The following is(was?) sent to all the post-testbed accredited registrars. It raises some extremely valid concerns regarding the very unfair pricing enviroment that is currently in effect.... ------------------------------------- Congratulations on being accredited! I am sending to you and the other accredited registrars a copy of an email I sent to Esther Dyson and Mike Roberts of ICANN. We are also going to send a similar email to Becky Burr at the US Department of Commerce. Please read it as it concerns, I believe, a huge issue that has been overlooked in this process of introducing competition in domain names, an issue that could have a profound effect on your business. We also offer what we believe is a fair solution. I would appreciate your comments (feel free to call me or email) and please, if you agree that this is an issue that needs immediate attention, as we believe it does, send an email today to express your own concerns to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Esther Dyson, Interim Chaiman, ICANN [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Mike Roberts, Interim President/CEO, ICANN [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Becky Burr, Department of Commerce Many thanks! -- Jeff Field [EMAIL PROTECTED] Founder/President http://www.namesecure.com NameSecure.com PO Box 127 phone: 925-377-1212, ext. 100 Moraga, CA 94566-0127 fax: 925-377-1414 <--- start copy of email ---> Mike (and Ms. Dyson), Thank you for your reply. I and everyone here at NameSecure.com are also looking forward to an open and competitive marketplace for domain names. In that regard... Perhaps I was not clear about our concerns as to the *severely* detrimental effect the testbed period as currently planned could have on not only our company but all 29 of the post-testbed registrars. Please permit me take a stab at it again... As I understand things going forward, the testbed period begins Monday, the 26th and is scheduled to last 60 days. During the 60 days (which will undoubtedly last longer) Network Solutions will be charging anyone that registers a name through them $70. They are, according to the documents, obligated to charge this legacy fee during the length of the testbed period. The five testbed registrars, however, may charge any price they wish. Presumably, they could even give it away for free and/or bundle the registry fee in with services (please correct me if I'm wrong about any of these assumptions). Assuming the above scenario, that means that during the testbed period, customers of NameSecure.com will be forced to pay the $70 fee. Now, one thing you could say to us is, "You will not have to register your customer's domain names through Network Solutions any longer. You could now register the names through one of the 5 testbed registrars." And to that I would say, "You're right. We do have that choice. However, all of our automated back-end systems have been designed to work with Network Solution's business processes. For us to change all of that for a 60-day period of time (we will ourselves be a registrar after the 60 days) would require an *enormous* amount of time, effort and money. It would force us to divert all of our resources away from our efforts to become a registrar." I don't believe you could truly expect us to do that. Please correct me if I'm wrong. So, assuming that we are not forced to change all of our back-end systems, what potential position does that leave NameSecure.com in? It leaves us in a position of our customers having to pay a $70 registration fee while at the same time one of the testbed registrars is giving it away for free or at cut-rate prices. Our business could dry up to a trickle during the 60-day testbed period. By the end of the 60 days, we could be either out of business or severely crippled. I'm sure that it is not your intention to drive the 29 accredited post-testbed registrars out of business during the 60-day period, however, as the plans to go forward currently stand, it could happen. Let me try to be even clearer about this... Let's say you have a town with ten gas stations in it. And you say, "For the next 60 days, five of you can sell gas for 50 cents a gallon, but the other five have to charge 1 dollar." Obviously, I, and I'm sure you, wouldn't want to be one of the stations that has to charge a buck. But this is exactly the position that NameSecure.com now finds itself in. We're one of the stations that is going to for at least 60 days charge a buck while the testbed registrars can charge 50 cents (or give it away for free). And as you know, in Internet time, 60 days is a long long time. We will do everything we can to make sure this plan does not go forward under this scenario. But... I believe there is a simple answer to all this. As I stated before, until the testbed period is over and until the additional accredited registrars have had a reasonable chance to test and implement their own connections to the registry, the current $70 registry fee should be charged by *all* participants. In addition, no additional services should be allowed to be bundled in with the registry fee. Then, once everyone has had a *reasonable* chance to get ready, set a date for everyone to begin competing on prices and services. This will truly level the playing field for all and will negate much of the advantage (real or imagined) that has been handed to the testbed participants. Simple, huh? As you know, we've been living under a non-competitive environment in domain names for a long time. Everyone maintains that the testbed period is required to "maintain the stability of the Internet." Well, I'm asking, "What about the stability of the 29 post-testbed registrar participants?" Will another four months or so of a non-competitive environment really hurt if it ensures that the post-testbed participants are in a better position to compete? I hope I'm now making this clear for you both. I anxiously await your response. Time is of the essence. The testbed period starts Monday! Best regards, Jeff <--- end copy of email --->
