On predatory pricing by Verisign

[Ken Herman]

Thanks Julf. I got the irony, but appreciate the history, of which I was unaware. I was a customer of, originally, verisign when I first registered my domain in 1999, and then Network Solutions after the change. I have since shifted domains from NetSol due to high cost and reduced service quality.  

I wonder if there are any studies to validate that the gTLDs diluted the .com business. 

Many of the comments after the article indicate unawareness of the difference between a registry and a registrar. 

Ken

-----Original Message-----
From: NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> On Behalf Of Johan Helsingius
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2024 8:49 AM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: On predatory pricing by Verisign

Just to be clear, my question was both rhetorical and ironic. But for those who aren't aware of the early ICANN history, the idea of the new generic top level domains was to dilute the Network Solutions/Verisign historical monopoly on .com. It was also a lawsuit that forced Verisign to divest the Network Solutions retail domain name registrar business in 2003 (retaining the domain name registry function).

	Julf


On 25/11/2024 14:00, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> Ask Elizabeth Warren...
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> On 25-11-2024 03:54, Johan Helsingius wrote:
>> So you mean ICANN's solution of creating 1200+ new generic top-level 
>> domains didn't actually solve the problem? :)
>>
>>      Julf
>>
>> On 24/11/2024 22:25, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>>> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/11/elizabeth-warren-calls-
>>> for- crackdown-on-internet-monopoly-youve-never-heard-of
>>>
>>
>