dcrocker at imc.org
Fri Mar 21 05:39:06 UTC 1997
At 8:51 PM -0800 3/20/97, Karl Denninger wrote:
>McDonalds does not have a "monopoly". They have a *BRAND*. You like to use
>that word because it is emotionally charged and you get a "kick" from it
>when you use it.
I like to use it because it fits. When a consumer is locked into
dependency on a particular vendor and does not have freedom to change
vendors, that vendor is in a monopoly position.
The difference between buying hamburgers and buying domain names is
that you are free to buy your next hamburger from someone else. While one
might counter that one is also free to buy the next domain name from
someone else, it ignores the continuing dependency for names already
If the exclusive vendor of a name chooses to triple the fee next
year, the consumer is stuck. The cost of changing domain names, after
putting marketing collateral development and building up their own brand
equity in the domain name, is onerous.
Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253
Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205
127 Segre Place dcrocker at imc.org
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA http://www.imc.org
Also: IAHC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.iahc.org
More information about the NANOG