Anyname Domain Services

The last couple of months have seen the public airing of a number of polarised viewpoints regarding the current governance of Nominet, the perceived grasp at control by a subset of the membership, vague and fluffy commitments to the wider stakehholder community, and the future role of Nominet in the UK namespace.

At real risk are Nominet, the independent not-for-profit governing body of the UK namespace, of losing their independent status to the BBER, at a critical time in the UK economy where beurocratic influence in many formerly independent sectors is a present and current danger.

The current crisis is symptomatic of bigger issues: how can the ‘whole stakeholder community’ be fairly represented, and not just the ‘wider stakeholder community? What future role does Nominet see itself in an ever changing and fast moving internet where opportunities in the global market have to be acted upon in the best interests of the global/UK internet sector. Are Nominet in its current form able to act as a regulator – and should it? And what changes are needed for greater stability?

I suppose I, like a significant proportion of Nominet members, have a lot invested in the UK namespace – both in a personal and business sense, to be at all comfortable with the current climate. That doesn’t mean that I or anyone else involved in the domain industry wants ‘control’ of Nominet, just to be heard.

The recent Guardian article is misleading and misses the important points totally. To say that the major viewpoint of those seeking ‘control’ is a slashing of the prices of domains, whereas others don’t, is totally wrong. It’s not something I, or anyone I know, really considers to be a major part of the discussion – it’s a minor one voiced by certain resistrars. The central issue of this whole dispute revolves around the perceived erosion of the business model of a sector of the membership, which also happens to be the most active and vociferous, and though others won’t admit it, are a sector of the membership also committed to a health, vibrant and global UK namespace – where the secondary market, like in other gTLD & ccTLDs’ plays a small but important part of it.

Maybe the results of the last elections – for the non-exec board, and PAB, were a cry in the wilderness, but that would be a disservice to the abilities of those elected to do a profefessional – and impartial – job. The same goes for the current elected members of the PAB, who I know are cabable members with the interests of a healthy UK namespace at heart.

Maybe they were just the concerned voices of a select few domain industry professionals, but also indicitive of voting apathy amongst the general membership – not unique to this area, and an indication of some deep-rooted issues.

Only a subset of the members have been called domainers, because they are actively involved in the resale & secondary market. But in reality that too loose a definition.

It’s a term I don’t particularly like. I prefer Internet Professional. Domain names are a significant part of that, and monetisation of them an important part; it’s a distinction I don’t make. A ‘domainer’ is anyone monetising domain names:
– if you are a registrar selling domain names, you are a domainer.
– if you are an ISP also acting as a host/registrar, you are a domainer.
– if you actively sell/buy domains on the resale market, you are a domainer
– if you hold even just one domain with the intention of it being an investment, you are a domainer.
– if you have a website with even one advert or google ads on it, you are a domainer.
– if you use a domain in such a way as to increase the asset value of either the domain or the business associated with it, then you are a domainer

That may be all a bit too ‘Barack Obama – yes we can’. But just replace the sentiment with ‘Yes we are’. We essentially are one community with a wide range of entry points and view points. We’re all domainers in our own unique way.

I’ll freely admit, some active members of the ‘Nom-Steer Flaming Crew’ utterly piss me off. Their blatant arse licking is a tad annoying, and especially when asked to nail their flags to the mast they get just a bit too defensive and use the term ‘wider stakeholder responsibility’ as a paper-wall to hide behind, without really justifying their stance. It’s not the only thing that annoys me on Nom-steer, frequently the other end of the scale does too, as well as the circular arguments that do no-one any good, and their instigators. It’s just top of the list.

The failures of the system in a few notable cases is really what has instigated the current crisis. At the heart of that is the DRS, and it’s lack of accountability, including to an independant ombudsman.

I’ve been on one end of the DRS system – as the registrant being DRS’ed. Though succesful, and justly so, the whole process, was immensely time consuming and personally costly. Though the whole system has recently gone through a long review period some distinct issues with it remain:
1. The lack of accountability to an independant ombudsman / tribunal for cases of perceived injustice in the expert decision.
2. The lack of due diligence in acceptance of claims up front. The streamlining of the process for summary decisions was meant to ease the burden on the experts / drs system, but also raises the spectre of major injustices. It allows any chancer with a blatant ’smoke & mirrors’ claim to a domain to access the system at very little cost – it’s a no brainer! There is no initial panel to review the complaints and reject those without clear viable cause before passing to the DRS system. This would ease the burden on registrants – the majority of who have no legal background or understanding of basic IP law, of the time and financial costs of defending potentially spurious and damaging (to personal & businesses) claims.
3. Appeals are in the majority of cases – unless you are a big business – well out of the financial reach of the majority of normal registrants, and to keep this whole end process in-house and at this cost, is damaging to the perception of Nominet.

It has brought forward the important issues with IP at a time when general understanding and knowledge of the internet is rising exponentially, a realisation by businesses (& individuals) that they have missed the boat and someone else has the domain they want, and the distinct possibility for businesses that their livelyhoods can – and it has happened – be lost at the whim of an untimately fallable human being. Mistakes do and have happened.

Imagine if someone just walked upto your house, knocked on your door and said, ‘Hello, nice house, I want it, and I’m going to fill out a few forms and get it from you’. Or, a competitor in your market walking into your shop and telling you across the counter – ‘Nice shop, in a much better position than mine. Tell you what, I’ll just fill in these forms and get it from you’.

The possibility of losing assets, which may be the focal point for a business, both online & offline, that they have worked long and hard for, to some chancer with a ’smoke and mirrors’ claim is an all too real a possibility. Self-interest doesn’t just lie with the registrant, but with the complainant.

‘Back a lion into a corner, you can’t expect it to just sit there and roar’. Some others might like to use the term ‘rabid dog’. But the principle is the same. To a certain extent Nominet has been the purveyor of their own problems.

Sanity, and some respect from both sides, and to both sides, and a realisation that both are flip sides of the same coin with the same long term health of the .uk domain industry at heart is now esential.

‘If all of those with a responsibility do not get involved, we risk a serious downturn in confidence’- David Hendon. Involvement – That means every Nominet member. But where does that apathy come from? A look at voting block rights may give an indication, where the 3 largest uk registrars effectively hold 90% (est) of the voting rights between them, and any agreement between them, informal or coincidental, would negate the opinions of everyone else is not a healthy situation. Cartel, monopoly, call it what you will. Margaret Thatcher sorted this issue out with the unions in the early 80’s. Maybe it should be sorted out internally now, before the government gets involved again. Also the reasonind behing becoming a member and when is an issue. Maybe there should be though put into graded memberships, such as discounted-fee non-voting membership, voting membership, full membership. That’s for the PAB, board & Nominet to ponder.

‘Nominet has made a positive impact on the Internet community. It has a standing internationally that is almost without parallel. It is demonstrating to UK stakeholders that it can identify activities where it can promote best practice in the industry to the benefit of all stakeholders. The challenge now is to ensure that the governance of the company allows the company to maintain and develop its leadership role in relation to the Internet industry. I hope that this is not seen as a power struggle but as an opportunity for all stakeholders to reconsider what they want out of the company in terms of the core business and the wider promotion of the UK Internet industry. I hope that we can build on Nominet’s strengths and look forward to creating a firm foundation for an even greater positive impact going forward. I’ve met Lesley, and on the whole I think that Nominet are doing doing the significant task of guiding the UK namespace well. But ‘on the whole’ is a flimsy statement. ‘On the whole’ could as easily have been applied to the boards of the largest UK banks intil recently. That is not to say there is any parallel at all, but that governance is a fickle beast.

The last few years have seen a vast improvement in the infrastructure supporting the use and general knowledge of domains and the internet in general. Widespread broadband has enabled mass-communication, e- commerce, social networking, and access to information to be an everyday reality for all . Next-generation broadband is set to make this a reality for all who want it.

Transparency, commitment to the whole of the stakeholder community, not just the wider stakeholder community, and sensible and progresive governance are essential requirements. In any business 12 years is a long time. On the internet it is a lifetime.

The next few months are pivotal in the future of the UK namespace. It’s time to be supportive and not divisive.

S
20/11/2008