Showing posts with label conflicted. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conflicted. Show all posts

2015-04-04

A Few Things Worth Reading

Many say forget ICANN--it's hopelessly conflicted and inept--and new gTLD domain names? Only tech oxymorons need more 1980s technology in the Mobile Apps Age of 2015! So, what do you really need to know about modern life and culture today? Bob Lefsetz starts us off--

Lefsetz Letter » Never Say Never: "Coke is in a tailspin, McDonald’s is dying, a star football player retires after one year of play, Apple offers twenty five TV channels for $30-$40 and SXSW is now a tech, not a music, festival. Dude, what happened to my country?".... The world will be saved by people. Who think. And lead thereupon....." (read more at the link above)

GoDaddy And The Eternal Optimism Of Retail IPO Punters - GoDaddy Inc. (NYSE:GDDY) | Seeking Alpha: "... Despite reams of historical evidence that most IPOs are overpriced and represent poor medium-term investments, there is an almost-unending stream of retail punters who jump into the next 'hot' IPO at almost any price, often on the basis of name recognition alone, only to be sorely disappointed in the months that follow... If GDDY was an early-stage growth company with an undefined 'blue sky' growth opportunity, these kinds of multiples and day-one enthusiasm would at least be explainable. But in response to the listing of a two-decades old business with a history of operating losses, a mostly mature (or at least maturing) market, a large majority of the share count yet to enter the float, the specter of numerous secondary offerings from motivated PE sellers; and, of course, listed comps trading at a fraction of the valuation, GDDY at $26 is beyond expensive..."

Facebook hosting doesn't change things, the world already changed — Remains of the Day"... The value of being a generalist as a reporter, someone who just shows up and asks questions and transcribes them into a summary article, is not that valuable. If you cover an industry, do you understand that industry? Take tech reporters as an example, many of them don't understand the underlying technology they write about. That may have sufficed in a bygone age, but it no longer does... Taking the time to become an expert in a domain still has value because it takes hard work, and that is also not a resource that is equally distributed in the world...."

11 Points A Somewhat Bearish Long Has Wrong About Google | Seeking Alpha"Advertising is how it has chosen to monetize the information flow it facilitates. In my eyes, the worst thing Google could do is get away from its position where it is comfortably collecting a royalty on the creation and flow of information."

How Super Angel Chris Sacca Made Billions, Burned Bridges And Crafted The Best Seed Portfolio Ever: ".... Camp, who sold StumbleUpon to eBay for $75 million in 2007, had the idea to make an app so his friends could book a black car to take them around town. He first called it UberCab. Camp’s friend and early advisor, the author Tim Ferriss, remembers that the idea seemed “ridiculous” to many outside the Jam Pad circle. “People who had the opportunity to invest laughed it off as this one-percenter vanity service,” Ferriss says. “Chris was not one of them. He had faith very early on.” Kalanick became a mega-advisor of sorts to the fledgling startup, and Sacca wanted a piece. The pair cemented the startup’s angel $1.3 million financing at the Truckee house, with Sacca ponying up $300,000, a large check for an $8 million fund. “I went all-in,” he says. More than just money, he helped negotiate Kalanick’s compensation and secure the Uber name from Universal Music Group. Lowercase would add another $400,000 worth of Uber at the Series A round in early 2011, led by Benchmark Capital’s Bill Gurley ..." (read more at the link above)
(emphasis added)

2014-06-06

Is It ICANN's Job To Market New gTLD Domain Names?

Has ICANN been conflicted, co-opted, and corrupted by its new gTLD domain names program? Is ICANN now, in effect, a joint venture partner with new gTLD registries and registrars -- "Pay us (ICANN) $185,000 up front (plus renewal fees) and we (ICANN) will help YOU market your new gTLD domain names that WE have authorized YOU to register (sell) for a PROFIT?"

"conflict" - an incompatibility between two or more purposes, principles, or interests
"co-opt" - divert to or use in a role different from the usual or original one
"corrupt" - change or debase by making alterations

"Marketing" - "Marketing is the process of communicating the value of a product or service to customers, for the purpose of selling that product or service." (source: Wikipedia)

"New gTLDs" - New generic Top-Level Domain Names authorized by ICANN to be offered for registration [sold] by Registries and Registrars.

Recently a domainer blogger asked: Who is responsible for new gTLD marketing? The answers from members of the domain name industry (registrars, registries, affiliated companies) included:

"... ICANN, the registries... registrars..."

"... I think the “we” here is primarily Registries, Registrars, the DNA [Domain Name Association] and ICANN..."

"Now that new gTLDs are here, I’ve heard people suggest that ICANN, the registries, and the registrars should be responsible for marketing them. This is a correct suggestion."

Really? Is marketing new gTLD domain names what ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, "a nonprofit corporation that coordinates the Internet's global domain name system" [Wikipedia] is supposed to be doing? Is marketing new gTLD domain names within ICANN's purpose or mission as expressed within its articles of incorporation, bylaws, affirmation of commitments, or applicable California or federal (US) law?

Not only is "marketing domain names" NOT within ICANN's purpose and mission, but to do such "marketing" for for-profit companies appears to be a violation of the ICANN corporate instruments and applicable state and federal laws, for example:
Exemption Requirements - 501(c)(3) Organizations: "... The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, and no part of a section 501(c)(3) organization's net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. If the organization engages in an excess benefit transaction with a person having substantial influence over the organization, an excise tax may be imposed on the person and any organization managers agreeing to the transaction. Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct...."
Some might argue that ICANN has already violated one or more of the legal provisions cited above, but at a minimum, the world of ICANN has become so dysfunctional that some ICANN insiders -- registries, registrars, and other for-profit domain industry members -- actually believe ICANN is supposed  to do the "marketing" of the new gTLD domain names for them-- for the registries and registrars which were authorized by ICANN to offer said new gTLD domain names for registration!

Somehow, in the world of ICANN, the interests of the regulated (registries and registrars) and the regulator (ICANN) have become one, at least in the minds of many. Is this what happens when a non-profit corporation, lacking proper oversight, transparency and accountability, becomes dominated by insiders and the special interests of the commercial, for-profit domain name industry it is supposed to be regulating and governing; when ICANN's Chief Strategy Officer (and architect of the new gTLDs program) resigns due to a conflict of interest (the particulars of which were never disclosed to the global multistakeholder community), and then becomes the Executive Director of the Domain Name Association, a lobbying group of that same for-profit domain name industry?

Is this why that same Domain Name Association has now jumped into the middle of ICANN's new gTLD auction process, to grab the money for itself and "marketing?"-- Domain Name Association: "The proceeds will be distributed as follows: First: Fees for the auction provider will be paid. Second: Disbursements, if any, will be made to auction participants. Third: Optional membership fees in the DNA will be paid. All remaining proceeds will go to the DNA. The auction winner will determine how those proceeds are allocated between funding TLD marketing and awareness campaigns and funding other DNA industry development efforts."

Sounds like ICANN should just shut down and turn everything over to DNA -- the Domain Name Association! Or more likely, ICANN will just contract with the DNA to perform all of ICANN's functions! 

I think it is now clear why the public interest was so disregarded in ICANN's new gTLDs program--

“'The public at large, consumers and businesses, would be better served by no expansion or less expansion' of domains" said Jon Leibowitz, former chairman of the US Federal Trade Commission in the New York Times."

"I really can’t see a legitimate upside where new benefits [of the new gTLDS] outweigh costs, and everyone I mention this to feels the same way. People just shake their heads. It’s all about the money. They [ICANN] are creating these extensions because they can." University of Pennsylvania Wharton School marketing professor Peter Fader, co-director of the Wharton Customer Analytics Initiative. (source: Knowledge@Wharton, emphasis added)

Esther Dyson On New Top-Level Domains: “There Are Huge Trademark Issues” | TechCrunch: "... we are not running out of domains. This is a “way for registries and registrars to make money,” says Dyson. She also points out that “there are huge trademark issues. I just think it is offensive... It will create a lot of litigation.”" [see: Esther Dyson Told ICANN new gTLDs were a mistake in 2011 (video)]

Tim Berners-Lee: "....when a decision is taken about a possible new top-level domain, ICANN's job is to work out, in a transparent and accountable manner, whether it is really in the best interest of the world as a whole, not just of those launching the new domain. It also means that ICANN's use of the funds should be spent in a beneficent way...."

Memo to ICANN: money spent on "marketing new gTLDs" is NOT a "beneficent way."





Domain Mondo archive