IF THE PARAMETERS, THE SCOPE THAT ICANN WILL USE IN DETERMINING THE ISSUES AND FIGURING OUT WHETHER TO HAVE A PDP, IS BROAD ENOUGH TO WORRY ABOUT THE PROBLEM YOU'VE RAISED, BECAUSE ALL OF YOU HAVE SAID THAT WHEN YOU DO ACKNOWLEDGE A PROBLEM FOR THOSE AT THE BOTTOM, THE PROBLEM IS ONE OF CONFUSION.

I'VE HEARD EACH OF YOU TALK ABOUT USER CONFUSION.

BUT I FEAR THAT WHEN STAFF LOOKS AT THE ISSUES AND GNSO EXAMINES THE PDP, CONFUSION IS OUT OF SCOPE.

WE HEARD THAT PHRASE USED A LOT ON MONDAY IN THE DISCUSSION OF WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT INACCURACY IN WHOIS.

WE HEARD PEOPLE SAY IT'S OUT OF SCOPE TO CONSIDER CERTAIN ISSUES.

SO IF USER CONFUSION IS NOT LIKELY TO FIT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF OUR MANDATE FOR SECURITY AND STABILITY, SUFFICIENT THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE A STRONG PRESCRIPTION FOR SOLUTIONS HERE.

AND ONCE THE SOLUTIONS ARE PRESCRIBED, IS THE SECURITY AND STABILITY SCOPE SO TINY THAT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO THEN TO IMPACT REGISTRY CONTRACTS OR REGISTRAR ACCREDITATION AGREEMENTS?

BECAUSE AT EVERY STAGE, WE ARE TRYING TO BE NARROW IN WHAT ICANN'S SCOPE IS.

AND YET I FEEL IN MY GUT AND FOR MY MEMBERS' INTERESTS THAT WE DEFINITELY NEED TO ADDRESS THE INTEGRITY OF THE USER EXPERIENCE ON THE INTERNET IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THE INTERNET GROW.

SO CONFUSION MAY NOT FIT IN SECURITY AND STABILITY, SO, BRET, MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS, DO YOU THINK WE HAVE A BROAD ENOUGH MANDATE TO ADDRESS THE CONCERN?

>>BRET FAUSETT: YES.

I -- -- YES, I THINK THERE'S A WHOLE RANGE OF SOLUTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BE AVAILABLE.

I MEAN, THERE ARE A LOT OF "IF'S" HERE, BUT I THINK THAT THE PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE GOING TO RAISE WITH ICANN AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO ASK ICANN TO LOOK AT WILL HAVE USER CONFUSION IN THEM.

THE TRADEMARK ISSUES, SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE WANT THEM TO LOOK AT.

I ASSUME THAT THE ISSUE REPORT IS GOING TO FLAG THOSE WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE GNSO.

NOW, WHETHER THE GNSO VOTES TO IMPLEMENT A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, AND, AGAIN, THE GNSO COUNCIL IS CHARGED WITH CHARTERING THE TASK FORCE.

AND SO THEY MAY TAKE THE ISSUES REPORT AND CHARTER SOME SUBSET OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED.

THERE'S NO OBLIGATION ON THE COUNCIL, I DON'T BELIEVE, TO CHARTER A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THAT COVERS ALL THE ISSUES THAT ARE IN THE ISSUES REPORT.

'CAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THEY CAN DO IS ACTUALLY TURN IT DOWN ENTIRELY.

SO I THINK THEY'VE GOT THE ABILITY TO PRETTY MUCH PARSE THAT HOWEVER THEY WANT.

I THINK IT STARTS WITH US, BUT WHAT COMES OUT AND WHETHER IT ADDRESSES USER CONFUSION OR ANYTHING ELSE, YOU KNOW, A WHOLE A LOT OF OTHER STEPS THERE.

AND I THINK, REALLY, IT'S GOING TO SIT WITH COUNCIL TO DECIDE WHETHER THE ISSUES YOU'VE RAISED ARE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED AND TO DETERMINE HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED.

>>ROB HALL: AND I FIND IT INTERESTING, SIR, THAT YOU THINK USER CONFUSION IS NOT PART OF SECURITY AND STABILITY.

BECAUSE I WOULD SAY THE STABILITY IS EXACTLY WHERE THAT USER CONFUSION WOULD MATTER.

USERS EXPECT THE INTERNET NOT TO BE JUST TECHNICALLY SECURE, BUT TO OPERATE AS THEY EXPECT AND AS THEY THINK IT SHOULD.

AND I THINK THAT'S A LOT OF WHAT THE STABILITY OF THE INTERNET'S ABOUT.

SO, FOR INSTANCE, ALTERNATE ROOTS, SURE, THEY BREAK SOME TECHNICAL PROBLEMS, BUT WHAT THEY DO IS FRACTURE HOW THE USER THINKS THE INTERNET WORKS, WHICH CAUSES A STABILITY PROBLEM MORE SECURITY.

SO I THINK USER CONFUSION IS A HUGE PART OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT STABILITY AND A USER'S EXPERIENCE ON THE INTERNET.

SO I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD CERTAINLY BE CONSIDERING THAT WITHIN THE SECURITY AND STABILITY REALM AND NOT JUST SAYING IT'S A TECHNICAL ISSUE, NOT A -- NOT AN END USER USE ISSUE.

>>PHIL CORWIN: AND, STEVE, IF I COULD JUST RESPOND, PERHAPS THERE WAS SOME MISUNDERSTANDING, BUT I CERTAINLY DID NOT MEAN TO SUGGEST THAT THE ICA MEMBERS WERE THE SOLE BOTTOM AND THAT ALAC WAS NOT.

I WAS SIMPLY TRYING TO GIVE THEIR PERSPECTIVE.

AND I KNOW THAT YOUR GROUP IS VERY SUPPORTIVE OF MARKETPLACE INNOVATION, AND THE PEOPLE WITHIN ICA BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE ENTREPRENEURS, THEY ARE RISK-TAKERS, AND THAT THEIR COMMERCIAL MODEL IS EVERY BIT AS VALID AS OTHER COMMERCIAL MODELS.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: AND I THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A GREAT QUEUE OF PEOPLE, I DID MENTION THAT WE HAVE AN ONLINE CHAT REQUEST FROM KIEREN MCCARTHY, WHO ASKED, CAN REGISTRARS AGREE ON A SET OF MEASUREMENTS AND PULL THEIR STATISTICS SO THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO MAKE AN INFORMED POLICY DECISION ABOUT WHAT TO DO?

>>TIM RUIZ: CAN I RESPOND TO THAT?

OR WAS THAT FOR A RESPONSE?

WE WOULD LIKE TO.

BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE DATA AVAILABLE TO US TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

WE'D HAVE TO RELY ON THE REGISTRIES FOR THAT.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: MAKES SENSE.

SO WE HAVE SEVEN OR EIGHT MINUTES LEFT, AND WE HAVE FOUR PEOPLE IN LINE.

AND WE DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE TO GET TO EVERYONE.

SO YOU GET THREE WORDS.

JUST KIDDING.

GO AHEAD, PLEASE ANNOUNCE WHO YOU ARE.

>>KRISTINA ROSETTE: MY NAME IS KRISTINA ROSETTE, AND ALTHOUGH I AM ONE OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY REPRESENTATIVES TO THE GNSO COUNCIL, I'M ACTUALLY SPEAKING IN MY INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AS COUNSEL TO I.P. OWNERS AND, IN PARTICULAR, OWNERS OF FAMOUS BRANDS.

TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS ANY -- I GUESS I SHOULD SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT I HAVE FOUND THIS TO BE A VERY HELPFUL PANEL TO HAVE THE ACCESS TO THIS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND THESE ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVES.

BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS ANY UNCERTAINTY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TRADEMARK OWNERS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OWNERS VIEW TASTING AS A PROBLEM, I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT MY CLIENTS -- AND I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ALL TRADEMARK OWNERS -- BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU MY CLIENTS VIEW IT AS A SERIOUS PROBLEM TO THE EXTENT THAT THE NAMES THAT ARE BEING TASTED -- EXCUSE ME -- ARE VARIATIONS OF THEIR MARKS.

IT IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO TAKE ACTION TO NOT ONLY IDENTIFY, BUT TAKE ACTION AGAINST ONE OF THESE NAMES IN THE FIVE-DAY PERIOD.

EVEN IN THE IDEAL WORLD, IF YOU LEARN OF THE NAME ON THE DAY THAT IT'S REGISTERED, AS A TIMING MATTER, IT'S -- I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY SITUATION IN WHICH I'VE ENCOUNTERED IT WHERE IT'S BEEN POSSIBLE TO GET A UDRP ON FILE OR TO GET AN ACPA COMPLAINT ON FILE.

HAVING SAID THAT, AN AREA IN WHICH I AM AWARE OF AN EVEN GREATER PROBLEM IS IN THE AREA OF PHISHING, WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CONSUMER FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND THE TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF LOSSES THAT ARE BEING RACKED UP BY CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

AND IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE TASTERS HAVE REALLY, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, STARTED TO SHIFT THE FOCUS IN TERMS OF DERIVING REVENUE FROM ADVERTISING TO A CORE OF THEM, AND I DON'T MEAN TO SUGGEST THAT THIS IS TRUE FOR ALL OF THEM, BUT THERE ARE SOME WHO ARE VIEWING THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PHISHING, BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY SUCH A SHORT TIME FRAME, THAT THERE'S NO WAY FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO CATCH UP WITH THEM, FOR THE CONSUMER TO CATCH UP WITH THEM, FOR THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TO CATCH UP WITH THEM.

AND I JUST -- HAVING SAT IN THE AUDIENCE, IT WASN'T CLEAR TO ME THAT THAT ASPECT OF IT WAS REALLY UNDERSTOOD.

SO I JUST WANTED TO SET FORTH MY COMMENTS.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. AND I'D LIKE TO FIELD THIS A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I HAVE ATTENDED SOME INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTIONS AND ALSO SPOKEN TO THIS IN DIFFERENT PLACES, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO NOT TAKE FROM THE COMMENTS, BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE BEYOND THIS ROOM WHO ARE LEARNING ABOUT THESE ISSUES, NOT TO MIX PROBABLY THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD TASTE DOMAINS AND THOSE PROBABLY BAD PLAYERS WHO ARE DOING NEFARIOUS THINGS LIKE PHISHING OR FRAUD. BECAUSE THEY ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. WHAT I HAVE SEEN TO BE THE CASE IS PEOPLE TASTING THOSE DOMAINS ARE ACCUMULATING LARGE PORTFOLIO DOMAINS WOULD NOT WANT TO JEOPARDIZE THOSE.

AND YOU WILL SEE A LOT OF THOUGHT LEADERS AND INDUSTRY ALLIANCES WHERE THEN THEY ARE BEING PROACTIVE ABOUT TRADEMARKS AND VERY RESPONSIVE TO PEOPLE.

>>KRISTINA ROSETTE: SURE. AND I DIDN'T MEAN TO SUGGEST THERE WAS A ONE FOR ONE OVERLAP. IT'S JUST MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT COMMUNITY OF INDIVIDUALS WHO IS INCLINED TO ENGAGE IN PHISHING HAS SEEN THE ADD GRACE PERIOD TO PURSUE THOSE OPPORTUNITIES.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU FOR CLARIFICATIONS.

OUR NEXT IS MASON COLE FROM SNAPNAMES.

>>MASON COLE: THANK YOU. I WANT TO ADD MY THANKS TO THE PANEL FOR AN INFORMATIVE SESSION.

I REPRESENT SNAPNAMES. WE ARE A COMPANY THAT PROVIDES DOMAIN NAMES THROUGH THE SECONDARY MARKETPLACE TO ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ORDER THEM ONCE THEY BECOME AVAILABLE.

I KNOW WE ARE SHORT ON TIME SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THREE MAIN POINTS.

ONE IS I'M SURE EVERYONE IS SYMPATHETIC TO THE CONCERNS OF THE TRADEMARK MUNICIPALITY AND THE USERS WHO HAVE CONFUSING EXPERIENCES IN ANY ASPECT OF THE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION.

TO THE EFFECT THAT ANY COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN REGISTRATION OR REGISTRATION SERVICES WE ALL NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE INTERACT WITH OUR CLIENTS AND WE NEED TO BE VERY SENSITIVE TO TRADEMARK CONCERNS.

I'D BE HARD PRESSED TO THINK THAT ANYONE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT.

IN -- AS FAR AS THIS ISSUE GOES, ICANN'S TIME, AS WE ALL KNOW, IS PRECIOUS AND WE HAVE QUITE A FEW THINGS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS. WE DO NEED TO TAKE CARE NOT TO HAVE A KNEE-JERK WE ACTION TO ANY INNOVATION THAT'S BEING INTRODUCED INTO THE MARKETPLACE.

ONE THING THAT'S HAPPENING AS A RESULT OF TASTE TESTING OR OTHER SERVICES THAT WEREN'T ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED WHEN ICANN WAS FOUNDED IS THE FACT THAT DOMAIN NAMES ARE GROWING IN VALUE. AND AS DOMAIN NAMES GROW IN VALUE, THERE ARE OTHER MARKETPLACE FORCES THAT ARE TAKING EFFECT, AND LOTS OF COMPANIES AND END USERS ARE DERIVING BENEFIT FROM THAT.

SO IF WE DO ADDRESS THIS FROM A POLICY POINT OF VIEW, WE NEED TO TAKE QUITE A BIT OF CARE IN HOW AWAY DO THAT AS SO AS NOT TO IMPEDE THE GROWTH OF THE MARKET THAT WE ARE ALL TRYING TO ENJOY.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, MASON. PAUL STAHURA HAS SOMETHING TO SAY.

>>PAUL STAHURA: I DIDN'T PRESS MY POINT FOR THE LAST PERSON AT THE MICROPHONE. ABOUT PHISHING, I DON'T THINK THERE IS MUCH TASTING IN PHISHING GOING ON BECAUSE IF YOU ARE GOING TO COMMIT BASICALLY A CRIME LIKE PHISHING, YOU MIGHT AS WELL REGISTER A NAME FOR SIX BUCKS OR TEN BUCKS OR WHATEVER AND THEN JUST DO -- AND NOT PAY OR DO A CHARGE BACK. I DON'T THINK -- YOU JUST DON'T CONFUSE PHISHING AND TASTING.

AND FOR EXAMPLE, AT ENOM WE DON'T ALLOW REGISTRANTS TO DELETE NAMES THAT WE DON'T KNOW DURING THIS FIVE-DAY PERIOD.

SO WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF REGISTRANTS DOING TASTING AT ALL, LET ALONE PHISHING WITH TASTING.

>>ROB HALL: IF I CAN TOUCH ON WHAT MASON SAID BRIEFLY, MASON I THINK YOU TOUCHED ON SOMETHING I BELIEVE IS HAPPENING IS WE KEEP REFERRING THIS AS THE SECONDARY MARKET. IT IS RAPIDLY BECOMING THE PRIMARY MARKET. THERE IS FAR MORE MONEY AND VALUE IN DOMAIN NAMES IN CHANGING HANDS IN THE RESALE OF DOMAIN NAMES THAN IN THE INITIAL REGISTRATION OF DOMAIN NAMES.

JUST LIKE A HOUSING MARKET WHERE ONLY 10% OF THE HOUSES SOLD IN THE YEAR ARE NEW HOUSES, WE TEND TO THINK OF THAT AS A MATURE MARKET. THE DOMAIN NAME INDUSTRY IS BECOMING THAT WHERE WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE SECONDARY MARKET, I BELIEVE IN A YEAR OR TWO WILL BE THE PRIMARY MARKET, WHERE DOMAINS ARE BOUGHT AND SOLD. AND NEW DOMAINS WON'T BE AS EXCITING AND WILL BE A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE INDUSTRY AND, IN FACT, WHERE THE REVENUE IS GENERATED IN THE INDUSTRY.

AND REGISTRARS ARE FIGHTING TO COPE WITH THAT CHANGE, BECAUSE TRADITIONALLY WE HAVE BEEN ALL ABOUT NEW DOMAIN REGISTRATIONS, AND WE ARE SEEING MANY SERVICES NOW ABOUT MONETIZING THE ASSETS THAT OUR CLIENTS' HAVE AND KEEPING THEM ALIVE AS OPPOSED TO DELETING THEM.

THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE HOW UDRP REACTS, THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE THE RGP PROCESS. SO THERE ARE MANY CHANGES COMING AS THE SECONDARY MARKET, AS WE CALL IT, BECOMES THE PRIMARY. BUT THAT WILL HAPPEN VERY QUICKLY IN THE NEXT YEAR, I BELIEVE.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: NEXT IS ROGER COLLINS WHO IS GENERAL MANAGER OF AFTERNIC.

>>ROGER COLLINS: I AM NOT REALLY ADVOCATING FOR ANYBODY HERE TODAY. I JUST WANT TO CONTINUE WHAT I THINK IS 73 GOOD EDUCATIONAL SESSION.

THE QUESTION I HAVE IS WHAT WAS -- FIRST OF ALL, PAUL, WHAT WAS THE FIVE-DAY PERIOD? WHAT DID YOU CALL THAT?

>>PAUL STAHURA: THE ADD GRACE PERIOD? THE INITIAL FIVE DAY PERIOD?

>>ROGER COLLINS: YES, THE INITIAL FIVE DAY. THE QUESTION IS WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF HAVING SUCH A THING AS A FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD? AND FOLLOW-ON TO THAT, HOW IS THAT ORIGINAL PURPOSE ADDRESSED YOUR SOLUTION, PAUL? AND I AM GOING TO GET RID OF ALL MY QUESTIONS HERE AND GIVE IT BACK TO YOU GUYS.

THE FINAL QUESTION IS PROBABLY TO TIM. TIM, DOES GO DADDY HAVE A POSITION ON PROPOSED SOLUTIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, TO THE CUSTOMER CONFUSION PROBLEM?

>>PAUL STAHURA: I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THE ORIGINAL REASON FOR THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD IS, BUT I THINK IT HAD TO DO WITH IF THERE WERE MISTAKES, OR TYPOS OR WHATEVER, OR CHARGE-BACKS WHERE YOU -- A REGISTRAR HAD THE ASSURANCE THAT SOMEBODY WOULD PAY, AND THEN IT TURNED OUT THEY ACTUALLY DIDN'T PAY, THAT THEY COULD GET THE MONEY BACK.

BUT IT'S NOT THAT EFFECTIVE WITH CHARGE-BACKS, BECAUSE THE CHARGE BACK PERIOD IS THREE OR SIX MONTHS AND THAT'S MUCH GREATER THAN FIVE DAYS. AND I THINK THAT'S THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE.

AND THEN HOW I THINK THE NEW TYPE OF NAME SERVES THAT PURPOSE, BECAUSE IF YOU ARE A REGISTRAR AND YOU ARE WORRIED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF YOUR CUSTOMER, YOU COULD REGISTER THAT NAME AS A TYPE 2 UNTIL, YOU KNOW, YOU ARE ASSURED OF PAYMENT OR GOT THE ACTUAL PAYMENT, AND THEN DELETE IT AND REGISTER IT AS A TYPE 1 AFTER THAT.

SO HAVING TWO TYPES OF NAMES AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK, YOU KNOW, FULFILLS THAT ORIGINAL PURPOSE AS WELL AS THE OTHER ISSUES I TALKED ABOUT.

>>TIM RUIZ: THANKS FOR THE QUESTION, ROGER.

AS FAR AS A SOLUTION THAT WE SUPPORT, WE HAVE IN THE PAST PROMOTED THE IDEA THAT BASICALLY ICANN SHOULD KEEP ITS QUARTER. MAYBE WHO HAS BEEN FAMILIAR WITH BOB PARSON'S BLOG IS PROBABLY AWARE OF THAT.

WE CONTINUE TO -- WE HAVE CONTINUED TO SUPPORT THAT IDEA, OR TO PROMOTE THAT IDEA.

I THINK IN RECENT WEEKS, MAYBE OVER THE LAST MONTH IN OTHER DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE HAD, WE HAVE COME TO REALIZE THAT MAYBE -- IT MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE THE BEST SOLUTION. AND WE'RE OPEN TO IDEAS, WE'RE OPEN TO A FORUM LIKE THIS WHERE WE CAN COME TOGETHER AND MAYBE COME TO SOME KIND OF UNDERSTANDING AS A GROUP, WITH ALL STAKEHOLDERS AS FAR AS WHAT CAN BE DONE, HOW ELSE CAN WE GET WHAT EVERYBODY NEEDS, AND NOT, YOU KNOW, COST THE REGISTRIES MONEY, TAKE AWAY WHAT THE MONETIZERS ARE TRYING TO DO.

BUT WE STILL THINK THAT THAT QUARTER WOULD PLAY A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN REDUCING THE ACTIVITY THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW. AND THE REASON WE KIND OF FOCUSED ON THAT, BECAUSE WE FELT IT WAS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE VERY SHORT TERM. IT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CHANGED IN THE BUDGET WITHOUT A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, WHICH COULD, AS BRUCE POINTED OUT, COULD TAKE A YEAR OR EVEN LONGER.

AND OUR CONCERN WAS TO FIND A QUICK SOLUTION THAT WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE SEEING.

BUT I THINK FORUMS LIKE THIS HAVE BEEN GOOD BECAUSE IT HELPS US TO REALIZE THAT IT'S MUCH MORE COMPLICATED ISSUE THAN WHAT'S INITIALLY APPARENT. AND SO THE SOLUTION WILL PROBABLY ULTIMATELY BE SOMEWHAT MORE COMPLICATED. BUT WE'RE OPENING THAT THESE KINDS OF THINGS WILL HELP US GET THERE FASTER THAN WHAT WE WERE SEEING.

>>HAKON HAUGNES: AND ROGER, I WANTED TO ADD ONE INFORMATION POINT ABOUT YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE ORIGINATION OF THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD. IT'S INTERESTING THAT NOBODY REALLY REMEMBERS EXACTLY HOW THAT CAME TO BE, BUT THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD ACTUALLY STARTED ON THE 15TH OF JANUARY 2000. AND BEFORE THAT -- AND THERE WAS ACTUALLY DISCUSSION AT THE TIME AS TO WHETHER THAT SHOULD BE 60 DAYS, AND ALSO YOU WHO WERE AROUND THE TIME REMEMBER YOU COULD ACTUALLY BUY A DOT COM NAME AT THE TIME AND ESSENTIALLY GET A BILL, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE USED THAT NOT TO PAY THE BILL AND ESSENTIALLY THEY GOT A 60-DAY FREE TRIAL PERIOD.

AND AS A RESULT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AS TO WHETHER THE GRACE PERIOD SHOULD BE 60 DAYS.

>>ROB HALL: WAIT A MINUTE, WE NEED CHUCK AND I HOPE THAT'S CHUCK COMING TO THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE AT THE LAST DOMAIN NAME MARKETPLACE, CHUCK EXPLAINED EXACTLY HOW IT CAME ABOUT AND WHY.

I KNOW FROM MY RECOLLECTION, MOST PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE IT BUT BACK IN THE OLD NETWORK SOLUTIONS DAY BEFORE ICANN EXISTED THERE WAS AN UNWRITTEN RULE THAT YOU COULD CANCEL WITHIN FIVE DAYS IF YOU KNEW ENOUGH TO KNOW YOU COULD CALL AND SAY YOU MADE A MISTAKE.

BUT IT'S A RIGHT THAT EXISTED OFF THE BOOKS IN THE OLD NET SOL DAYS WHEN THEY WERE THE ONLY REGISTRAR. BUT I THINK CHUCK KNOWS HOW IT CAME ABOUT IN ICANN.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: CHUCK, MUCH RESPECT TO YOU, BUT BEFORE YOU RESPOND I WAS ADVISED WE HAVE LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES FOR THIS BEFORE THE NEXT PEOPLE WHO ARE UP HERE. I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE QUEUED IN LINE SO YOU GET FIVE WORDS.

>>CHUCK GOMES: IT WILL TAKE MORE THAN THAT, BUT I WILL BE BRIEF.

WHEN THE SRS WAS INTRODUCED AND THE TESTBED REGISTRARS WERE ALREADY IN PLACE, THIS WAS IN 1999, THERE WAS NO ADD GRACE PERIOD. OKAY?

WHAT HAPPENED WAS IF REGISTRANTS MADE A TYPOGRAPHICAL ENTRY IN THEIR DOMAIN NAME, AND THEN CAUGHT IT AFTER IT WAS REGISTERED, THE ONLY WAY TO CORRECT THAT PROBLEM WAS TO REGISTER A NEW NAME, AND YOU WERE STUCK. THE REGISTRAR WAS STUCK WITH THE $6 FEE.

REGISTRARS IN PLACE AT THAT TIME, THERE WERE A VERY SMALL NUMBER, CAME TO US AND, YOU KNOW, COMMUNICATED THE PROBLEM.

WE THEN, IN CONSULTATION WITH LOUIS TOUTON AT THE TIME, IN FACT IT WAS ME AND LOUIS TALKING ABOUT IT, SAID THIS IS A CUSTOMER NEED. LET'S TALK ABOUT IT.

WE THEN WENT THROUGH THE STEPS AND INTRODUCED THE FIVE-DAY GRACE PERIOD. IN THE SRS IT WAS IMPLEMENTED IN JANUARY OF 2000.

WHAT HAPPENED THEN IN TERMS OF CONTRACTS -- THERE WAS NOTHING IN OUR CONTRACTS ABOUT THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT. WHEN OUR CONTRACTS, COM, NET AND ORG WERE REVISED AND WHEN OTHER CONTRACTS WERE NEGOTIATED FOR NEW TLDS, THAT THEN WAS INCORPORATED AS A -- AS A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THAT PERIOD.

THERE WAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CHARGE-BACKS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. NOW, THERE ARE OTHER REASONS THAT I THINK IT'S BEEN USED FOR SINCE THEN THAT MAY BE CALLED LEGITIMATE, BUT IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT AT THAT TIME.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION, CHUCK.

JOE ALOGNA IS FROM CENTRAL NIC, AND THEN WE HAVE STEVE CROCKER. AND I ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO CUT OFF THE LINE AND WE HAVE FIVE MINUTES. IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DO BUT WE DO WANT TO TRY TO GET THROUGH THINGS.

THANK YOU.

>>JOE ALOGNA: THANKS, JOTHAN. NO QUESTION JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.

I THINK I JUST WANTED TO CAUTION ICANN THAT I THINK THIS HAS OBVIOUSLY BECOME A PROBLEM BIG ENOUGH TO BE DISCUSSED HERE. AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST IS THAT WE BE CAREFUL TO KEEP ANY POLICY VERY BROAD, BECAUSE I ALWAYS PREFER PRIVATE SOLUTIONS. AND I REMEMBER WE HAVE BEEN IN THIS SITUATION BEFORE WHEN IT CAME TO WHOIS PRIVACY. AND SOME OF THE REGISTRARS UP HERE CAME OUT WITH SOLUTIONS WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE BROAD POLICY AT ICANN. AND THOSE SOLUTIONS ARE STILL IN EFFECT AND VERY PROFITABLE AND CUSTOMERS ARE HAPPY AND REGISTRARS ARE HAPPY.

YOU KNOW, I KNOW THERE ARE ISSUES TO BE DISCUSSED AS POLICY, BUT I LIKE PRIVATE SOLUTIONS.

MARKET-BASED SOLUTIONS I THINK ARE REAL IMPORTANT. AND I THINK AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, WE ARE COMING UP WITH SOME GOOD IDEAS HERE.

ONE OTHER COMMENT. YOU KNOW, IN -- THIS ISSUE RELATED TO PHISHING, WE RUN A SMALL REGISTRY AND WE ARE GETTING E-MAILS FROM A COMPANY CALLED RSA OUT OF BRITAIN THAT IS REALLY NOTIFYING US RIGHT AWAY WHEN THEY DETECT PHISHING FROM A BANK. USUALLY THESE PHISHING SITES WILL HAVE LINKS TO THE REAL BANK. WHAT THESE GUYS DO IS THEY HAVE A MARKET-BASED SOLUTION. THEY LET US KNOW. WE CAN SHUT THAT SITE DOWN, NOTIFY THE REGISTRAR. IT ALWAYS HAPPENS REAL FAST AND WE THINK WE ARE HAVE HAVING AN IMPACT FOR THAT RSA TECHNOLOGY'S CUSTOMERS.

SO AGAIN, MARKET-BASED SOLUTIONS THAT ARE VERY EFFECTIVE.

I THINK WE CAN COME UP WITH THOSE AS REGISTRARS AND REGISTRIES.

AND THEN LASTLY, I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT, TO ME THERE IS ONE THING THAT I FEEL IS ABSENT HERE AND THAT IS SOME REPRESENTATION, MAYBE BESIDES JON OR PHIL, OF GUYS DOING DOMAIN TASTING. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SEEN MAYBE A STATEMENT, MAYBE THEY WANT TO REMAIN PRIVATE FOR SOME REASON BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE TO HAVE INVITED THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS DISCUSSION SINCE, IN MANY CASES, WE ARE GUESSING AT WHAT THEY REALLY WANT TO ACCOMPLISH.

JUST MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: THANK YOU, JOE.

STEVE CROCKER, YET AGAIN.

>>STEPHEN CROCKER: THANK YOU, AND I WILL TRY TO BE BRIEF AND I APPRECIATE BEING SQUEEZED IN HERE.

RATHER THAN ASK, I HAVE BEEN WATCHING THIS NOW FOR A GOOD LONG TIME, A YEAR, TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS, HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH SOME OF YOU.

THE PROBLEM THAT STIMULATES A LOT OF ANGST ABOUT ALL OF THIS IS THE VERY HIGH LOAD THAT DOMAIN TASTING AND OTHER ACTIVITIES PUT ON THE REGISTRIES WITHOUT COMPENSATION.

NOW, YES, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF COMPENSATION AT THE TAIL END OF IT, BUT THE REGISTRIES WERE CLEARLY BUILT WITH A CERTAIN MODEL OF HOW MUCH OF THE RESOURCES WERE GOING TO GO INTO THE REGISTRATION SIDE VERSUS THE DOMAIN LOOKUP SIDE.

NOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LOADS BEING PLACED ON THE REGISTRATION SIDE THAT ARE 100 TO 1,000 TIMES OF WHAT THEY WERE ORIGINALLY SIZED FOR. THERE'S NO WAY THAT HAPPENS WITHIN THE SORT OF ANTICIPATED MARGINS.

IN AN UNREGULATED, FREE WHEELING KIND OF MARKET, THE REGISTRIES WOULD HAVE SAID EITHER STOP OR THEY WOULD HAVE CHARGED SOMETHING OR THEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN IN THERE AND FIXED THIS FOR THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF USING THE GRACE PERIOD IN A WAY THAT WENT WAY BEYOND -- AM I OFF?

I'LL JUST TALK LOUDER.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: SEE, WE HIT THE CUTOFF ON TIME.

>>STEPHEN CROCKER: SO THE -- SO THAT THIS RESTOCKING FEE, THIS FIVE CENT FEE THAT PIR HAS INSTITUTED, I DID THE MATH, TOO, AND ARGUED AT ONE POINT EXACTLY ALONG THE LINES YOU DID, ROB, THAT IT WAS TOO LOW. I AGREE WITH YOU IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN HIGHER. AND THEN IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT, IN FACT, DOING THE MATH AGAINST $6 WAS THE WRONG THING BECAUSE MANY OF THEM WERE BEING PURCHASED AGAINST $1, AND SO 5 CENTS, PRO RATA, PLENTY FOR THAT.

THE IMPACT ON DOMAIN SPACE AND IMPACT ON USERS AND SO FORTH THAT IS A MUCH BIGGER AND THORNIER KIND OF QUESTION AND I THINK IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY WELCOME TO HAVE A BROAD INSIGHT INTO ALL OF THAT, WHETHER ALL THE GOOD NAMES ARE BEING CONSUMED, QUOTE-UNQUOTE, OR WHETHER IT HAS AN IMPACT ON TRADEMARKS. THOSE ARE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS FOR INVOLVEMENT.

AND THIRD, THE WAY I PARSE THINGS, THE IMPACT ON ICANN'S REVENUE, I THINK IT'S GREAT, SPEAKING AS A BOARD MEMBER OF ICANN, IT'S GREAT TO HAVE PEOPLE WORRIED ABOUT THE REVENUE OF ICANN. ICANN CERTAINLY HAS TO HAVE REVENUE. THE REVENUE THAT IT HAS IS AN OVERLAY ON THE MARKET IN SOME SORT OF WAY THAT IS A LITTLE HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER IT'S AN EXACTLY RIGHT FIT, BUT IT'S KIND OF A MADE-UP SCHEME.

I WORRY THE LEAST ABOUT WHETHER ICANN IS COLLECTING ITS FEE AND MUCH MORE ON WHETHER THE MARKET IS OPERATING SMOOTHLY AND IN A STABLE MANNER THAN THE TERTIARY ISSUE, IF YOU WILL.

AND THE LAST PART OF THE PROBLEM, IF WE SOLVE THE REST AND WE ONLY HAVE AN ISSUE OF ICANN'S FEES, I'M SURE WE WILL BE BACK FIGURING THAT PART OUT, TOO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES:THANK YOU VERY MUCH, STEVE.

WELL, IN CLOSING, AND BY THE WAY, I DO WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE HERE IN HERE AND THE COMMUNITY HERE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HAVE SHARED THEIR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. I'D LIKE TO THANK THE FOLKS WHO JOINED US FROM THE CHAT ROOM AND ALSO FOLLOW THE WEBCAST.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE PARTICIPATING IN THE PANEL. I SHOULDN'T SAY BOARD MEMBERS. THAT'S CONFUSING HERE AT ICANN. TIM RUIZ FROM GO DADDY GROUP, HAKON, PHIL CORWIN, ROB PAUL, PAUL STAHURA, AND BRET FAUSETT. MY PERSONAL THANKS. YOU HAVE REALLY CONTRIBUTED TO WHAT I THINK IS A GREAT DISCUSSION HERE. THANK YOU.

>>ROB HALL: IF I COULD TAKE A SECOND FOR THANKING JOTHAN AND TIM FOR ORGANIZING THIS AGAIN BECAUSE THEY PUT IN A LOT OF WORK IN BEHIND THE SCENES AND EVEN OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS OF THE MEETINGS.

AND TO OUR TWO SCRIBES WHO, AGAIN, LEAVE ME, WHEN I AM SPEAKING, OFTEN WANTING TO READ WHAT I AM ABOUT TO SAY NEXT.

>>TIM COLE: ROB, I THINK THIS IS THE SECOND PANEL IN A ROW WHERE YOU STOLE MY LINES BEFORE I --

>>ROB HALL: I APOLOGIZE.

>>JOTHAN FRAKES: AND JUST A COUPLE OF CLOSING COMMENTS. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE DOMAIN MARKETPLACE BEYOND THESE WALLS, BEYOND THE ICANN MEETINGS, BEYOND THE ICANN WEB SITE, THERE ARE WONDERFUL SERVICES OUT THERE, NEWS SERVICES LIKE DNJOURNAL.COM, CIRCLEID.COM, THERE IS ALSO TRAFFIC CONFERENCE, THE DOMAIN ROUNDTABLE IS A FANTASTIC DOMAIN INDUSTRY CONFERENCE, AND THERE IS ALSO DOMAIN FEST COMING UP IN LOS ANGELES IN JANUARY.

SO I WANT TO ONCE AGAIN THANK YOU TO THE PANEL, THANK YOU TO THE AUDIENCE FOR PARTICIPATING AND I GIVE THE MIKE ONCE MORE TO TIM.

>>TIM COLE: I WANTED TO THANK EVERYONE AGAIN BUT I WANTED TO POINT OUT THERE ARE RESOURCES ON THE ICANN WEB SITE AND WE DO HAVE A SECTION ON THERE FOR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR WORKSHOP. AND I WOULD INVITE ANY OF YOU THAT HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO ADD OR EVEN SOME OF THE INFORMATION YOU JUST SHARED WITH US TO POST IT THERE SO PEOPLE CAN GO AND FIND INFORMATION ABOUT THESE RESOURCES.

I ALSO DID WANT TO MENTION THAT PAUL STAHURA'S SLIDE PRESENTATION IS ALSO LOCATED ON THE ICANN WEB SITE. THE AGENDA FOR THIS WORKSHOP HAS A LINK TO HIS SLIDES. SO PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT THEM MORE CLOSELY AND STUDY THEM.

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR ATTENDANCE, AND ENJOY THE REST OF THE MEETING.

[ APPLAUSE ]

© Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers