ICANN posts Economic Studies justifying new gTLDs & stating Price Caps unnecessary

[gpmgroup]

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-04mar09-en.htm

http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/prelim-report-consumer-welfare-04mar09-en.pdf

V. CONCLUSION
52. The benefits of free entry are well-recognized and the introduction of new gTLDs is likely to benefit consumers by subjecting .com and other gTLDs to increased competition, widening choice available to consumers, and facilitating innovation. At the same time, claims that the introduction of new gTLDs will necessitate widespread defensive registrations appear to be exaggerated and are inconsistent with the oft-noted observation that there have been a limited number of registrations on gTLDs introduced in recent years. Existing legal framework and ICANN-established procedures provide mechanisms for protecting trademarks and addressing concerns about consumer confusion. If necessary, various additional mechanisms could be created by ICANN to protect against abuse of existing trademarks.

53. Together, these factors imply that consumer welfare is likely to be harmed if the deployment of gTLDs is restricted or delayed by requiring ICANN or others to provide an affirmative justification to permit entry. Placing such a burden on ICANN or other parties is inconsistent with the general approach to antitrust policy in a wide variety of industries.

http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/prelim-report-registry-price-caps-04mar09-en.pdf

“I conclude that price caps or ceilings on prices charged by operators of new gTLD registries are unnecessary to insure competitive benefits of the proposed process for introducing new gTLDs. I further conclude that imposing price caps on the registries for new gTLDs could inhibit the development and marketplace acceptance of new gTLDs by limiting the pricing flexibility of entrants to the provision of new registry services without generating significant benefits to registrants of the new gTLDs.”