THE Trade Show for VoIP

VON is coming up (March 7-10, San Jose
CA). This is THE show for VoIP. I’ll probably make a last minute decision
whether or not to go. There’s also a Fall VON in the East Coast, but I
think the West Coast show will be better than the East Coast show simply
because it is in THE Valley.

A serious error in the CICT Guidelines

Lawrence’s story appears here.

I’m a bit disappointed that Computerworld seems to have gotten a key point wrong:

DotPH was previously given until Jan. 15 to decide whether it will continue to be the administrator of the PH country code top-level domain name or limit its functions to just that of a registry. As registry, DotPH will become the central repository of PH domain names.

Despite a week’s extension after the Jan.15 deadline lapsed, DotPH has yet to officially communicate its decision to the Commission on Information and Communication Technology (CICT).

Actually, the guidelines are very confusing, and perhaps that’s one reason why Lawrence has gotten this point wrong. This is how this key provision is actually written in the guidelines (Article XII, Section 2):

Within 3 months [..] the incumbent Administrator should formally notify the CICT whether it will act as an Administrator or Registrar, but not both. It shall also submit to the CICT a plan to divest itself of either the operations of Registry or its Registrar operations.

The Administrator is defined in Article I of the Guidelines as:
the duly incorporated or organized entity that manages the ccTLD Registry, which the CICT has previously designated as such, and which ICANN has chosen to be the delegee for the ccTLD on behalf of the local and global Internet Community.

So let’s take it step by step. Who are the Guidelines defining as the Administrator?

Is it DotPH? Let’s see. What entity manages the Registry? It’s DotPH. Ok, has CICT previously designated DotPH as such? No. Uh-oh. Now who has ICANN chosen as the delegee? Without a doubt, it’s PHDF as designated here.

So at this point - it’s unclear whom the Guidelines are referring to as the Administrator. Is it DotPH or PHDF? Technically, one could conclude at this point that the Guidelines are unworkable. But let’s assume it’s PHDF, as ICANN refers to it as the “administrative contact” for the ccTLD.

PHDF now has to submit a plan to the CICT to divest itself of the operations of the Registry or Registrar. Ok - that’s easy, because PHDF has never had any equity in DotPH, and has never operated as a Registrar or Registry!

So is that it? Are we done? Have we complied with the Guidelines, since the Administrator has already divested itself of its Registrar and Registry operations?

According to Mr. Pena - No! (No surprise there). Because for Mr. Pena to allow this, would be to admit that the Guidelines have a critical - if not fatal - defect.

This is what I’ve been referring to when I say that the Guidelines are impossible to comply with in my letter to Computerworld and Inquirer. I’ve said as much to Ver Pena in a phone conversation, on this blog, in a letter to the Inqurier, and in a second letter to ComputerWorld. So it’s a bit puzzling to me when I hear Mr. Pena continuing to say that we have yet to communicate our decision to the CICT.

Already, I can see Mr. Pena distancing himself from this mess by passing the buck to Dondi Mapa, and continuing to claim that DotPH has yet to reply as to its “choice”. The only way out of this, and I mean this in all sincerity - is for the Mr. Pena to step back and think first about what it is he is trying to accomplish. Are you trying to lower the retail price of domains? Are there any DotPH policies you would like to change? What are your concerns? What problems are you trying to fix?

I know this sounds like a broken record [1][2][3][4][5], but surely you must have some REAL problems with the way the PH Domain is run, otherwise you would not have bothered writing the Guidelines, yes? If so, then let’s have it - and let’s start working on fixing these problems. And if you don’t - then please simply ask the general public - “who here has problems with DotPH? Let them speak out now - or forever hold their peace”. It’s really that simple.

letter to ComputerWorld Philippines

Here’s a letter I sent to Lawerence Casiraya of Computerworld Philippines. It’s a reaction to a CICT statement - that essentially says

1) that Govt will redelegate PH (eg - take control of the PH Domain)
2) CICT Commissioner Ver Pena justifies his reasons for the Guidelines - to make the PH Domain more efficient and independent.
3) Just in case the Government is unable to redelegate - he’s creating a Technical Working Group to discuss the implementation of the Guidelines with DotPH.

(3) is an interesting admission, I might add, because I believe Mr. Pena was operating under the assumption that he could redelegate PH at will - hence the guidelines were created in relative secrecy (we weren’t invited to meet with the Advisory Board), and the guidelines have ended been pretty much one-sided .

Hopefully we’ll be seeing a thaw in these hardline positions?

=====

Regarding the CICT statement:

I’m glad that Mr. Pena has finally given us his justification for taking control of the Domain Registry - he says it is for an efficient and independent administration of the .PH domain. Well, we’re all for efficiency and independence! For well over a year we have been asking Secretary Pena to identify problems so that we can work together to fix them . Instead of answering, his response has been to impose these Guidelines. It is difficult to understand how Mr. Pena intends to make our operations more efficient if he can’t identify where the inefficiency is in the first place. Perhaps he would care to elaborate?

And the Guidelines actually make the administration of the PH domain completely dependent on the government. Mr. Pena insists on having the right to create new guidelines at will. This will kill the PH domain’s ability to compete against foreign domains like COM, NET and INFO. There will be no incentive to develop technology and infrastructure, or do any long-term planning, when the franchise can be arbitrarily terminated — as Secretary Pena is attempting to do right now.

We’ve invested a lot of time and energy in making the PH domain easy to register, manage and use. Our systems are world-class. Technology which we developed for the local market is currently being used with great success in New Zealand and will soon be exported to other countries as well. We were one of the first countries in the world to introduce a Shared Registry System. We have well over 200 Registrars - almost as many as ICANN has accredited. We were one of the first countries to initiate a dispute resolution system. Its hard to see how the government could improve on what we’re doing, but we are willing to work with them. The thing though is to first identify the areas that need improvement. Then can we work together on possible solutions.

>Like I was asking you, did Joel (or DotPH for that matter) issue a
>decision about the matter? From how i understand, based on the guidelines,
>you have to choose between remaining as “administrator” or becoming a
>”registry”.

There is a serious problem with the “choice” that is being forced on us. The Administrator is neither the Registry nor the Registrar. It never has been, and never will be! The “choice” is based on wrong information and is indicative of how seriously flawed the Guidelines are. For Mr. Pena to keep insisting that we make a “choice”, despite the fact that such a choice is impossible, is a dangerous sign of inflexibility.

The Guidelines also have onerous provisions that make them completely one-sided. For example, the government can impose new rules at any point in the future (Guidelines Art. XI, Sec. 6 and Art. XIII, Sec. 4). Whoever heard of an agreement where one party can change the terms at will, and the other has no choice but to accept? Also, any doubts about the interpretation of the Guidelines are immediately resolved in favor of the government (see Guidelines Art XIII, Sec. 1). It’s not what I would a fair agreement.

I think that the best way to proceed is for Mr. Pena to stop insisting that we agree to the Guidelines - seeing as how they are onerous and seriously flawed. If he can do this and just list the inefficiencies he wishes us to correct - then we can be well on our way to making the PH Domain as efficient as he envisions.

Ah - to be in the land of Tir na nOg!

When I see reports that the President is considering raising corporate tax rates, I can’t help but ask - what in the world is she thinking? This isn’t going to raise funds for the government; it may work in the short run, but certainly not in the long run. Big Business today - her real target - has no loyalty to the Philippines and can easily repatriate their profits and reorganize to minimize their tax liabilities.

Two years ago, if you picked up some Colgate toothpaste in your local supermarket, you would see a curious declaration (that went something like this):

Manufactured in Indonesia, by Colgate-Palmolive Indonesia
For Colgate Palmolive Headquarters in Hong Kong
Distributed by Colgate PalmOlive Philippines.

That’s strange. I thought to myself - why are they saying this? It seems to me like a declaration Colgate-Palmolive was making for the benefit of the tax authoritites. Here’s my analysis:

Hong Kong is the ideal place to set up a Global HQ. Corporate tax rates are only 17%, and most importantly - businesses are only taxed on local profits, and not on profits earned outside HK! What was happening here was that CP HQ was buying the toothpaste from CP Indonesia for a very cheap price, then selling it to CP Philippines for a very expensive price. The net result is that CP Philippines & Indonesia would declare a very modest profit (where tax rates are high) whereas CP Hong Kong would keep the profits in HK and thus pay no taxes on foreigh-sourced income! Brilliant!

(more…)

A really cool business Idea

Here’s an idea that’s been percolating in my head for the last 2 years. I was stunned to see my phone bill after a trip I made to Las Vegas some time ago. Included in the roaming bill were charges for unanswered incoming calls. People would call me at night (while I was sleeping), and I would be, of course, unable to answer those calls. Sometimes the calls would come in while i was at a trade show, where the noise would be so loud that i would be unable to hear the phone ringing. The net result was that I was charged about $3-$4 per unanswered call! Sometimes people (in Manila) would call me twice or thrice, not knowing that I was travelling.

Equally irritating was that calls made within the US would be charged at international rates, rather than at local rates. So rather than pay 25c/min for a local call, I’d be paying $2-$3 per minute for intra-state calls! So using a Globe or Smart mobile was useless. I was better off buying a local prepaid calling card for calls I made within the US (as well as calls to Manila).

The obvious solution - was to buy a US Carrier’s prepaid GSM SIM. But none was to be found at the airport, nor at the hotel, nor at the strip. So I thought - hey! wouldn’t it be a great idea to set up a website that sold International GSM SIMs to the public, and set up some online chat software for people to make inquiries about, as well as set up a US/European phone number for them to call?

(more…)

sukiing o shimasu!

The one thing I miss the most about living the US - I was based in California for almost ten years - is without a doubt - SKIING! In a few weeks, I get to hit the slopes after a 15 year hiatus. Ironically, the cheapest place to go skiing (if you’re based in Manila) is - drum roll please - Japan! Winter huts are availble for about $150/night in Sapporo (for a family of 4), with your own outdoor onsen. So I’ll get to see what that’s like - rolling in the snow in the buff then immersing oneself in a really hot spring! The plane tickets are cheaper too - than flying to NZ, Melbourne, or California.

Kudos to the Japanese Embassy for NOT charging a fee for a tourist visa. As far as I can recall, this is the only country I’ve ever applied for a VISA and have not had to pay a fee!

Wine-making in the Cordilleras

Lynn Madalang of EBGAN, a Bontoc-based NGO dedicated to helping the women and youth of the Cordillera, tells me that they are working on setting up a wine-making establishment somewhere near Sagada. They intend to make strawberry, raspberry, and blackberry wine, which retail for about P100/bottle in the markets along the Halsema highway. (She tells me that the raspberry wines are the best tasting). Lynn says that only 30% of all strawberries harvested - that is, only the good looking straweberries - make it to the markets of Baguio. The remaining 70% is either thrown away or used to make jam. The going rate for these “uglier” strawberries is about P10/kilo, and can be used to make 200 bottles of strawberry wine. That’s a potential P20T in sales for P10 in raw materials!

Lynn plans to set up a cooperative and is in need of project-funding as well as help in the packaging/distribution of the wine. Interested parties should contact her at <048ebgan@mozcom.com>. EBGAN’s phone number is 074 4470022.