- comments-biz-renewal-03apr19@icann.org

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Page Suggestion
by Sarah Watts May 28, 2019

May 28, 2019

Hi, I am inquiring about whether you may be interested in linking to our site https://www.mathschase.com/ from your page? http://onlinedomain.com/2016/09/22/domain-name-news/games-got-3820-domain-r… Maths Chase is a completely free site where you can quickly test your times tables. The site is a very simple game but I think kids will find it a really fun way to learn their times tables. I wondering whether this could be a useful resource for your site readers? Thank you very much for your consideration. Kind Regards, Sarah Sarah Watts info(a)mathschase.com https://www.mathschase.com/

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (no subject)
by Richard Lanoszka May 23, 2019

May 23, 2019

It is disgraceful to promote self interest or .biz registry. Stop the .BIZ price increase and URS! I am a .biz registrant and I strongly oppose uncapped price increases in .biz domains and the introduction of URS. Shame on you ICANN for even suggesting a comment period for such despicable changes to the legacy extensions: .org (PIR), .biz (Neustar), .info (Afilias) and .asia (DotAsia Organisation Ltd. and Afilias). Richard Lanoszka Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comments of Intellectual Property Constituency re Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Brian Scarpelli May 15, 2019

May 15, 2019

On behalf of the GNSO Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC), please find attached IPC comments of regarding the proposed renewal of .biz Registry Agreement. The IPC stands ready to assist ICANN in any further ways possible moving forward. Best, Brian Scarpelli Senior Global Policy Counsel +1 517-507-1446<mailto:+1%20517-507-1446> | bscarpelli(a)actonline.org<mailto:bscarpelli@actonline.org> ACT | The App Association 1401 K St NW (Ste 501) Washington, DC 20005

1 1

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Domain price increases
by Michelle Wallace Hamilton May 15, 2019

May 15, 2019

Many domains are run by small business owners. They are using the web to reduce over head to compensate for the ever growing taxation and fees for running a business. Increasing domain prices cuts in to the income needed to support a household. Please do not increase domain prices. Regards, Michelle

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] INTA Comments
by Lori Schulman May 14, 2019

May 14, 2019

Attached please find INTA comments. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns. Lori Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association 1250 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 700 Washington DC, USA +1-202-704-0408, skype: lsschulman www.inta.org<http://www.inta.org/> [2019_AM_Boston_register (003)] Find us on: [Description: Description: Description: cid:F361C18F-02FE-4CF0-A43E-AA8566DC2514] Twitter<https://twitter.com/INTA> [Description: Description: LinkedIn] LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/groupInvitation?groupID=69899> [Description: Description: facebook-logo (2)] Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/GoINTA?ref=ts> [Description: Description: pnpb_sig.png]

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Opposing removal of pricing restrictions on dot biz domain names
by pub 144 May 14, 2019

May 14, 2019

Hello, I was terribly disappointed when I heard ICANN was considering removing price caps on dot biz domain names, as well as other legacy tld's. Millions of registrants - low-income individuals, mom-and-pop businesses - rely in their presence on the Internet for their livelihood. This presence, their domain name, is now jeopardized by potential price hikes related to the removal of price caps, which threatens to raise the price they pay for their Internet presence significantly. Dot biz domains - along with dot org, dot com, etc - have millions of registrants who are locked in to using these domains because they have invested their hard work and efforts into these domains. They cannot just pick up and go if they can't afford significant price hikes. If price restrictions are removed, these registries can raise their prices sky-high in theory by instituting premium pricing for premium domains. Nothing justifies the transfer of money from hard-working registrants to fatcat registries who simply provide a basic service that costs a minimal amount of money to provide. Please do not pump literally billions of dollars into these companies bank accounts. Registrants will suffer. The registries have a strong financial position and are solidly profitable as is. They enjoy a strong profit margin at current wholesale pricing levels. Raising prices significantly from here is unnecessary for the financial health of the registries and detrimental to average consumers who rely on fair and stable pricing of domains. Help protect small business people around the world and do not let one or two powerful entities suck up all the money from hardworking citizens who have built up the brand power of these tld's by putting their domains to work. Consumers around the world are watching these developments with fear as ICANN seems prepared to do whatever the registries want them to do, at the expense of registrants, who are just average people. Keep the internet affordable for them and say no to price hikes and removing pricing restrictions. Please do your part as an independent governing body to limit the nearly unchecked power of these entrenched near-monopolies. Consumers around the world need ICANN to look out for their interests too, not just the dot biz, dot org, dot com registries and others financial powerhouses. I oppose the removal of price restrictions on dot biz domains. Sincerely, Matthew Klein

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Business Constituency (BC) comment on Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Steve DelBianco May 14, 2019

May 14, 2019

Attached is the comment of ICANN’s Business Constituency (BC), regarding the Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement. This Comment was drafted by Steve DelBianco, Mark Datysgeld, and Andrew Mack. It was approved in accord with our Charter. -- Steve DelBianco Vice Chair for Policy Coordination ICANN Business Constituency (BC)

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Public Comment of Rabbi Shalom Arush, Head of the "Chut Shel Chessed" Institutions on Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Rubin International Law Firm and Notary May 14, 2019

May 14, 2019

May 13h 2019 ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA Public comment on the Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement Executive Summary Renewal of the .biz registry agreement with Registry Services, LLC should be assessed against the background of the Internet addiction global problem. According to academic research, Internet addiction disorder (IAD) results in personal, family, and occupational problems. Internet addiction can be decomposed into several subtypes of behavior and impulse control problems, namely, Debauchery, cyber-relationship addiction, net compulsions, information overload, compulsive web surfing or database searches and net gaming. Internet gaming has been classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a disease in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). There is a large correlation between addiction to online social networks and generalized Internet addiction. The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops that Facebook has created are destroying how society works and it is eroding the core foundations of how people behave by and between each other. Smartphones and the social media platforms they support are turning us into bona fide addicts. Platforms like Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram leverage the very same neural circuitry used by slot machines and cocaine to keep us using their products as much as possible. Internet Addiction Disorder (IAD) ruins lives by causing neurological complications, psychological disturbances, and social problems. Smartphone or Internet addiction can also negatively impact your life by increasing loneliness and depression, fueling anxiety, increasing stress, exacerbating attention deficit disorders, diminishing your ability to concentrate and think deeply or creatively, disturbing your sleep and encouraging self-absorption. The psychopathological overlap between IA, substance addiction and pathological gambling suggests a common neurobiological substrate, involving a dopamine dysfunction of the neural "reward systems". Debauchery destroys the brain. Lust and promiscuity, explains Nachman of Breslev, lead to a breakdown of logic, common sense and even insanity. The proof is that in this decadent age, so many people are in need of psychiatric medication, whereas millions suffer from anxiety and depression. All the people who are out of their minds, because they fell into the difficult disease of looking at women and all kinds of filthy movies on the Internet, on the iPhone, Facebook, etc., to the point of burning lust in real madness. Gambling is a terrible sickness, even more addictive than alcohol, tobacco and drugs. The lust for money is the root cause of gambling affliction, which not only drives a person insane, but makes him or her lose faith in the Creator, and truth and emuna in His Divine providence, Heaven forbid. The gambler is cruel to his family. The owners and operators of gambling parlors are outright murderers. ICANN, some ICANN-accredited registrars, some registry operators and some Domain Name Registrants are fostering Internet Addiction. Registry Services, LLC is fostering Internet addiction. Fostering Internet addiction is a disastrous violation of fundamental human rights and GAC Communiqué - Beijing, People's Republic of China. Fostering Internet addiction by ICANN, some ICANN-accredited registrars, some registry operators and some Domain Name registrants is a violation of applicable laws. Fostering Internet addiction is a violation of ICANN's Articles of Incorporation, Board of Directors' Code of Conduct, Governance Guidelines, Commitments, Core Values and By-Laws. In view of the above, we require ICANN to terminate immediately the activities fostering Internet addiction, including the performance of relevant IANA functions, relevant gTLD activities, relevant Registry Operators' activities, relevant ICANN-accredited registrars' activities, including through RESP and amendments of registry and registrar agreements and to refrain from renewing the .biz registry agreement with Registry Services, LLC unless Registry Services, LLC and its related companies terminate immediately activities fostering Internet addiction and the .biz registry agreement is amended to prohibit Internet addiction activities. Rabbi Shalom Arush Head of the "Chut Shel Chessed" Institutions For the full article, please see the attachment. -------- The Universal Garden of Emuna Author: Rabbi Shalom Arush The Universal Garden of Emuna What's the consolation in knowing that the world is full of strife when our personal lives are a never-ending saga of stress, worry, anxiety and challenges? Making a living today is like being a 21st Century gladiator. Family units are falling apart and marital bliss seems like a pipedream. People face child-education problems that they never imagined. What can a person do to maintain sanity? If sanity is such a struggle, who dares to dream of genuine happiness, fulfillment and true inner peace? You do. As soon as you open up the first page of the new Universal Garden of Emuna by internationally acclaimed best-selling author Shalom Arush, whose books have helped millions of people around the globe live better lives, you gain the master-key to life's locked doors, especially the doors to fulfilling your own personal potential. Far from flash-in-the-pan fad spirituality, the new non-denomenational Universal Garden of Emuna takes the reader by the hand along the proven path to satisfaction of the soul. By learning emuna - the pure and simple faith in the Creator - the reader learns how to cultivate an intimate personal relationship with the Creator. This book will quickly become your best friend, a book you'll want to read over and over! A complete and total life-changer! By world-renowned spiritual guide and bestselling author Shalom Arush, translated by Lazer Brody. Paperback, 406 information-packed pages, including an amazing new explanation of the Seven Noahide Commandments for all mankind. In English - <https://www.breslev.co.il/store/the_universal_garden_of_emuna/spirituality_ and_faith/books.aspx?id=16146&language=english> https://www.breslev.co.il/store/the_universal_garden_of_emuna/spirituality_a nd_faith/books.aspx?id=16146&language=english In French - <http://www.joie2vivre.org/produit/le-jardin-universel-de-la-foi/> http://www.joie2vivre.org/produit/le-jardin-universel-de-la-foi/ In Spanish - <https://www.breslev.co.il/store/en_el_jard%C3%ADn_de_la_fe_universal_gu%C3% ADa_pr%C3%A1ctica_de_vida_para_todo_ser_humano_en_espa%C3%B1ol/rabino_arush_ y_autoayuda/libros.aspx?id=23093&language=spanish> https://www.breslev.co.il/store/en_el_jard%C3%ADn_de_la_fe_universal_gu%C3%A Da_pr%C3%A1ctica_de_vida_para_todo_ser_humano_en_espa%C3%B1ol/rabino_arush_y _autoayuda/libros.aspx?id=23093&language=spanish Rubin International Law Firm and Notary 11 Avinoam Yelin Street Jerusalem Israel <https://cp85.box.co.il:2096/cpsess9959319546/horde/imp/dynamic.php?page=mes sage&buid=29&mailbox=SU5CT1guU2VudA&token=LFMj5G5zIPWSb4toEDU8LmX&uniq=15577 70818080> info(a)advrubin.com <https://cp85.box.co.il:2096/cpsess9959319546/horde/imp/dynamic.php?page=mes sage&buid=29&mailbox=SU5CT1guU2VudA&token=LFMj5G5zIPWSb4toEDU8LmX&uniq=15577 70818080> naftali.rubin(a)gmail.com +972-544-705-200

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price raise .biz inacceptable
by Peter Leuzinger May 14, 2019

May 14, 2019

Hello Icann On one site, the ngTLDs are dropping prices in order to sell more of the unnessary TLDs, and on the other site, .biz should not become more expensive. Our clients do not accept any higher price for a .biz domain name. Kind regards, Peter -- _________________________________________________________ Sicher sicher sein - Safe be safe global IP action AG, Bahnhofstrasse 3, CH-8808 Pfäffikon Peter Leuzinger, CEO *https://www.globalipaction.ch * M +41 79 660 86 35 T. +41 55 420 11 12 F. +41 55 420 11 13 E. p.leuzinger(a)globalipaction.ch Skype: peterleuzinger The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or the use of, or taking any action in reliance upon this information by person or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from the computer. global IP action AG and its partners reserve the right to retain, intercept and monitor any e-mail communication through its networks if legally allowed.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Removal of price caps for .biz
by Paul Shaw May 14, 2019

May 14, 2019

I oppose the removal of piece caps for the .biz extension. This would be a burden for registrants who could potentially face large price increase. The cost of shifting to a new extension would be very high in terms of of lost search engine rankings, changes to letterheads and logos, lost emails and confused customers. Registrants deserve to be protected from these large price changes as it is not the terms under which they registered these domains.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Dot BIZ
by D. D. May 13, 2019

May 13, 2019

Hello, I oppose the fact that ICANN wants to remove price caps for .biz domains. Because price increases decrease the possibility of buying domains for those who live in poor countries, for example. Your action stops both the domain and the Internet industry as a whole. Such actions are discriminatory and inadequate. Raising domain prices unambiguously is biased. I'm ashamed of you. Regards, Darius Davainis, Marius Davainis Tomas Davainis

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Karen Allen May 13, 2019

May 13, 2019

Removing the price ceiling from a domain opens it up to increases that could eliminate the possibility for anyone to get an affordable domain. This case is similar to what’s happening in the battle of Net Neutrality. The concept of the internet makes it a level playing field for many who do not have the resources to compete in the market place physically. The people want internet that is accessible to ALL. Let’s maintain the opportunities for EVERYONE to contribute to the knowledge and services of mankind and benefit from the diversity from which it came. KEEP THE PRICE CEILING IN-TACT. Thank you.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Stop the .BIZ price increase and URS!
by Konstantinos Zournas May 13, 2019

May 13, 2019

Stop the .BIZ price increase and URS! I am a .biz registrant and I strongly oppose uncapped price increases in .biz domains and the introduction of URS. Shame on you ICANN for even suggesting a comment period for such despicable changes to the legacy extensions: .org (PIR), .biz (Neustar), .info (Afilias) and .asia (DotAsia Organisation Ltd. and Afilias). How does ICANN justifies these huge price increases on domain names that cost less than $1 to maintain and operate? Shame and disgust on the privileged registries that have made millions over the past few years from us all. Us all the domain name registrants that come from all over the world. "Legacy" TLDs, such as .org .net .com .biz .info and .asia, have absolutely nothing in common with all new gTLDs. Legacy extensions were created 15 to 30 years before the new gtlds and are essentially a monopoly on the internet. All 1000+ new gtlds represent less than 5% of all domains. The 10+ legacy tlds have the other 95% of the market share. Neustar, PIR and Afilias did not create these extensions as it happened with the New gTLDs and they certainly did not or currently have any competition. New gTLDs companies paid millions in auctions to get the rights of these extensions. What would happen if the legacy TLDs were put up for auction with today’s capped price increases? Other companies would pay millions to have the privilege of being one of the respective extension operator. Popular New gtld extensions were auctioned of for millions while the legacy extensions were simply awarded to be operated by the respective registries. Verisign paid $135 million for the rights of .web domains. How much do you think the .com registry would be auctioned today? Even if .com prices were set at $3 or $5 the high bidder registry would probably end up paying billions. These legacy extensions were NOT created by Neustar, PIR, Afilias or Verisign. The extensions existed before these companies and will exist after these companies. These are not their extensions. They are our extensions. And by our I am talking about the registrants around the world. And some people in the US this they own the extensions. They don’t. The legacy extensions belong to the whole world. ICANN should stop catering to the big registries and pay more attention to protect the owners of .biz domain names. The registries have made billions of dollars over the past 20 years. The registries are already operating a ridiculously high profit margin (65%-70% or even higher) that are not met in any other industry. The Verisign .com monopoly reported last week a huge operating margin that was 65.4 percent for the first quarter of 2019. Instead of being grateful for this gift that it is being given all the legacy registries are asking for domain name price increases. It is time that all legacy contracts are put up for grabs for a more competitive prices. The .com extension can be operated for maybe $2 or $3 per domain and companies would pay millions to have the privilege to operate the extension at this level. Same with .asia domains. Companies would easily pay a couple of billion to operate the .com at $5 per domain for the next 6 years. Or they could easily pay 500 million to operate the .com registry at $3 per domain for the next 6 years. Yet ICANN strangely allows this Verisign, Afilias, PIR and Neustar greed and arrogance. It makes you think what "organization" ICANN has become over the past few years... Instead of price increases with should be having price decreases on all legacy extensions including .biz domains. New domain extensions charge any price they want and they have been a disaster so far. Registries are suddenly increasing registration and renewal fees of up to 3,000%!!!! Lots of people are complaining because of this and this has already been very bad for the domain name industry’s reputation. .BIz has the right to raise prices 10% every year that already too much and well above the current inflation. Allowing huge price increases from one year to the next could ruin .biz for everybody. The .biz registry or any other legacy extension operator must not be allowed to raise prices are they wish. These domain names belong to the whole world and not just these 4-5 registry companies. They are only paid to be the administrative operator and nothing more. And the current price is well above what the current price for a new gtld backend is. New gtlds backend registries are charging $1 per domain or less. These are companies like Afilias, PIR and Neustar that are now getting paid $10+ from us the world domain name registrants and yet they want a lot more. And ICANN is surprisingly willing to give them whatever they want instead of doing their job that is to protect the registrants. Increasing .biza and other legacy tld prices will be a disaster. What happens if prices go to $100 per domain or $1,000 per domain? This is about the whole effect this will have on the global. How is such a huge price increase justified? An increase of all legacy domains (lets say about 200 million of legacy domains) from $10 to $100 per year would mean that an extra 180 BILLION dollars will go to just 4 companies over the next 10 years. 4 US companies. How is this justified? All these domain name registrants now pay about 20 billion over 10 years. They will have to pay 200 BILLION dollars at $100!!! Or 2 trillion at $1,000 per domain! Greece's gross domestic product is about 200 billion per year. We would love to take over these extensions and run a few servers around the world. This is free money. Companies have already paid for the rights of their .biz, .org, .info or .com domains. Any price increase would effectively mean that Neustar, Afilias, Verisign or PIR would cease our domains and make us pay rent on them. This is domain name confiscation!!! Before you know it your company or personal .biz domain will cost $200 or $3,000 per year or $10,000 per year depending on what Neustar decides that you have to pay them depending on the domain name. They will essentially confiscate our domains (that we either bought years ago or even paid thousands or millions to purchase) and make us pay them rent on them. At this point new gtld prices are held down because of the capped legacy TLDs prices. If legacy domain prices get to $200 per domain per year then all domains will cost $200 or more. Or $1,000 or more. There is little competition in all domain names as Neustar, Verisign, PIR and Afilias are basically monopolies. They have a 95% market share. It only takes these 4 companies and soon all domain names could cost $200 or $500 or more. Practically these large companies are attempting to steal all our land and homes and rent them back to us. Domain names are our land and homes on the internet. This attempt is only possible with the help of ICANN and their executives that hide behind a non-profit organization while making millions in salaries and while NOT protecting the domain name registrants. We are now paying an administrative fee to these companies. An administrative is pretty much set in competitive world. New gtlds are paying $1 or less per domain. But there is no competition in these registries. They are essentially monopolies that will be able to charge us whatever they want if ICANN allows them to have no price caps. Anything above $2 or $3 per year is already too expensive for the backend registries that Verisign, PIR, Afilias and Neustar truly are. Finally .BIZ domains don’t need the URS. There have been a lot of bad decisions under the UDRP from the unregulated UDRP providers. The URS is even worse. Konstantinos Zournas

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] No to price increases
by HOSTMASTER WEB May 9, 2019

May 9, 2019

WHOIS PRIVACY, operator of the .LGBTR.COM domain registration for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Resources or Races, is publicly exposed to comment. Everyone knows that ICANN is adopting malicious practices against society and dangerous behavior with the sole purpose of generating huge profits for the board and its employees. Removing the price cap on heirloom gTLDs or gTLDs created in the 2000s is a way for ICANN to be able to earn more and satisfy the egos of its directors and employees. ICANN Officers, like most of their staff, want to have money from domain registrants. We can not allow ICANN to decide on matters of public interest. The ideal is the separation of ISOC and ICANN. www.whoisprivacy.lgbtr.com tld-admin-poc(a)whoisprivacy.lgbtr.com <tld-admin-poc(a)whoisprivacy.lgbtr.com>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do Not Uncap .Biz Pricing
by Max Menius May 8, 2019

May 8, 2019

The case for maintaining regulated pricing on .biz renewals is obvious, and goes straight to the basic concept of fairness. The registry and ICANN both know that many thousands of businesses rely on a predictable price structure. A company’s brand and livelihood are inextricably connected to their adopted domain name. Switching from historical capped pricing to “unregulated pricing" is the equivalent of deliberately exploiting tragedy for personal gain, i.e. raising the price of a bottle of water 20x following flood or natural disaster. You can do it, but it makes you an unconscionable exploiter of human tragedy. The real issue here is whether those in control of ICANN (and the registry) have a conscience, and are willing to make intelligent, fair decisions that honor existing stakeholders. Max Menius May 8, 2019

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comment re .BIZ registry renewal from John Poole, DomainMondo.com
by John Poole May 6, 2019

May 6, 2019

Comment re .BIZ registry renewal from John Poole, DomainMondo.com is attached (pdf) and also below: Re: Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement I am a gTLD domain names registrant, and* oppose* the proposed *.BIZ* renewal registry agreement, as I have also opposed the currently pending proposals for generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs)* .ORG, .INFO, .ASIA.* *Reasons for opposition:* *1.* All of those reasons set out in the comment submitted by Zak Muscovitch on behalf of the Internet Commerce Association (ICA) <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-biz-renewal-03apr19/2019q2/000166.h…> (of which I am NOT a member), as if fully set out herein, and with which I fully concur. In accordance with ICANN’s own bylaws, it is simply wrong and inappropriate for ICANN org management and staff on its own, to “make policy” in regard to legacy gTLDs, such as .BIZ, by deleting all pricing controls and allowing unlimited price gouging by registry operators, and applying RPM and other policies specifically adopted for new gTLDs, but *not* other gTLDs, especially when those same RPMs and policies are currently under review for further revisions by the “ICANN community.” ICANN org ALWAYS fails to represent the interests of domain name registrants (which indicates ICANN is a *domain-name-industry-captured-organization*), and its process for ALL gTLD registry renewals needs a complete overhaul in conformance with advice from the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3zjyRMTBSc7UzViS0stOWhQR3c/view?usp=shari…> discussed further below, attached to this letter from NTIA <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/baker-to-dengate-thrush-18dec08…> to ICANN. In addition I concur with EFF’s .ORG comment <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-org-renewal-18mar19/2019q2/003200.h…> as also *applicable to ALL gTLDs*, as if fully set out herein, *and* the following which is also *applicable to ALL gTLDs *(emphasis added): The economics of domain name prices-- https://domainnamewire.com/2019/04/29/the-economics-of-domain-name-prices/ : “… *high switching costs* make domain owners hostages to the registries that operate their domains. They simply have to pay whatever they are charged. The cost to switch is too much. For this reason, *renewal costs must be capped*. *How domain registration and renewal costs should be managed*--*Some* top level domains have *market power* at the *time of registration*. *All top level domains have tremendous power over registrants at the time of renewal*. For this reason, ICANN should consider *capping initial registry fees* for top level domains that have some level of *market power, such as .com and .org*. It should *limit prices on all domains at the time of renewal*. The organization [ICANN] has stated that registrants have some protection because they can renew domains for up to ten years at current prices before price hikes take effect. There are two problems with this. First, the registries must notify the registrars of the price increase. It’s up to the registrars to notify customers. Busy customers might overlook these notices or not have the cash to renew for ten years today. Second, and most importantly, this just kicks the can down the road. *What does a company do ten years from now when it has to pay the new rates*?” *2.* Those reasons set out in *my comment* <https://drive.google.com/file/d/12s-uHjxXhe2JyjtKdKmdddUKiqrQTmdL/view?usp=…> submitted in regard to *.ORG*, and blog post *News Review 1) ICANN Org Policy-Making Trashes Legacy gTLD .ORG* <https://www.domainmondo.com/2019/03/news-review-1-icann-org-policy-making.h…> , applicable to .BIZ, as if fully set out herein, as well as the aforesaid DOJ Antitrust Division advice <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3zjyRMTBSc7UzViS0stOWhQR3c/view?usp=shari…> which states: *“ICANN’s approach to TLD management demonstrates that it has adopted an ineffective approach with respect to its obligation to promote competition at the registry level.”* (p.8) The *“proposed registry agreement should include provisions that would enable ICANN to constrain … registry operators from exercising market power. In particular, ICANN should establish competitive mechanisms for … renewals of gTLD registry agreements whereby prospective gTLD operators would compete for gTLDs by proposing registry terms – including maximum fee schedules – that would provide consumer benefits.*” (p. 2) (emphasis added) “ICANN’s request for bids should expressly call for bids to specify an *initial maximum price* that would be charged by the operator for *domain registrations*, as well as *limitations on price increases over time*.” (p.7) “… *ICANN *should require competitive bidding for* renewals of a gTLD registry agreement, *rather than granting the incumbent operator a perpetual right to renew without competition. Such a mechanism would both assist in disciplining the conduct of the incumbent during the initial term insofar as the incumbent would want to maximize the likelihood of renewal, and ensure the benefits of competition when potential operators bid for the right to operate the gTLD in the renewal term … *Experience with the .net TLD and other gTLDs has shown* that … *periodic rebidding has served as an effective tool* for *managing the interests of registrants* in *gTLDs*. Indeed, *competitive bidding has resulted in lower domain prices* and higher operating specifications than what ICANN has achieved through non-competitive negotiations. In particular, *competitive bidding* prompts bidders to propose and accept registry improvements, higher operating standards, and *lower registration fees* to win the contract.” (pp.7-8) *3. The Registry Operator Does Not Own .BIZ—top level domains do not constitute property--see* U.S. government’s Amicus Curiae brief filed 29 Dec 2015 in Weinstein vs IRAN <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/litigation-haim-et-al-us-brief-…> (US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, USCA Case #14-7193), at page 20 of 32: “To the contrary, a foundational 1994 Internet governance policy statement, *still regarded by the Internet community as authoritative*, explicitly rejects efforts to assert property rights in such domains: “Concerns about ‘rights’ * * * are inappropriate. It is appropriate to be concerned about ‘responsibilities’ and ‘service’ to the community.” See RFC 1591 <https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1591.txt>, DNS Structure and Delegation 4-5 (Mar. 1994).” (emphasis and link added) Respectfully submitted, John Poole, gTLD domain name registrant, and *editor,* DomainMondo.com <https://www.domainmondo.com/2019/04/news-review-1-org-comments-2-when-to.ht…> cc: U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division; Federal Trade Commission (FTC); NTIA (David Redl); European Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager; European Commission Directorate-General for Competition For the attention of the Antitrust Registry; European Data Protection Supervisor Giovanni Buttarelli; ICANN Board Chair Cherine Chalaby.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] price capping .BIZ
by RGEFFKEN May 5, 2019

May 5, 2019

I am strongly opposed to the proposed removal of price capping. Removing price capping is likely to result in many valuable resources being forced off-line or to alternate platforms (think IG etc) by unregulated price increases. I would urge you, therefore, to not remove price capping. R. Geffken

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comments on .biz changes
by ds May 4, 2019

May 4, 2019

**I am writing to express my deep concern with allowing the Public Interest Registry (PIR) set prices for domains without the price caps currently in place. Removing price caps on all .org, .info, and .biz top level domains will allow the PIR to set any price it wants, which will almost certainly cause prices to spike, making web domains unaffordable, and costing companies and organizations money that they would use to grow their businesses. At its most basic sense, high domain prices will hurt business, and since 80% of all employees in the US (and a higher percentage in the rest of the world) work for small businesses, raising prices will directly impact the US and world economies. Please leave the price caps in place. 10% annual growth, as governed by the caps, is still 3x the average inflation rate, so it's not like the domain wholesalers are losing money. Thank you for your consideration to this comment. Regards, DS

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Opposal to Domain Price Increases
by Cristina gil May 3, 2019

May 3, 2019

I write to oppose the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs as doing so will only create a free-for-all on limitless price increases across the well-established board. The new GTLDs are already accepted as alternative options with price expectations that vary greatly based on the registry; however, current registrants of older well established extensions are expected to maintain some level of stability. These legacy domain names, some of which have been registered for many years, are unlike the new mess being created and owners of these legacy names have a reasonable expectation of affordability and stability. The old manta goes ‘if it is not broken, you do not try and fix it.’ The vast majority of domain owners will remain unaffected so long as the fluctuating and exorbitant prices remain in the newer name space; there will be plenty of years ahead for ICANN to benefit from those while allowing stability within the legacy name space. Leave well enough alone and move forward without effecting millions and millions of current and well established registrants who expect their domain expenses to remain reasonable, affordable and stable. Enviado desde Correo para Windows 10 --- El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comments of Leap of Faith Financial Services Inc. opposing proposed .org, .info, .biz and .asia contract renewals
by George Kirikos May 3, 2019

May 3, 2019

Submitted by: George Kirikos Company: Leap of Faith Financial Services Inc. Website: http://www.leap.com/ Date: April 29, 2019 We write to oppose the proposed contract renewals posted by ICANN for the .org, .info, .biz and .asia contracts, as posted for public comments at: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/org-renewal-2019-03-18-en https://www.icann.org/public-comments/info-renewal-2019-03-18-en https://www.icann.org/public-comments/biz-renewal-2019-04-03-en https://www.icann.org/public-comments/asia-renewal-2019-03-27-en While our arguments are focused on the .org TLD, to the extent that the contractual terms are similar for the other TLDs, we repeat the same comments for .info, .biz and .org. Indeed, while the majority of the thousands of public comments to date have focused on .org, ICANN should read those comments as also applying to .info, .biz and .org, even if the submitters did not explicitly submit their comments to all 4 email addresses. 1. We support and endorse the great groundswell of opposition as expressed in the thousands of thoughtful public comments opposed to these proposed agreements. It is shocking that ICANN did not learn its lesson from 2006, when similar massive opposition existed for comparable contracts which would have allowed for unlimited fee increases: https://forum.icann.org/lists/org-tld-agreement/ The proposed contracts are simply unconscionable, and ICANN should instead simply extend the existing contracts by another 6 or 10 years, rather than make any other changes. 2. Within the At-Large, we had a video discussion/debate, archived at: https://freespeech.com/2019/04/10/impact-of-the-urs-and-unlimited-fee-incre… https://youtu.be/KW3I1oFGbv0 where many of the points below are discussed, and I include them here by reference. 3. We particularly agree with the comments and/or blogs submitted/posted by: a) Nat Cohen / Telepathy: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-org-renewal-18mar19/2019q2/003067.h… http://www.circleid.com/posts/20190423_spurious_justifications_for_eliminat… b) NameCheap: https://www.namecheap.com/blog/keep-domain-prices-in-check/ c) Zak Muscovitch / Internet Commerce Association: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-org-renewal-18mar19/2019q2/000006.h… d) Jay Chapman / Digimedia: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-org-renewal-18mar19/2019q2/002967.h… e) Andrew Allemann: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-org-renewal-18mar19/2019q2/003091.h… 4. It should be noted that in the past ICANN trumpeted lower fees as one of its main achievements. For example, the testimony of ICANN General Counsel and Secretary John Jeffrey at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-109hhrg30233/html/CHRG-109hhrg3023… "STATEMENT OF JOHN JEFFREY, INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS (ICANN) ... Among ICANN's main achievements are the following: ... Market competition. Market competition for generic top-level domain registrations established by ICANN has ****lowered domain name cost in some instances as much as 80 percent with savings for both consumers and businesses.****" (emphasis added) It is not consistent with those past statements for ICANN to abrogate its responsibilities, and permit unlimited fee increases by registry operators. Unlimited fee increases are not in the public interest, and do not even attempt to balance the needs of registrants against those of registry operators. ICANN was handed a responsibility to balance the interest of affected stakeholders when it achieved (against our wishes) independence from US government oversight, and it's now clear that it is not living up to those commitments given such one-sided contracts that have been presented here for public comment. Unlimited fee increases are not balanced, and do not promote stability of the internet or competition. ICANN is engaging in corporate welfare and/or crony capitalism through such anti-competitive proposals as are here before us. 5. As has been pointed out by others, under competition the cost of providing registry services (really just the management of a central database plus the operation of various nameservers) would be under USD $1.00 per domain name per year. This is evidenced by the .IN (India) tender, where Neustar beat Afilias with a winning bid of USD $0.70 per domain name per year (70 cents/domain/yr): http://domainincite.com/23364-afilias-sues-india-to-block-12-million-neusta… A similar competitive tender process happened in France: https://www.thedomains.com/2012/08/07/afnic-awarded-new-contract-to-run-fr-… where AFNIC had to lower the wholesale fees for .FR domain names, and the contract was for 5 years. Similar competitions are held for the .US ccTLD: https://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/ntiahome/press/2007/Neustar_101907.html You'll note that registry operators do not have presumptive renewal in those ccTLD contracts, yet are more than willing and able to compete effectively and make investments. It was a major policy blunder of ICANN to have agreed in the past to presumptive renewal, a decision that has had a multi-billion dollar negative impact upon registrants, compared to a situation where there are regular competitive tenders. Even the US government has argued for those competitive tenders for both initial agreements and for renewals of agreements: https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/icann_081218.pdf (Ms. Garza's analysis begins on the 3rd page of the PDF, after the covering letter by Ms. Baker of the NTIA) The absence of such competitive tenders can only be rectified through the protective fee caps which have been long established, and which the registry operators themselves have agreed to since the times they entered into their respective agreements. If current registry operators are not prepared to renew the existing contracts (which have fee caps in place), then there would be no shortage of other prospective registry operators who would be prepared to step in and replace them (and at a much lower cost, with fee caps in place). Indeed, ICANN themselves have argued (in court) that such caps are *pro-competitive*, see: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icann-reply-on-cfit-26may06-en.… "....in a single supplier market, price caps are, if anything, procompetitive (Mot. at 13-14);" (line 13, page 6 of 15) 6. We would like to openly make ICANN the following offer: We will run the .org registry for USD $5 per domain name per year, and keep all other existing terms the same. [We would then simply subcontract it to one of the many registry operators who would bid for the job at USD $1 per domain per year or less, and pocket the difference!] This is lower than the $9.93 per domain name per year that PIR currently charges. ICANN cannot of course accept this improved deal, even if it wanted to, because its hands are tied by the foolish decision to agree to presumptive renewal in the past. Looking forward, an agreement to permit unlimited fee increases in the future (far beyond the already generous 10% per year permitted increases) would similarly hamper ICANN's ability to negotiate future "win-win" deals, giving it no negotiating leverage in the future, as it would have already given away the farm if it entered into this proposed agreement. Agreeing to permit unlimited fee increases is like letting the genie out of the bottle, as there's no way that registry operators will ever agree to voluntarily undo such a change in the future. Presumptive renewal means that registry operators can safely ignore any future attempts by ICANN to renegotiate. This is why these contractual changes are so important, because they'll be impossible to fix in the future (without giving up even more to registry operators, e.g. via a buyout or something). This alone should be reason for caution. Given there's no urgency to making a change (i.e. registry operators have *falling* costs, not increasing costs), then the status quo should prevail. 6. Some have suggested that the Internet Society and/or PIR would never raise fees by a large amount. However, "hope is not a strategy." Past performance is no guarantee of the future. Leadership can change, as can priorities/missions. It's clear from section 7.5 of the the draft contract itself: https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/org/org-proposed-renewal-18m… that ISOC/PIR could simply sell or assign the registry contract to another entity (e.g. Private Equity, just as registry operator Donuts was sold by its founders), and that new owner/entity could take the heat for future egregious fee increases. ICANN would not be able to stop such a deal. Such a sale would allow ISOC to create a huge endowment for itself worth billions of dollars, given that .org is arguably the second most desirable gTLD, after only .com. 7. The ability to renew a domain name for 10 years is not sufficient protection for registrants. Eventually the bill will come due, and nothing can offset the enormous switching costs. Any goodwill/links/etc. built up will be reduced to zero, totally destroying one's investment in one's web identity that may have been built up over 20+ years (even longer than ICANN has existed, in many cases). URLs that have been printed in offline media such as books, DVDs, etc. can't be updated, thus it's impossible for many to simply stop renewing after 10 years and switch, as some people will still see the old URL. E-mails aren't forwarded by the new registrants to those of past registrants, meaning that all existing email addresses can't easily transition to a new domain name without risk. Business cards would need to be reprinted (and can't be "recalled" from past recipients). Registrants expect URLs to be permanent, not transitory. Registrants of legacy gTLDs like com/net/org own their domain names, and are not temporary tenants (like those in the failed new gTLDs). 8. One of the reasons prospective registrants rationally avoid new gTLDs is the lack of certainty over potential future fee increases. As one submission pointed out, they are "leery" of such one-sided contracts, and for good reason. Those failures of the new gTLDs experiment should not be allowed to contaminate the successful and proven legacy gTLDs like .com/net/org. Indeed, if there is to be any harmonization of contracts, the "base agreement" should be that of the successful .com/net/org TLDs which included fee caps, rather than have the future be modeled on the the failed new gTLDs program. Registrants of new gTLDs knew the problems with the lack of price caps, and foolishly agreed to them before registration. Changing the rules for existing registrants of legacy gTLDs is unacceptable, as this amounts to changing the rules in the middle of the game, rules which would never have been acceptable to most prior to registration. One submission suggested that as each new gTLD matures, or reaches a critical mass, it should then transition to the legacy contracts. That was a wise suggestion, to bridge the failed new gTLD program with the successful legacy gTLDs. 9. Even ISOC/PIR doesn't enter into such one-sided agreements, given that its own supplier/subcontractor (Afilias) had to win a competitive tender to retain the contract for managing the back-end of the registry (presumably at an even lower fee than it agreed to years ago -- fees would be able to be estimated once the relevant IRS Form 990 forms become public). https://domainnamewire.com/2016/02/16/32-million-org-contract-up-for-bids/ https://domainnamewire.com/2016/11/14/org-sticks-afilias-backend/ It's entirely inconsistent that Internet Society doesn't give presumptive renewal and/or permits unlimited fee increases for its own suppliers, yet wants such things for themselves. 10. We oppose the ability for the registry operators to unilaterally create and impose their own mandatory RPMs upon registrants. See, for example: https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/org/org-proposed-addendum-18… "Specification 7, § 1 The terms of Section 1 of Specification 7 are hereby amended and restated in their entirety as follows: “Rights Protection Mechanisms. Registry Operator shall implement and adhere to the rights protection mechanisms (“RPMs”) specified in this Specification. In addition to such RPMs, Registry Operator ******may develop and implement RPMs that discourage or prevent registration of domain names that violate or abuse another party’s legal rights.****** Registry Operator will include all RPMs required by this Specification 7 and any additional RPMs developed and implemented by Registry Operator in the Registry-Registrar Agreement entered into by ICANN-accredited registrars authorized to register names in the TLD.” (page 6, emphasis added) This should be left to the GNSO, to develop only policies that have consensus, and which balance the needs of both rights holders and registrants. For example, suppose PIR (or another registry operator) was allowed to unilaterally create a RPM on their own which allowed for complaints to be filed for a fee of $100, but which required registrants post a $1 million bond if they wish to file any response to the complaint. Such a one-sided policy could be created by a registry operator under the proposed terms, and would ignore the requirement that ICANN policies need to balance the concerns of all affected stakeholders (including registrants). 11. We also oppose the searchable WHOIS, which ignores the ongoing EPDP on WHOIS: https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/tlds/org/org-proposed-renewal-18m… (page 37) "Notwithstanding anything else in this Agreement, Registry Operator must offer a searchable Whois service compliant with the requirements described in Section 1.10 of Specification 4 of this Agreement." as it doesn't properly balance the privacy rights of registrants against those who would go on fishing expeditions. A searchable WHOIS system should only ever be adopted, if and only if the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) equally becomes public and searchable, in return. If the TMCH is kept secret and non-searchable, then the WHOIS should not be searchable either. 12. Additional RPMs that were developed for new gTLDs were the result of bad predictions that were made of massive cybersquatting prior to the adoption of the program. For example, in testimony before the US government: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-112shrg74251/html/CHRG-112shrg7425… "First, the immediate costs imposed on business is likely to be in the multi billions of dollars." "This Program in aggregate has multi-billion dollar implications for all marketers, both in the commercial and the nonprofit sectors, and their brands. It would cause irreparable harm and damage to the entire online business community. It would throw the domain name universe into substantial confusion for both marketers and consumers." "So there are billions of dollars that are going to be spent and it's not going to be providing a use for the economy." "And when we're talking about billions of dollars here, when we're talking about companies with 3,000 or more brands, even big companies will be facing really large expenses. So this is a very, very significant economic issue for this country and for the world." "An unlimited expansion of the TLDs will cost the business community billions of dollars." "The unlimited expansion of TLDs would dramatically increase the cost and complexity for trademark holders to protect their rights. The immediate cost imposed on businesses is likely to be in the billions of dollars." "We believe ICANN's gTLD program would impose billions of dollars in unnecessary costs on the restaurant industry at a time when restaurant operators are looking forward to investing in their businesses and hiring employees after the worst recession in decades." These predictions exaggerated and overestimated the actual risk that was realized by the launch of new gTLDs. Thus, the justification for the adoption of the URS and other RPMs turned out to be false predictions, and should now be undone. They were never intended for, nor should be imposed upon, registrants of legacy gTLDs. Prospective registry operators at the time were willing to accept such terms, as the trademark lobby threatened to thwart and delay the release of new gTLDs unless their demands were met. Registry operators were blinded by dollar signs in their eyes, for example, predictions by Name.Space: "Name.Space, whose business has a potential value of over 1 billion dollars, has been deprived the opportunity to fully launch and operate its portfolio of gTLD properties under what we believe is the most responsible, fair, and ethical practices yet to be employed in the commercial domain name industry." (same link as above for testimony) 13. Given that the RPM PDP of the GNSO is actively reviewing the URS, including determining whether or not it should be a consensus policy, no steps should be taken by ICANN staff and/or the registry operators to unilaterally impose it upon registrants. Indeed, there are numerous proposals to actively change the URS (including a proposal to explicitly eliminate it), see: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/URS+Proposals (click the "Individual URS Proposal" tab to see the 33 individual proposals, 14 of them from us) The current URS is deeply flawed. For example of just one of the defects, currently complaints are required to be in English (unlike the language rules for the UDRP, where complaints must be in the language of the registration agreement, which varies by registrar). Thus, many registrants defending a URS dispute have no idea what the actual URS complaint is about, if they do not understand English. This is particularly egregious, given that new gTLDs are most popular in China. Such flawed RPMs whose creation was rushed before the launch of new gTLDs, and which are tilted in favour of large multinational companies, need to be reviewed and corrected before they are ever adopted for legacy gTLDs like .com/net/org. 14. In conclusion, ICANN's proposed contracts represent a failure of the multi-stakeholder model, and are instead evidence that ICANN has been captured by registry operators. ICANN claims these contracts are the result of a negotiation, yet what did registrants receive in return for these contractual changes? We received absolutely nothing in return, except for higher fees and higher regulatory burdens (via the imposition of the URS), with all the gains being received by the registry operators at the expense of registrants. That's not a negotiation -- that's a giveaway. We expect and demand that ICANN and the registry will simply extend the current contracts, rather than enter into these one-sided arrangements. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/

1 1

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Don't remove price caps
by Mike Thomas May 3, 2019

May 3, 2019

I disagree with the proposed direction of removing price increase caps on .biz, .org, and .info domain registrations. Without price caps, it is likely that the costs associated with owning such domains will significantly rise. I'm the owner of several small online community websites that earn limited income. When they started over 15 years ago, they earned nothing. My experiences creating and operating these websites led me to meet and make friends from around the world, fostered my interest in computer science and software engineering, and in no small part led to my current professional employment at a major U.S. technology company. Without a cheap price on domain names, my websites would have never gotten started and I would not have had the rich experiences that followed. These days, I can absorb additional increases in the cost of domain name ownership, at least to an extent. But today's younger version of me cannot. Please reconsider. Mike Thomas

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Pending Ratification: ALAC Statement on Registry Agreement Renewals .org, .biz and .info
by ICANN At-Large Staff May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

Dear All, Please find attached the ALAC Statement on Registry Agreement Renewals .org, .biz and .info<https://community.icann.org/x/-oSGBg>. The statement is accordingly being submitted to the .org, .biz and .info public comment emails. On 28 April 2019, a formal request for extension to submit the statement was approved by staff, as two of the three Registry Agreement public comments were to close on 29 April, before the CPWG would finalize the statement on its weekly call<https://community.icann.org/x/WIOGBg> (today at 20:00 UTC). The At-Large workspace related to this comment may be viewed here<https://community.icann.org/x/-oSGBg>. In the interest of time, the ALAC Chair requested that the statement be transmitted to the ICANN public comment process with a note that the statement is pending ALAC ratification. Kind Regards, ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz price cap removal
by Carl Christian Hauser May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

To whom it may concern, Please keep the domain name price cap in place. Removing the cap will create a hardship for smb and private domain owners. Thank you Best Regards Carl Christian (CH)

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Bad Idea
by Soren Stoutner May 1, 2019

May 1, 2019

Allowing unlimited price increases is a bad idea. They should be able to charge enough to cover the cost of the service they perform with a little extra for a reasonable profit. Nothing more. -- Soren Stoutner soren(a)stoutner.com 623-262-6169

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] No to uncapped domain fee increases
by Matt Bearman May 1, 2019

May 1, 2019

I'm against uncapping the increase in renewal fees for any domain. It could lead to a situation where only those with vast wealth can own and keep domain names. Domain names should always be available to anyone regardless of ecumenic status.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] How is a 10% fee increase allotment not enough?
by David L. Rager April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

Hi, A potential of a 10% fee increase per year seems like more than enough to cover costs. In general I'm against regulation, but when a single company has all of the power, such limits are appropriate. Not fully informed but of course I have an opinion anyway, David

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] ICA Comment on Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Zak Muscovitch April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

Please see the below Comment of the Internet Commerce Association, which is also attached herewith as a PDF letter. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Zak(a)InternetCommerce.org<mailto:Zak@InternetCommerce.org> .... April 30, 2019 ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, California 90094-2536, USA Attn: Mr. Russ Weinstein, Global Domains Division Dear Mr. Weinstein: Re: Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement I write to you on behalf of members of the Internet Commerce Association. Founded in 2006, the Internet Commerce Association (the "ICA") is a non-profit trade organization representing domain name registrants, including domain name investors, domain name secondary marketplaces, domain name brokers, escrow service companies, and related service providers. The ICA's mission is to assist with the development of domain name related policy. ICA members own a substantial percentage of all Internet domains and provide crucial domain name-related services to millions of Internet users. We are pleased to provide herein, our comments on the Proposed Renewal of the .biz Registry Agreement (the "Proposed Renewal Agreement" or the "Agreement"). 1. ICANN Should Seek Community Input Before Negotiating Registry Agreement Renewals The Proposed Renewal Agreement was ostensibly already negotiated and agreed to by ICANN and Afilias before seeking input from stakeholders on the very serious policy matters that arise from the Agreement. At this point, ICANN seeks public comment not to renegotiate the Agreement, but only to make a report of public comments "available for the ICANN Board in its consideration of the proposed renewal agreement". This puts the cart before the horse. Prior to negotiating and agreeing on any such Agreement, ICANN should be seeking community input as otherwise ICANN will not have the benefit of understanding what stakeholders want or need will thereby not be responsive to the stakeholders that it is mandated to serve. That is precisely what has regrettably occurred here. 2. ICANN Once Again Circumvents Dedicated Volunteers When it Comes to URS and So-Called "Bottom-up Multi-Stakeholder" Policy Development ICANN prides itself on bottom-up multi-stakeholder policy development, but yet again, ICANN staff has attempted to circumvent the established policy development process. The Proposed .biz Renewal Agreement includes Uniform Rapid Suspension ("URS") when ICANN Staff are well aware that the question of whether URS should become a Consensus Policy is currently undergoing extensive review by the Rights Protection Mechanism Working Group (the "RPM WG"). In fact, the question of whether URS should be applicable to all gTLD's as a Consensus Policy is one of the primary questions that numerous experts from the ICANN community have been engaged in for the last two years. These experts have dedicated thousands of person hours to determining whether URS should be a Consensus Policy and yet ICANN Staff has purported to circumvent them and render all these efforts largely moot with the unilateral implementation of URS in registry agreements as they come up for renewal. It is an affront to the ICANN Community, and in particular to those dedicated volunteers that are following the established policy development process, that right under the noses of the ICANN Board, ICANN Staff continue to subvert and circumvent the required procedures by unilateral implementation of policy. This is at least the 7th instance where the Global Domains Division ("GDD") has circumvented the policy development process by unilateral introduction of the URS and ICANN has been put on notice through Comments by various parties on each occasion.[i] The question then becomes whether there is any point in continuing to engage in the established "bottom-up multi-stakeholder model" if efforts from volunteers, included members of the Internet Commerce Association, are ostensibly engaged in mere "busy work" at tremendous expense and opportunity cost, when the actual policy making happens behind closed doors by ICANN Staff. Given that ICANN Staff has ignored all previous entreaties to abide by the established policy development procedure when it comes to URS, it must be concluded that ICANN pays mere lip service to the bottom-up multi-stakeholder model and putting the Proposed .biz Renewal Agreement out for public comment is mere window dressing. Nevertheless, once again, and despite every indication that ICANN Staff remains intent upon continuing their unilateral policy making mission and circumventing its dedicated volunteers, we must demand that ICANN await the completion of the Working Group's deliberations on the inclusion of URS as a Consensus Policy and refrain from unilateral imposition. 3. There are Major Oversights Within the Agreement Leaving Registrants Unprotected a) The Agreement does not require that existing registrants receive notice of pending increases or renewal increases from the Registry Operator or registrars. Sections 2.10(a) and 2.10(b) merely require that the Registry Operator provide notice to registrars, not registrants. Accordingly, registrants may not receive adequate notice, and this is an example of how ICANN has made sure to look after registrars, but not registrants. b) There is no requirement that registrants be afforded the opportunity to renew a domain name for up to 10 years. Section 2.10(b) merely provides registrars with the option (i.e. in their "discretion") to offer up to ten year renewals. That means that a registrar may decide in its discretion, to only allow their customer to renew for a single year rather than ten, so that they can charge more after the one-year renewal term. Again, nobody at ICANN adequately looked out for registrants, but merely looked after its own service providers. 4. Does ICANN Care About Registrants and the Public Interest? We are very troubled by the what appears to be ICANN Staff's complete disregard for registrants and the public interest when it comes to the removal of all price caps in the Proposed .biz Renewal Agreement. New gTLDs created entirely new namespaces where any registrant knew that they were subject to price changes and price increases at the whim of the new gTLD operator. It was clearly 'buyer beware' in the new gTLDs. In contrast, with legacy extensions such as .biz, the name spaces were not bought and paid for by the registry operator and the reasonable expectation of .biz registrants was that prices would be capped in order for pricing to remain stable and reasonable. The operators of legacy extensions such as .biz don't "own" those name spaces. They were created for the public at large and are to be administered in the public interest by ICANN as essentially a trustee. The contracted registry operators are merely providing a service of maintaining the database and the underlying infrastructure on behalf of ICANN which is the caretaker of the public interest in the name spaces. That is why it is so surprising and concerning that ICANN Staff expressly stated that the ostensible objective in removing the price caps on .biz registrations under the existing Registry Agreement, was to "align" it with the current "base registry agreement". First of all, the crucial problem with this purported "alignment" is that in effect it constitutes a fundamental policy-making initiative that is beyond the scope of ICANN Staff without the support of the established policy development process. Second, this purported "aligning" totally disregards the fact that .biz is a legacy registry that is supposed to be operated in the public interest. Although "alignment" may be convenient from an administrative perspective, there is no factual or legitimate policy basis for treating the .biz registry the same as all others, when it is clearly different. So, other than conveniently "aligning" registry agreements to purportedly treat all registries alike despite their respective and dramatically different mandates, registrant base, and histories, what justification is there for unlimited price increases? There is no evidence whatsoever that the .biz registry requires unlimited additional funds to maintain reliable operations. There is no evidence that the .biz registry needs unlimited funds in order to "compete" with other registries. There is simply no justification for permitting the .biz registry operator to raise prices at all, let alone with a sky-is-the-limit approach. Moreover, .biz registrants can't simply pick up and move to a different domain name if prices are jacked up. For example, a business or non-profit or individual registrant who chose to "build a home" in .biz and who invested heavily in web development, branding, and marketing all connected to the .biz extension, did so with the reasonable expectation that ICANN would ensure, as the trustee of the .biz registry in the public interest, that reasonable prices would be maintained. If a registrant is faced with a substantial price increase for renewing their domain name they would have little choice but to pay it or face the potentially even greater costs of moving locations, rebranding, and remarketing, not to mention to potentially massive issue of losing their original email address. Similarly, if a new business wants to take its place it the .biz as a suitable namespace for its enterprise, and is met with a totally unjustifiable and expensive registration fee, it will force them to take their place in another less suitable registry. As such, existing registrants are a captive audience with little practical means of avoiding a registry-imposed price hike, and prospective registrants would be hugely disadvantaged if the price of a .biz domain name became unaffordable. 5. ICANN Misapprehends its Role and Ignores the Department of Justice The rationale that GDD staff are putting forth for removing price caps is that ICANN does not want "to become a price regulator". This is a misleading formulation since ICANN as a trustee of the public interest for the legacy domains has set prices within the legacy extensions. Has ICANN throughout its history been overstepping its authority when it entered into agreements that included terms governing pricing? The US Department of Justice viewed ICANN's role as creating competitive mechanisms, such as putting registry agreements out for rebid, to keep prices low for registrants, and failing that, the DOJ clearly stated it was ICANN's role to manage the TLDs in a manner that "safeguards the interests of registrants in obtaining high quality domains at the lowest possible prices."[ii] The DOJ expressly stated that ICANN should set price caps in the absence of putting out registries for competitive bid: "Because ICANN's proposed registry agreement lacks any [pricing] safeguards,... ICANN should consider revising the proposed registry agreement, at least for instances where there is not competitive bidding to operate a new gTLD, to include provisions designed to limit the ability of the registry operator to exercise market power, i.e., price caps..." The DOJ called for agreements that included a maximum price and limitations on price increases: "ICANN's requests for bids [to operate a new gTLD] should expressly call for bids to specify an initial maximum price that would be charged by the operator for domain registrations, as well as limitations on price increases over time.." The DOJ knew that relying on market forces and competition were not adequate where registries had market power. The DOJ found that .com and other gTLD registry operators had market power: "our investigation of the .com agreement found evidence that other gTLD registry operators may possess a degree of market power. The market power inherent in other gTLDs is less than the market power in .com, but is still material..." And; "Further, the introduction of new gTLDs is not likely to constrain the market power by existing gTLDs..." ICANN has apparently totally ignored this longstanding advice and direction of the DOJ. Although .biz may have less market power than .com or .org, for example, it still has a degree of market power and no economic studies have been conducted by ICANN prior to purporting to eliminate all price caps. ICANN is therefore wading into treacherous territory, as by removing all price caps after it created an anti-competitive environment by not enabling competition via a tender process and by on top of it, by providing perpetual contracts with presumptive rights of renewal, it is unwittingly or perhaps negligently, created an egregious situation which may compel the DOJ to once again intervene. As the DOJ has stated, "ICANN should take steps to protect consumers from the exercise of market power by gTLD operators", and has abjectly failed to do so with the proposed Agreement. Lastly, ICANN should not blithely state that it is "not a regulator" when the fact is that it is more than a regulator - it is the effective owner and trustee of registries. As such, it is entirely within its purview to set prices in the public interest. It is nonsensical to rely on the truism that it is 'not a regulator' (only governments are regulators), when the fact is that it has the right to set prices, subject to complying with its obligation to create a competitive environment and pricing in the interest of the public. In other words, nobody - especially the DOJ - would complain (other than the registries who receive ICANN's largess through un-competitive and perpetual contracts) if ICANN maintained low prices incrementally above the cost of operating registries in the public interest. Yours truly, INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ [i] See for example "Comments Run Overwhelmingly Against ICANN Staff Attempt to Impose URS on Legacy gTLD's, June 22, 2015 (https://www.internetcommerce.org/comments-oppose-dottravel-urs/) see also "Comment on Proposed Renewal of .Coop Sponsored Registry Agreement, Business Constituency Submission, July 27, 2018 (https://www.bizconst.org/assets/docs/positions-statements/2018/2018_07July_…) See also: "ICA Files ICANN Comment on Proposed .Museum RA Renewal", October 22, 2017 (https://www.internetcommerce.org/ica-files-icann-comment-on-proposed-museum…) [ii] https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/baker-to-dengate-thrush-18dec08…

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (no subject)
by Hoonie Park April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

I am against raising the price. I do not want to see price-caps removed and believe price increases would be unfair.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please Keep The Cap
by Luke Hackenberg April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

Please keep the price cap that has allowed the internet to be accessible to all; raising rates only lessens that.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz registration comment
by Steve Epstein April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

Maintaining some form of price controls will both help smaller users keep long-standing domains, and possibly increase the value for the registrar overall with increased volume of registrations. Otherwise, many will be force to jump to other TLDs. Please maintain the price controls currently in place.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] I oppose the removal of the price cap
by Paul Pliska April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

I use use a .biz domain for my small business, and I understand that existing registrants will keep their price protection, but even so I oppose the removal of the price cap. It would be unfortunate if tomorrow's start-ups don't have the same chance at an affordable domain that I did. Moreover, I don't think older TLDs, such as .biz, first created when there were still vary few options, can be compared to newer, incredibly specific TLDs like .doctor and .farm. As such I see no reason to give the Registry Operator a new better deal, let them stick to what was originally agreed.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Tucows Comment on Legacy TLD Contracts
by Graeme Bunton April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Please see the attached comment from Tucows. Regards Graeme -- ____________________________ Graeme Bunton Director, Analytics & Policy Tucows Inc. PH: 416 535 0123 ext 1634

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] biz pricing
by Burt Culver April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Please do not change the domain pricing policy for .biz domains. Allowing the prices of domains to increase dramatically will mean that non-profits and small companies will struggle to pay for their domain names and will eventually be priced off the internet. Regards, Burt Burt Culver Los Angeles, CA

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price cap removal an abdication of responsibility
by Kevin Ohashi April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Removing the price cap on legacy gTLDs is an act of regulatory capture, plain and simple. These are non-competitive, monopoly contracts providing internet services with diminishing costs at scale and for years ICANN has allowed them to raise their prices on consumers. The fixed increases were bad enough, but uncapping it and saying the market will decide is dangerous and irresponsible. Do your job properly and keep price cap provisions in the contract. Kevin Ohashi

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comment re: .biz price cap lift
by Samuel Reed April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

The Internet is a public resource and it is ICANN's responsibility to be the caretakers for it, not to extract maximum profit from it. The proposed cap lift on .info, .org, and .biz is the beginning of the end for the democratization of the Internet and DNS as a whole. When we all got on the Internet, we thought we had truly discovered something different, something democratic, by the people for the people. Please don't prove a whole generation wrong for dollars.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Changes NOT Needed
by Mike Sallee April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

The current procedures and processes used by ICANN, the organization that oversees domain names, is more than sufficient and should not be changed. The ability to removing price caps on all .org, .info, and .biz top level domains is excessive and not necessary. Please do not make the changes that are planned. We must keep the access and pricing of domains as they are at this time. Mike Sallee

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] NO DOMAIN PRICE INCREASES
by Strategic Investment Management Ltd. Corporate April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019 To ICANN and the .ORG, .INFO and .BIZ registries (and to all other registries): CEASE AND DESIST NOTICE Any regulation, rule or law which allows anyone (including ICANN, and / or any registry) to raise the price of any domain above the initial price paid for the domain is fraudulent and should be understood as illegal. It is an uncompetitive business practice, and amounts to the operation of a monopoly, and US anti-trust laws and civil and criminal procedure should prohibit and such action. Neither I, nor the company I founded, have ever agreed to any price increase over the original price paid to register a domain. The fact that a domain must be renewed does not imply our acceptance of the legality of an increased price, but rather your fraudulent and unfair business practices and monopoly practices. We have had to keep renewing our domains or lose them, so we have had no alternative but to renew them for higher prices and expect to be refunded every penny paid over the original purchase price once a competent and fair and just court understands and decides in this continuing matter. No one goes into business in a competitive market unless they can understand their costs; To allow a registry to increase costs over the originally agreed-to price (which is an agreement to pay a specific price every year for the infinite future) is already a very serious financial commitment. We business-people will not allow a for-profit (or any type of) registry to continue raising the annual price of such a business asset. That would be agreeing to fraudulent theft from one's own business - nothing any American or other nations' citizen should ever agree to. It is, in fact, shameful that this is happening at all, and ICANN has the shame for being "in bed" with the registries in this matter, rather than representing the real backbone of the Internet- the millions of domain name owners (that you still call Registrants) who have paid for domain names, web hosting services, website construction and web app construction services, web advertising and web marketing, etc. These are the drivers of the economy and the Internet, not the cash cow monopolistic registries. We expect a competent court to recognize a real ownership interest in a domain name by the registrant, as common law already has, and this means that the price paid to register a domain name is the price that must be paid annually for as long as the domain owner/registrant wishes to keep the domain name. It's as simple as that. Please stop this theft, this fraud and these unfair and uncompetitive business practices in allowing registries to change prices for domains already registered, and start the massive refund process for every price increase over the $6 original fee for a year of domain name ownership. Furthermore, to ICANN, stop taxing us $0.18 per year of domain name ownership. That is taxation without representation – something that is not allowed in the United States of America. Sincerely, Matt Hooker Chairman Strategic Investment Management Ltd. Corporate(a)S-I-M.biz

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] NO DOMAIN PRICE INCREASES
by IDOA - Internet Domain Owners Association April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019 To ICANN and the .ORG, .INFO and .BIZ registries (and to all other registries): CEASE AND DESIST NOTICE Any regulation, rule or law which allows anyone (including ICANN, and / or any registry) to raise the price of any domain above the initial price paid for the domain is fraudulent and should be understood as illegal. It is an uncompetitive and unfair business practice, and amounts to the operation of a monopoly, and US anti-trust laws and civil and criminal procedure should prohibit and such action. Neither I, nor the company I founded, have ever agreed to any price increase over the original price paid to register a domain. The fact that a domain must be renewed does not imply our acceptance of the legality of an increased price, but rather your fraudulent and unfair business practices and monopoly practices. We have had to keep renewing our domains or lose them, so we have had no alternative but to renew them for higher prices and expect to be refunded every penny paid over the original purchase price once a competent and fair and just court understands and decides in this continuing matter. No one goes into business in a competitive market unless they can understand their costs; To allow a registry to increase costs over the originally agreed-to price (which is an agreement to pay a specific price every year for the infinite future) is already a very serious financial commitment. We business-people will not allow a for-profit (or any type of) registry to continue raising the annual price of such a business asset. That would be agreeing to fraudulent theft from one's own business - nothing any American or other nations' citizen should ever agree to. It is, in fact, shameful that this is happening at all, and ICANN has the shame for being "in bed" with the registries in this matter, rather than representing the real backbone of the Internet- the millions of domain name owners (that you still call Registrants) who have paid for domain names, web hosting services, website construction and web app construction services, web advertising and web marketing, etc. These are the drivers of the economy and the Internet, not the cash cow monopolistic registries. We expect a competent court to recognize a real ownership interest in a domain name by the registrant, as common law already has, and this means that the price paid to register a domain name is the price that must be paid annually for as long as the domain owner/registrant wishes to keep the domain name. It's as simple as that. Please stop this theft, this fraud and these unfair and uncompetitive business practices in allowing registries to change prices for domains already registered, and start the massive refund process for every price increase over the $6 original fee for a year of domain name ownership. Sincerely, Matt Hooker Founder IDOA Internet Domain Owners Association Info(a)IDOA.info Contact(a)IDOA.info -- IDOA.info the Internet Domain Owners Association info(a)IDOA.info

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Registration Renewal
by Stephen Scott April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

To whom it may concern, I am writing to ask that you maintain the current methodology for price increases on domain registration. Removing the limit increase would create much higher costs and would limit individual's accessibility to registering. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Stephen Scott

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz price cap
by Michael Toth April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Keep the price cap on .biz gTLD. All gTLDs should have a reasonable price cap.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Christian K. Nordtømme April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

I write to oppose the removal of price caps on the .biz and .org TLDs. It is important not to change the meaning and expectations surrounding legacy Top Level Domains. Their historical availability and affordability are integral to the democratic spirit of the Internet, and they carry a certain meaning. A promise, so to speak. Other TLDs are not as attractive and do not carry the same democratic promise. Allowing PIR to set arbitrary price hikes erects new boundaries to entry around previously accessible domains. It is one more step, in a long series of steps, toward allowing big players with deep pockets to squeeze out smaller actors from the market place, and making the web less democratic. You might think that there are plenty of other TLDs than .biz and .org for people who want to register their domains, so this doesn't limit people's freedom much. That's not true. Admittedly, there is an infinite number of possible domains available online, but the number of *practical* and *memorable* URLs on *recognizable *and* trusted* TLDs is quite limited. It would be as if we let the market decide who gets access to public parks. It would probably get expensive to visit Central Park or Yellowstone quite soon. And while nature is vast, and there are other parks where ordinary people can go, *they are not the same*, and they don't hold the same place or meaning in our culture. Similarly with .biz, .org, and other legacy gTLDs – they are unique. This is particularly worrying as there is no real competition to counteract the upward price pressures. Instead you are privileging a single organization or company, like PIR, with the right to charge whatever they want for something that is essentially a public asset. That is unacceptable, and something I would otherwise only expect from corrupt banana republics. Please reconsider. Christian K. Nordtømme PAPAYA design & marketing 715 Carroll Street Brooklyn, NY 11215, USA

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Statement in opposition to .biz domain changes
by Al Mithani April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Hello, I am against having .biz domains follow the same rules as the new TLDs, including allowing the registry to set prices arbitrarily. The .biz TLD is now part of the fabric of the internet, and it should have a separate set of rules from the new TLDs. The registry for the .biz domain is a steward of a public resource, and should not profit off of the value of the .biz TLD which was created by the public. If the registry wants to arbitrarily set prices, it should create a new TLD - not take advantage of the history of the .biz domain name. -Al Mithani

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] NO to the proposed removal of caps on legacy TLDs
by Michael Neuffer April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

The proposed removal of the caps on the gTLDs (biz/info/org) would only drive up prices for all users and line the pockets of ICANN and the owners of the privatized registries while ignoring the long history of those TLDs. The gTLDs are are common resource the current registries are just their stewards. So this is a resounding NO to this proposal. Instead the new TLDs should receive a cap as well once they reach a certain size. Kind regards Michael Neuffer

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Fwd: Comment
by bb120190＠fastmail.fm April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Why is it deemed necessary to remove price-increase caps? Are running costs increasing that much from year to year despite no evidence of similar cost increases in other parts of the Internet and IT sectors? Domain rental is expensive enough as it is, and these caps are one of the few things preventing domain registration from potentially turning into a complete free-market free-for-all accessible only to the rich. There are and can be no reasonable grounds for removing these caps. J Gerrard, domain tenant.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .info & .biz Registry Agreements
by Saron Harford April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Hello, I am very concerned about the removal of price caps currently being discussed for .info and .biz domains. It will directly affect my business and hundreds of thousands of small business owners just like me. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up. Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. I hope you will take my concerns seriously. Kind regards, | | | Saron Harford | | Designer & Developer | | Tiger-Fruit Web & Graphic Design | | m: | +353 868 272 999 | | w: | www.tiger-fruit.com e: saron(a)tiger-fruit.com | | Thank you for supporting Irish business

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Keep the price cap on BIZ
by Brady Owens April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

I write to oppose the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs as doing so will only create a free-for-all on limitless price increases across the well-established board. These legacy domain names, some of which have been registered for many years, are unlike the new mess being created and owners of these legacy names have a reasonable expectation of affordability and stability. Brady Owens Owner Fastglass LLC tele: 617.682.9484 email: info(a)fastglass.net

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by T'ony SAN Bliss April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Website Development already comes with several cost ... setup, development, maintenance and hosting to name a few based on the nature of the website or web application. We took on a .biz as opposed to a .com back in 2012 based on 1. .com domain was not available and 2. .biz was a convenient change from the typical. A price increase in general could push users away from even signing up with this domain extension, for us ... it may mean having to find an alternate domain name and the haggle of mass notifications of the change and SEO updates, et cetera. I would kindly ask that the downsides of this move may be more adverse than any calculated benefits. Thank you Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Reject Proposal
by David Powys April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

A domain name is an ID which one would expect to keep for a long time. Remove price cap and unscrupulous domain registrars can lure one to by a domain name at a very low price, then increase this to a very high price on renewal. This is unacceptable Regards David Powys

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Domain Name costs must not increase above actual costs
by Norman Edwards April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Limit increase to 10%
by Christine Esposito April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

To whom it may concern: Please retain the allowable 10% per year increase in wholesale price of .biz domains. Please do not let Public Interest Registry (PIR) set whatever price it wants upon extension of its contract, which could mean exorbitant price increases. My understanding is that registrars would need to recupe their increased expenses by spreading them across various domain types. As a small business owner, I cannot afford such increases, which would mean losing my websites. Without them, I am severely hampered in my ability to gain new customers and sustain my business. Very concerned about the widespread negative impact of such a change, Christine Esposito

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .BIZ Comment
by ????? ?????? ??????? April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Removing the price ceiling from a domain TLD is like making real estate unaffordable for the masses. The spinoff effect is that small startup businesses could find themselves at the mercy of thoughtless merchants who want to monopolize the internet. Please make it better for us all and allow the price ceiling to remain in-tact. Thank you.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Dot biz renewal pricing
by Trevor Robertson April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Please DO NOT allow the Public Interest Registry to set their own pricing. A maximum increase of 10% per year as per the current agreement is more than ample – in fact is probably already too high – so I do not feel any change needs to be made. Trevor Robertson w: creativelogic.biz e: trevor(a)creativelogic.biz

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] ICANN rules change
by Zachary Webb April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Please don't remove the price caps on .biz domains. Thanks, Zachary Webb Web developer and podcaster

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not remove the price cap on .biz domain names. It is a financial burden that organizations should not have to carry as time goes on
by thomas astles April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Do not remove the price cap on .biz domain names. It is a financial burden that organizations should not have to carry as time goes on Thomas Astles TNT Lavage de Vitres Window Washing 450-330-0687 Cell 450-263-1133 Bureau Thomas_Astles(a)yahoo.ca

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not raise the prices of biz domains
by Ron Kisiel April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Hi please do not raise the prices of BIZ domains. Ron Kisiel Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Kamal Prasad April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Please do not let PIR set whatever prices it wants for .BIZ TLDs. Sincerely, Kamal S. Prasad 3184 Calistoga Rd Santa Rosa, CA 95404

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] a loss for the internet
by Jan van Leeuwen, Stajl April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

a few small businesses that I help out will drop this tld. They have their country-specific tld and on top of that the biz-tld. I myself will drop the biz domains just because of this silly idea, there are enough tld's that are even cheaper and people will eventually get used to another tld. Jan van Leeuwen -- /STAJL/ Stajl IT - /Webdesign - Webprogrammierung - IT Consulting - Networking/

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] No for letting PIR set whatever prices it wants.
by Philippe AGRIPNIDIS April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Hello. A definitive *NO for letting PIR set whatever prices it wants*. Best regards.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please do not remove .info price limitations
by Think NexGen Technologies April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Hi, Please do not remove .info price limitations.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] STOP the price increase of domain names.
by mkv22＠cantab.net April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Please do "not" remove the cap on the pricing of the domains.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Public Comment .biz
by Michelle - AuroraWebsites.net April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Please do NOT remove the price cap for .biz Pretty Please with Sprinkles on Top? Thanks for Reading -- *Michelle Myers* *AuroraWebsites.net* <http://www.AuroraWebsites.net> Web Site Design and Services Michelle Myers on behalf of AuroraEquine, LLC as its Manager Michelle(a)AuroraWebsites.net

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not remove price cap on .biz
by Nattapak Atichartakarn April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Removing price cap on .biz is a bad idea. Please do not do it. Thanks, Nat

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] don't remove the cap! against the propoasal
by thorsten ebers April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am completely opposed to the plan of removing the pricing caps. It is only good the for isps/registrars. there is no much work related for the isp to keep up a domain.if teh fees will rise to much peopel will loo out for alternatives. and regarding to tcpip. other registarts could rise and dont follow icann. it could lead to a split of dns. we need to keep against the trrend of the internet as it was designed ages ago. we alreday face a split america and eu due to the new copyright laws. people will do their own internet independant from icann etc or create their own dark web/internet

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by John Romine April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders. John Romine

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed renewal of .biz registry agreement
by Marco Fatica April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .org registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] My comment
by Troy S April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Please DO NOT implement this proposed change to the .biz registry agreement. You are going to make prices skyrocket and stifle innovation. People use the .biz for everything and this will cause personal website, businesses and everyone to get to a point where you must get financial backing just to create your own domain. Please DO NOT IMPLEMENT!!! Troy <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Keep low renewal cost increase caps in the .biz renewal agreement
by Matt Lutze April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Good day, The Internet grew out of a common goal to have a space for the world to connect and communicate. Being able to build a space on the Internet shouldn’t only be accessible to the wealthy. Removing the price caps encourages and ensures that the cost for creating a space and registering a .biz domain will become unaffordable for much of the Internet community. You have a duty to the community first. Please be responsible and restore low price increase caps for .biz registrations to keep registration costs affordable. Respectfully, Matthew Lutze

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not sell out our legacy TLDs!
by mardanlin＠gmail.com April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

It is incomphrensibly immoral to give a corporation the opportunity to buy these legacy TLDs out from the internet as a whole. There is too much corporate welfare as it is, stop selling out and do the right thing!

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by David Jimenez Sequero April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

To the attention of the ICANN committee, As an individual domain name registrant, I strongly believe legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .biz registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders. I sincerely hope this proposal is not progressed any further. Thank you for your attention, David Jimenez Sequero -- David J. Sequero | davidjise (at) gmail (dot) com | PGP ID: 0432213D PGP FP: E219 213D 64F2 ADE4 5443 746E E59E 01A2 0432 213D

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Fwd: Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Jonathan Saewitz April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Jonathan Saewitz <saewitz(a)terpmail.umd.edu> Date: Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 8:05 AM Subject: Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement To: <comments-biz-renewal-18mar19(a)icann.org> I am a domain name registrant. ICANN staff should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN policy making is supposed to be a ‘bottom up, multi-stakeholder model’. I believe that legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs. Legacy TLDs are essentially a public trust, unlike new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private interests. Registrants of legacy TLDs are entitled to price stability and predictability, and should not be subject to price increases with no maximums. Unlike new gTLDs, registrants of legacy TLDs registered their names and made their online presence on legacy TLDs on the basis that price caps would continue to exist. Unchecked price increases have the potential to result in hundreds of millions of dollars being received by one non-profit, the Internet Society, with .biz registrants receiving no benefit in return. ICANN should not allow one non-profit nearly unlimited access to the funds of other non-profits. ICANN appears to be entirely catering to registries by removing price caps. ICANN should stand up for the public interest and registrants!

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (no subject)
by dezilva April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Sent from Samsung tablet.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Thomas Knaub April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. ICANN does not seem to recognize the difference between a legacy extension created with the support of the US government, that predates the existence of ICANN and that has millions of existing users and the brand new extensions that started off with a new set of rules, in particular no price controls, and no existing registrants. They have completely different characteristics, history, and ownership structure. It is not acceptable for ICANN to ignore these differences and to propose that they be treated the same. Removing price caps is not fair to .biz domain owners. Many of them have websites that they have used for years. If price caps are removed, the cost to renew their domain names may become too expensive, and they could be forced to give up websites that are important to them. The Uniform Rapid Suspension policy is too new and untested to apply on domain names that may be 20 years old or more. With the URS, the domain names could be taken down in a matter of days with little notice. ICANN should be doing more to protect owners of .biz domain names. Why is ICANN trying to remove price protections for .org domain owners, so many of which are non-profits, so that they can be overcharged for their domain names?

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please don't remove the cap for domain names!
by Nenad Todorović April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

To whom it may concern, Please do not remove caps for domain names! It will create a fertile field for what is basically blackmailing - domain name is too much important fot business, and they will have to pay a lot to keep the name for themselves. Please! Best regards, Nenad Todorović

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Pls do not remove 10% cap & put PIR in charge of setting price
by Bams Bamgbade Adetoyese April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I’m commenting from Nigeria, please the idea of removing the 10% percent cap on domain reg, and letting PIR set whatever prices it wants, will only ruin/decapitate our effort [the developing part of the world- Africa/Nigeria] to grow and catch up with the ever changing technology of this world. The cost might be too unbearable that it will foil our plans of running with latest trends in technology, reason been that our economy is not as big and strong as the developed world and where you are operating from. So Please any & all help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you Bamgbade Adetoyese [From Nigeria]

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by 20190428_internetcommerce.org＠waltzingalong.org April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a .org registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .org registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Jurgen April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a .biz and a domain name registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .biz registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders. Jurgen Homola

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Maintain price caps for .biz domains
by Derrel Fincher April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

As described, the Pricing for Domain Name Registrations and Registry Services (Section 2.10 of the .org renewal agreement) indicates that there will be no regulation of price, but there is only one Registry Operator. That constitutes a monopoly, and it will be seen and lobbied against as such. There is a reason monopolies are regulated; please consider doing so here to contain prices. Derrel Fincher -- Representative - Oklahoma House District 11 2300 N Lincoln Blvd., Rm 329, Oklahoma City, OK 73105 derrel.fincher(a)okhouse.gov<mailto:derrel.fincher@okhouse.gov> | (405) 557-7358 NOTICE: The information in this email is confidential, legally privileged, and exempt from disclosure under law. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and unlawful. The Oklahoma House of Reps does not warrant any e-mail transmission received as being virus free, and disclaims any liability for losses or damages arising from the use of this e-mail or its attachments. Recipients of e-mail assume the risk of possible computer virus exposure by opening or utilizing the e-mail and its attachments, and waive any right or recourse against the House by doing so.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Domain registry fees for BIZ domains
by Jon F Caudle Jr April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I find it unconscionable that an organization with a monopoly on domain names would have the power to charge whatever fee they choose. If there is no competition permitted in this, then they should be strictly regulated as to pricing. Jon Caudle 335475 P O Box 1409 Jefferson City, MO 65102-1409

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Carl Abbott April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Please DO NOT change the limits on PIR price increases of .biz domains. If anything, the amount of increase they charge should go down to the inflation rate of a few percent. Sincerely, Carl Abbott CenterTao <https://www.centertao.org/> When answers aren't enough :)

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] BIZ domain names
by Chris Schroeck April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

ICANN should be doing MORE, not less, to protect owners of .biz domain names. What is the point of ICANN trying to remove price protections for .biz domain owners, so businesses can be overcharged for their domain names? What possible advantage does it have? This seems like a short-sighted money grab to make 1 company richer at the cost of hundred or thousands of businesses. Do the right thing and do not eliminate any caps on registration costs. Sincerely, Chris Schroeck

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz changes
by Jeff Coward April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I feel like the new changes being made are going to hurt small business owners like myself. It takes a lot of money to run a business these days and the cost of a domain should not surpass today’s web standard. There are far more important things that business owners really need to spend money on than just their name for their website. - Jeff Self-Employed Web Designer & Online Marketer Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please don't increase domain name prices
by Jen Lampton April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I'm a firm believer in a fair and open internet, and by increasing the cost of domain names many poorer people, or people from poorer parts of the world, will be excluded from participating in the web. The internet should not be another place where only the Rich are allowed. I would hate to see our society loose its last place level playing field.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Keep the cap on fees
by Frasier Linde April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

Please do not remove the cap on registration fees. We need to keep the internet as level a playing field as possible so that anyone can participate. Sincerely, Frasier Linde

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Raveesh Nagpal April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .biz registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Raveesh Nagpal April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .org registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] #no-for-price-increase
by SlimaK . April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am against the removal of the price increase provisions of this proposal.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] This NOT acceptable!!!
by Dr Ashraf Elsafty April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

This NOT acceptable!!! a 10% increase is enough. Kind Regards, <http://www.ashrafelsafty.com/> Dr. Ashraf Elsafty Founder, Adjunct Assistant Professor Research Methods & Strategic Management. ESLSCA - Paris/Cairo Faculty of Engineering - Cairo MsM - Maastricht/ Riti-Cairo <http://www.ashrafelsafty.com/> www.ashrafelsafty.com | <https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashrafelsafty> ashrafelsafty |

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not remove price caps!!!
by Dustan Drake April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

ICANN, Please do not remove price caps on .org, .info, and .biz domains. This change could significantly increase the wholesale price that my domain provider receives which means i will have to pay more because they will charge me more. I nor my clients can afford this. This is not right. you can already increase up to 10% which is more than enough and more than inflation. Don't stomp on the little guys. Respectfully, Dustan Drake CEO/Founder - Body Mind Soul Marketing <http://www.bodymindsoulmarketing.com> +1-949-629-0294 “Be the change that you wish to see in the world.” - Mahatma Gandhi

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Domain Prices
by Kenneth Fernandes April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

Please do not increase the prices of domain names as this hurts small businesses. Thanks.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz domain renewal fee cap
by John Sawyer April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

To whom it may concern: Please maintain the current cap on price increases for .biz domain names. Thank you, John Sawyer -- John Sawyer The Small Business Website Guy https://thesmallbusinesswebsiteguy.com <http://thesmallbusinesswebsiteguy.com> Web site services for people who would rather run their business than mess with their web site! john@ <john(a)chonresources.com>thesmallbusinesswebsiteguy.com (610) 813-2018

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by David M. Wilson April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .org registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders. Respectfully, David M. Wilson

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] comment
by Lee Walters April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not change the capped rate. The internet system works well if it is affordable to profitable and non-profitable domain names alike. The majority of domain names are not linked to profit centres, and are widely used by individuals as the common method of communication. Changing this will create a damaging situation to our freedom of speech and expression. Thank you for considering my comment Regards Lee

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] comments .biz
by Dilbar Hussain April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Dear Sirs/Mams, Good day Please don’t increase prices of domains as the business is down globally. Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Jonathan Hult April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .biz registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders. Jonathan

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Opposition to removal of BIZ price cap
by Chuck Hagelgans April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

To Whom It May Concern: I am opposed to the removal of the BIZ domain name price cap. ICANN grants Registry Services, LLC a *de facto *monopoly on domain names. ICANN therefore has a public responsibility to impose limits on the use of that monopoly. ICANN'S abrogating of that responsibility would give Registry Services, LLC free rein to charge any amount they wished. In the past few hundred years, we have seen in the United States the stranglehold that monopolies in the oil, coal, railroad and communication companies have had on this nation. We have seen how difficult it is to dismantle such a power structure once it is in place. Please do not create another unlimited monopoly by removing the BIZ domain name price cap. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Charles Hagelgans Gloversville, NY

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Seriously? Life isn't expensive enough already?
by Sarah Beebe April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

As has been stated so eloquently before me-- This renewal proposal does not include the 10% maximum year over year increase in registration fees found in previous registry agreements. This limit should remain in effect. Inflation of the US dollar has been substantially less than 10% for 38 years and it is extremely unlikely for it to increase above 10% in any circumstance other than economic collapse. It would therefore be impossible to classify a price increase >10% as anything other than pure rent-seeking. ICANN is ultimately accountable to the Internet community and has a moral obligation to place that community above domain registrars. ICANN is therefore duty-bound to oppose rent-seeking by the domain registrars. This is absolutely critical to protect the creativity and innovation that the Internet contributes to our modern society. This comes off as another case of bureaucracy bowing down to companies money-grabbing just because they can. After the disaster of the FCC trying to remove net neutrality to allow abuse by ISPs, and the backlash within the internet community, it seems irrational and irresponsible to allow (independent) website owners to be abused in this new way. Making the internet more and more inhospitable to the people who make the internet the great place it is, will only ultimately drive people away from it. And while it holds a fairly monopolizing power in the digital age, there is no guarantee that something better will be created to replace the current system and drive despots out of business.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price increases for .biz domains
by Jim April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

As a domain registrant, I am opposed to the potential price increase of .biz domains by removing the existing price limitations. In order to maintain a budget, small businesses cannot afford to pay whatever prices may be set by bigger corporations. The existing price limitation helps with this. If it is removed, many registrants will not be able to maintain payment for their domains. -- Thanks.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] I object.
by Ethereal Enigma April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hello! I strongly OBJECT to the plan of removing the pricing caps. They were put in place in 2006 for a good reason and should remain so for the upcoming years. Sincerely, Sandra Urquhart http://crossofpain.com Sent from Mail for Windows 10 --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Brian Glover April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. ICANN does not seem to recognize the difference between a legacy extension created with the support of the US government, that predates the existence of ICANN and that has millions of existing users and the brand new extensions that started off with a new set of rules, in particular, no price controls, and no existing registrants. They have completely different characteristics, history, and ownership structure. It is not acceptable for ICANN to ignore these differences and to propose that they be treated the same. Removing price caps is not fair to .org domain owners. Many of them have websites that they have used for years. If price caps are removed, the cost to renew their domain names may become too expensive, and they could be forced to give up websites that are important to them. The Uniform Rapid Suspension policy is too new and untested to apply on domain names that may be 20 years old or more. With the URS, the domain names could be taken down in a matter of days with little notice. ICANN should be doing more to protect owners of .org domain names. Why is ICANN trying to remove price protections for .org domain owners, so many of which are non-profits, so that they can be overcharged for their domain names? Thank you for your support! Brian Glover

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] No price increase for biz
by office＠wernerfilm.com April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not make this more expensive.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Saevon Kyomae April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

This applies to most well known TLDs: .org, *.biz,* .info, .com. This is basically sanctioning extortion, a domain name is closer to a trademark, except a company is apparently not allowed to own it... instead they must keep "leasing" their trademark from a registrar. What do I get for improving my domain name (making my business known, improving public trust, running a well known blog/ news site)? Clearly higher rent costs on that same name. The Registry Operator is not going to be passing along actual business costs, or selling "domain-names with more value-added-benefits"... they know their audience has no choice but to pay. Effectively this is like the insulin price hike: morally wrong. Yet with ICANN backing off, you expect the Registry Operator to police themselves. OR their audiences to do so (by switching registrars? most will likely follow suit as they're businesses)

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Against the elimination of price caps
by MM Benya April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

To whom it may concern, Thank you for the opportunity to voice my opinion concerning the proposed elimination of price caps for the legacy .org, .info and .biz gTLDs. As a domain name registrant, I am deeply concerned by and oppose the aforementioned proposal to allow unlimited fee hikes to any of the legacy gTLDs. The legacy unsponsored gTLDs, in their function as foundation of the modern Internet, were not created as the product of private, corporate interest groups. Furthermore, I urge ICANN to shed the pretense of acting in the public benefit instead of as a for-profit monopoly on critical infrastructure. Thank you for your time, I appreciate it. Best regards, Myriam Benya

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not extend PIR contract to operate .biz
by Origami Guru / ＠theTechRebel April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not extend the contract for these guys to freely charge whatever they want for .biz domain names. Allowing this form of capitalist monopoly on TLDs affects a lot of us small business owners and the web at large. This makes it difficult for us to keep costs of running our internet businesses down as the domain is literally an unavoidable fixed cost. Good domains are expensive as it is. DO not let what’s left for us to also be beyond what we can afford because this will bring down and affect a lot of us. Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Jesús Alejandro Marín Calzada April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a .biz registrant. I believe that legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs. Legacy TLDs are essentially a public trust, unlike new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private interests. Registrants of legacy TLDs are entitled to price stability and predictability, and should not be subject to price increases with no maximums. Unlike new gTLDs, registrants of legacy TLDs registered their names and made their online presence on legacy TLDs on the basis that price caps would continue to exist. Unrestrained price increases on the millions of .biz registrants who are not-for-profits or non-profits would be unfair to them. Unchecked price increases have the potential to result in hundreds of millions of dollars being transferred from these organizations to one non-profit, the Internet Society, with .biz registrants receiving no benefit in return. ICANN should not allow one non-profit nearly unlimited access to the funds of other non-profits. ICANN appears to be entirely catering to registries by removing price caps. ICANN should stand up for the public interest and registrants!

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please don't kill the internet or make it only for the elite few
by Srikanth P.K April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please don't kill the internet Please don't remove the fairness from the internet Internet is for everyone and this move puts persons from developing countries like India who have lower purchasing power vs the developed at high disadvantage Please don't kill the internet or make it only for the elite few

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] ICANN
by Gavin Klauser April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

ICANN is proposing extending the contract to operate .org but letting PIR set whatever prices it wants. Rather than a 10% increase to renew your domain next year, it could suddenly start charging registrars like Namecheap 100 times as much. Registrars would have no choice but to pass these charges on to customers. This means that the price for the domain name you’ve been using for over a decade could shoot up. Switching domains is hard, so you will have little option but to pay the higher prices.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Removing price caps on per year price increases will hurt small business owners and inviduals.
by macarthur April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

There is no reason to remove the limit on price increases on year-over-year for the domain names. The companies are already making more than enough money as is with their current costs. It costs them next to nothing to run the domain when you take them from their overall fees that the root registry charges. These fees should be predictable not insane which could cause massive disruption across the marketplace as small business owners scramble in an attempt to keep their business from going under and deciding if they really want to keep their current TLD as its costs become far too high. Sincrely, Macarthur Inbody

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Don't increase the price. It will kill small businesses
by Luca Tom April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Don't increase the price. It will kill small businesses

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Unlimited Price Hikes Crush Small Organizations
by Marie Watkins April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

To ICANN staff responsible for this action: By allowing unlimited price hikes for .org, .info and .biz legacy TLDs, you are essentially putting non-profits and small businesses at the mercy of a monopoly, possibly crushing whole segments of the online (and offline) economy all over the world. If ICANN is truly a "public-benefit corporation" please consider the potentially devastating harm that would come to millions of people with legitimate organizations operating under these TLDs by letting a cartel enrich itself at the expense of "the little guy" and how it would affect "One World, One Internet", as your motto goes... Please do not allow this proposal to go through. Regards, Marie Watkins

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] do not remove price caps
by Juliana Mann April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

*Please do not remove price caps on all .org, .info, and .biz top level domains*.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Claude Bitner April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I oppose allowing the Public Interest Registry (PIR) to arbitrarily increase prices for generic Top Level Domains - particularly .biz domains. This is not a competitive marketplace, and it deserves careful regulation with allowance for modest increases over time, at most. Claude Bitner Onsite Computing Services 713.721.5254 (office)

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Bronson Sweet April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Do not remove price caps. This ruins the internet an puts burdens on small businesses. Thank you Bronson Sweet This message and any attached documents may contain sensitive information from Five Nines Technology Group, Inc. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for the delivery of this message to the intended recipient, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attached documents, or taking of any action or omission to take any action in reliance on the contents of this message or of any attached documents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or telephone at (402) 817-2630, and delete the original message immediately.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please keep prices at a fair level, if not somebody is going to abuse it.
by Ron Smith April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please keep prices at a fair level, if not somebody is going to abuse it.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] No Increases
by Nebi Cem Erdogan April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Do not remove the caps on .BIZ domain renewals. -- Sincerely yours, Nebi Cem Erdogan

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Daniel Foster April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. ICANN does not seem to recognize the difference between a legacy extension created with the support of the US government, that predates the existence of ICANN and that has millions of existing users and the brand new extensions that started off with a new set of rules, in particular no price controls, and no existing registrants. They have completely different characteristics, history, and ownership structure. It is not acceptable for ICANN to ignore these differences and to propose that they be treated the same. Removing price caps is not fair to .biz domain owners. Many of them have websites that they have used for years. If price caps are removed, the cost to renew their domain names may become too expensive, and they could be forced to give up websites that are important to them. The Uniform Rapid Suspension policy is too new and untested to apply on domain names that may be 20 years old or more. With the URS, the domain names could be taken down in a matter of days with little notice. ICANN should be doing more to protect owners of .biz domain names. Why is ICANN trying to remove price protections for .biz domain owners so that they can be overcharged for their domain names? ••• Daniel Foster

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] We Do not agree with the proposed changes by ICANN
by Devvault April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

We Do not agree with the proposed changes by ICANN Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] We Do not agree with the proposed changes by ICANN
by Devvault April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

We Do not agree with the proposed changes by ICANN Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] against removal of price caps for .biz domains
by Pat Green April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please reconsider removal of the current price caps on .biz, .org, and .info domains. A very large price increase in the cost for our .biz domains would be a hardship to us. I understand the need for all companies along the line in the domain registration process to be profitable but am quite concerned that removal of the price cap would signal to the primary registry parties that they are free to exploit all those they sell to. I fear that the this would be a significant disruptor to business and those who rely on legacy domains. If our domain costs multiply significantly, we will have to drop some of current domains and would seriously consider other options before adding a new domain. Please leave the current price caps in place for legacy .biz, .org, and .info domains. I don't see destabilization of the domain name market as a benefit to any except Registry Services LLC, Public Interest Registry, and Afilias Limited. Thank you for your consideration. Pat Green The Hezner Corporation | Hezcorp Construction Services 678 Broadway, Libertyville, IL 60048-2325 Phone: 847-918-3800 extension 112 | Fax: 847-549-7633 Mobile: 847-951-1283 Email: patg(a)hezner.biz<mailto:patg@hezner.biz>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by AT Domain Admin April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

To whom it may concern RE: PROPOSED RENEWAL OF .BIZ REGISTRY AGREEMENT The following has reference: _________ Pricing for Domain Name Registrations and Registry Services (Section 2.10 of the .biz renewal agreement): In alignment with the base registry agreement, the price cap provisions in the current .biz agreement, which limited the price of registrations and allowable price increases for registrations, are removed from the .biz renewal agreement. Protections for existing registrants will remain in place in line with the base registry agreement. This change will not only allow the .biz renewal agreement to better conform with the base registry agreement, but also takes into consideration the maturation of the domain name market and the goal of treating the registry operator equitably with operators of new gTLDs and other legacy gTLDs utilizing the base registry agreement. _________ I strongly object to the removal of limitations in the price increase of new .biz domains, in fact I would much rather like to propose a subsidy or reduction of 33% in the current price: 1. The .biz TLD is a legacy TLD recognised internationally for trade and business related information, and an essential commodity for small businesses trying to break into international markets with the strong local content focus of search enjins. Country TLDs merely limit business opportunities to local markets via the most prominent search enjins, while alternative international TLDs are often taken or prohibitively expensive. 2. The internet is slowly removing the barriers for international trade, especially in Africa and other poorer counties, however currency exchange rates remains an obstacle for entrepreneurs in countries with weak currencies. The arrival of countless new TDL registrars have done nothing to lower the entry barrier for entrepreneurs in poorer countries, who wish to gain access to international markets. Some TLDs are priced above the monthly rental fee for a shop in poor countries. By removing price increase limitations, ICANN will merely exclude the poor from legal international trade opportunities via the internet and fuel the smuggling of cheap products and illegal substances into other markets. 3. If the international internet community really want to alleviate poverty across the world, it should much rather consider removing trade barriers for people in poorer countries. Subsidising an international trade TLD may be a starting point. 4. Furthermore ICANN run the risk of being marginalized as an internet authority with growing markets and populations seeking alternative and cheaper internet solutions, and crossing over to the darknet. This pricing proposal may be the last straw to break the camel's back for growing markets. I therefore reject the changes to price limitations. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Increasing in .biz registration prices
by Shane Bill April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

To whom it may concern, I would be concerned that ICANN is going to open up .org, .info, and .biz into a realm of no price restrictions. This could have massive impacts on organizations, small businesses, and other groups who are trying to get online and start out. I'm even thinking beyond first-world countries, and thinking towards third-world or others who may not have the same income level or accessibility. Thank you for considering my comments. -- Shane Bill Consultation du site web Web Development & Consultant Bees on a Bike E-mail shanebill(a)gmail.com <mailto:shanebill@gmail.com> Phone (514) 608-8068 <tel:+15146088068> More information @ Bees on a Bike https://beesonabike.com

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price increase
by Wade Burchette April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am opposed to any price increase. While .biz is not as important as .org, it is still an essential domain name extension. There is no justifiable reason for it, only greed. Please do something for our benefit and do not remove the price cap. Wade Burchette 252-452-1874 919-521-5122

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Lynn Davis April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not remove price caps on all .biz. Lynn A Davis "Truths that are known but not practiced become a judgment rather than a benefit." J MacArthur

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by John April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please STOP this!

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (no subject)
by SIYA RAHIMI April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 I am writing this email to complain about the proposal by ICANN to increase the cost of maintaining.biz domains disproportionately. I run a small business and have a domain (talkeasy.biz) which brings no extra business for me and I keep it purely because it is affordable to run. If the running costs become substantially higher, I may have to get rid of my domain or pass it on. I hope that you consider my plea and remain more rational about the costs of maintaining domains. Thank you. Kind Regards Siya Rahimi

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] increasing rates on .biz domains
by nri3 April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Dear Sir/ M'am , .biz domains offer a true alternative to other domains. They are also cost effective. So increasing costs just because 'you can' ,could well backfireas users could possibly stop using the .biz domain. It seems a bad move to me and could well spell the end of .bizdue to increased costs. So, I'm not in favour of any cost increases on .biz domains. sincerely Tim GaynorUnique RadioAustralia https://www.uniqueradio.biz

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .Biz Renewal Fee increase
by Haggag April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hi, Please do not increase your renewal fee for the .Biz domains, that is not fair. Thank you Haggag Hussein

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Sergey Semenov April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hello, I am a domain name registrant. I've read about a lot of bad decisions under the UDRP. The URS seems even worse. I heard the URS is very new and is being reviewed now to see if it is working properly. It is too soon to include an untested policy on .biz domains where for a few hundred dollars anyone could try to shut down someone else's website. Telling the .biz registry that it can charge any price it wants for renewing a domain name is a terrible idea. Why would you allow them to set a crazy high price? They could try to force the domain owners to pay a very high price each year to renew their domain name, and if the domain owner either won't or can't, then the .biz registry could take away their domain name, set a high registration price on it, and then try to find someone else who is willing to pay a high price for it. This is very unfair to long time .biz domain owners who may see their prices raised sky high for no reason. You let the new domain extensions charge any price they want, but that hasn't gone so well. Lots of people got burned when the new registries offered low rates for the first year, and then after people registered the domain names and some built web sites on them, some of the prices were raised through the roof. .Biz has been working just fine for decades where the prices maybe go up a little bit each year. Allowing huge price increases from one year to the next could ruin .biz for everybody. I think you should pay a little more attention to what is good for the owners of .biz domain names. The registries are doing fine. They don't need your help as they are already making plenty of money. Regards, Sergey Domain Name Registrant

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (no subject)
by anddone anddone April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

this can't be done as this will increase all costs of everything by the start of domain name and ending to real offline life things -- polosas ICQ: 464-584-976 | MSN: polosas @ xxx.lt | Yahoo: polosasmk | AIM: polosasmk | Skype: polosas M.K.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz domain name
by ben cowan April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Dear whom it may concern,An increase in the cost of annual price of domain will adversely affect the viability of small businesses like mine www.smart-ink.biz . I am an individual artist who sells what I create on this site. These domain names are one of the last corners of a democratic internet where the little guy can prosper and have a voice. I implore ICANN to scrap any plans to remove the cap of these urls, which make personal websites affordable.Thank you.Ben CowanArtist, business owner, SMART INK Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] CONGRATULATIONS comments-biz-renewal-03apr19 YOU WON
by John Madden April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

OUR DEDICATED CLOUD PLATFORM BLOCKCHAIN POWERED TEAM OF CONSULTANTS IS HORNED TO DELIVER YOUR PRISE OF A TRIP TO THE WONDROUS NIC.BIZ OF ICANN INC!!!!!!!!!! CONTACT OUR CONSULTANTS AT SECURITY(a)GOATSE.FR TO CLAIM YOUR PRISE!!!!!!!!!! HURRY WHILE STOCKS LAST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] no to .biz limit increases
by Weston Childers April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Domain vendors being free to raise rates drastically each year would be a disaster for internet users and content creators. It would encourage unscrupulous bulk domain name purchasing, lining the pockets of scammers at the expense of individuals and organizations who are trying to make a home for their work on the internet. It would needlessly strengthen the hand of the Facebooks, Amazons, and Googles of the internet but stifling anything smaller in the ecosystem. Just as cities and states need rent control to prevent landlords from further crippling tenants, the goals of the internet are far better served when domains are kept inexpensive and readily available. WESTON CHILDERS Film Director | Collaborator | Entrepreneur

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] ICANN sucks donkey dick
by wowaname＠nigge.rs April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

* g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g g o / \ \ / \ o a| | \ | | a t| `. | | : t s` | | \| | s e \ | / / \\\ --__ \\ : e x \ \/ _--~~ ~--__| \ | x * \ \_-~ ~-_\ | * g \_ \ _.--------.______\| | g o \ \______// _ ___ _ (_(__> \ | o a \ . C ___) ______ (_(____> | / a t /\ | C ____)/ \ (_____> |_/ t s / /\| C_____) | (___> / \ s e | ( _C_____)\______/ // _/ / \ e x | \ |__ \\_________// (__/ | x * | \ \____) `---- --' | * g | \_ ___\ /_ _/ | g o | / | | \ | o a | | / \ \ | a t | / / | | \ |t s | / / \__/\___/ | |s e | / / | | | |e x | | | | | |x * g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x *

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Regarding price increases
by Pawan Bahuguna April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hi ICANN, I am one of the domain owners and came to know that you are going to increase the price of .BIZ domains. Please do not do that. We are already paying a good amount for registration and renewal of the domain. Please don't make hard for us to survive in this internet age. Regards Pawan Bahuguna Regards Pawan Bahuguna

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz domain registration pricing
by David Rossiter April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I'm rather shocked to hear that you would consider extending the contract with PIR for .org domains and allow them to increase the price at will. Think about the abusive pricing in the unregulated pharmaceutical industry. Life-saving insulin prices have increase dramatically even though we've known how to make insulin for 100 years and it's not a difficult or expensive process. Why did they increase the price so dramatically? Because they could get away with it. Unrestrained capitalism is not a good thing. I understand similar contract changes are being considered for .biz domain registration. Please don't change the pricing restrictions for .biz (or .org) domains! Best, David E: David(a)eRossiter.org (mailto:David@eRossiter.org) A: Sequim, WA 98382 (https://maps.google.com/?q=Sequim%2C%20WA%2098382)

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Don’t make this change!
by Edgardo Ceballos April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

The service is a natural monopoly, and without options, We will be at the mercy of unscrupulous business practices. Please don’t make this change, it’s not good for the startup and entrepreneurship communities! Best regards, Ed Ceballos

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Keep price limits on .biz
by Geoff Kuenning April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Although it was not part of the original "big seven" top-level domains, .biz has long served as a sensible alternative to .com. Thousands of small businesses have taken advantage of that top-level domain to establish their Web sites; many of them have done so to work around domain squatters who captured, but do not operate, closely related .com domains. Removing price limitations on .biz would put those small businesses in an untenable position. Equivalent .com domains are often unavailable, and the existing sites already have established a presence under the businesses' customers. A significantly higher price would certainly be a major burden, and would probably drive a few small businesses into bankruptcy. Nor is it the case that significant price increases are necessary. DNS operates effectively on the funding that it has, and the addition of new high-priced top-level domains such as .money has resulted in a significant additional infusion of cash. There is no reason to remove price limitations. Please keep .biz affordable! -- Geoff Kuenning geoff(a)cs.hmc.edu http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~geoff/ "There's a true schizophrenia where if you say to voters, you know, do you think the federal government spends too much money and they should spend less, they say yeah, absolutely. Then you name specific things, like Pell grants for students and they say, no, not that. How 'bout NIH, medical research funding? Nah, you really shouldn't cut that. And pretty soon you've proved that what the American public is against is arithmetic." -- Bill Gates, March 10, 2011

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price Cap Increase
by Sylvester Ink April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

To Whom It May Concern, Removing the price increase cap on domain names will have a detrimental effect on smaller businesses, organizations, and individuals, since over the long term, the prices for these names will rise above an affordable level for these small groups. As a result, there will be less independent innovation and representation on the web, an aspect that makes the internet such a powerful economic force. Please reconsider your position on this decision.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price increase
by Robert Young April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I think that you should stop this contract update. As a consumer I think this is a ploy to get the single consumers out of the market so big business can take our domains because we will no longer be able to afford them. If you continue down this path then I think our only recourse is to push hard for more regulation so you can not do this to us just to help your big business friends. I think another option would be to have each state have laws to regulate you. Robert Young robertyoung112(a)gmail.com

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please do not remove the cap
by Geoff Infield April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please reconsider your decision to remove the cap on annual increases. The existing cap is already more than generous and I cannot fathom why it would be eliminated.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not remove price controls
by Rod Roark April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

This invites price gouging and is outrageous.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] BIZ Renewal Price
by Nitya. M. April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hi, As a general public user and owner of .BIZ domains, my kind request to ICANN to not allow big corporates to charge big amount for domain renewal price. Increase the price only if the domain operating cost increases like DNS server cost...etc. Hope, ICANN will be continuing support for the general public. Best Regards Nityananda Maity

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Otto Béatrice April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Dear ICANN, ICANN staff should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs. These TLDs have a long history and are in wide use based on a significant period of price-capping. To treat them the same as new TLDs denies the extent to which their use is established, and the costs this will impose on millions of small companies, individual entrepreneurs and non-profit organizations. This feels like an abuse of more or less a monopoly position. ICANN appears to be entirely catering to registries by removing price caps. ICANN should stand up for the public interest and registrants! We ask you to avoid removing price caps on such long legacy TLDs as .info, .org. and .biz. Beatrice Otto

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Potential Hardship
by Bob Williams April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

As a very small business, any additional expense to me is a hardship. I look for ways to save money on each business expense I must pay for. Don't add to my burden with a price increase I can't afford. rvw <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Renewal
by tomwitt60＠gmail.com April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not allow this price increase, Thank you

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (no subject)
by Milton Adams April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please retain the current low domain renewal prices. Thank you for not increasing or making it possible for the current price cap to be lifted.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (No Subject)
by Eugene Ramirez April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not raise the prices! Keep them the same.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz
by Chad Michael Lawson April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please don't raise the price. Do the right thing and avoid your greed. -- regards, ************************ Chad Michael Lawson Chad Connects, LLC http://www.ChadConnects.com Connecting You to Your Market 480-343-5906

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please say NO to the raining of price caps on .BIZ domains
by John April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

We understand that you are considering removing price caps for .biz domains through your contracted party. If unwise prices rises of domains were to occur because of this, it will be the start of the dumbing down of the marvelous resource that the internet is to the US and the world. Further, there’s a good chance it will simply drive innovation out of the .biz sector and drive people away from seeking information. We hope you will ensure that our future isn’t decided by big business profiteering. Sincerely, John Ridgway Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Gustavo Palminha April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I write to oppose the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs as doing so will only create a free-for-all on limitless price increases across the well-established board. The new GTLDs are already accepted as alternative options with price expectations that vary greatly based on the registry; however, current registrants of older well established extensions are expected to maintain some level of stability. These legacy domain names, some of which have been registered for many years, are unlike the new mess being created and owners of these legacy names have a reasonable expectation of affordability and stability. The old manta goes ‘if it is not broken, you do not try and fix it.’ The vast majority of domain owners will remain unaffected so long as the fluctuating and exorbitant prices remain in the newer name space; there will be plenty of years ahead for ICANN to benefit from those while allowing stability within the legacy name space. Leave well enough alone and move forward without effecting millions and millions of current and well established registrants who expect their domain expenses to remain reasonable, affordable and stable. Gustavo Palminha Enviado do Correio<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> para Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Objecting to proposal that would allow main registry to increase prices with no caps.
by Pawan Misra April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hi there - The fact that there can only be 1 entity that runs a domain suffix means there is zero competition in that space. That's non-competitive and inherently unfair. If you extend the contract for .biz domains, please cap increases in prices to LESS than 5% per year. That's more than the US inflation rate, and more than fair (esp. given that technical innovations always drive per unit price DOWN, not up). Thank you. Regards, Pawan.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comments
by Michael Cocchini April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Greetings, I do not agree with the proposed price increase. The internet was created as a communications network that could withstand a nuclear disaster. It is and ought to be accessible to everyone and that includes being affordable for all member. Thank you, Dr. Michael Cocchini MD, MBA.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Stop This Outrage!
by Logan Bentley April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear all the people at ICANN, WHY ON EARTH ARE YOU DOING THIS? Please, doing this will not only make less opertunities for new developers like myself but also diminish your income rate as less people means less money and that means you will have to up the prices again! Eventually the whole circle will diminish and you could be forced to shut down. Please, this is a much riskier way of doing things from a business point of view opposed to keeping thing the price they are and as you gain more and more buyer slowly down the costs. Yours, Logan Bentley

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz domain price cap
by TLC April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please keep the domain name price cap in place. Removing the cap will create a hardship for business and personal domain name users. Thank you

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price increase biz
by David Francoeur April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Keeping the prices low is really important to keep the web accessible. Thanks, David

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz renewal price increases
by Muhd Ashiq April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hello, please limit registry price increases for .biz, .org and .info domain extensions. Left to their own devices, single market player registries will naturally operate as a monopoly as economic studies have shown. This in turn would make domains more out of reach to general consumers. Thank you. α s h ı q ¬

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comments
by PandF Systems April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

ICANN should be aware that “market forces” and “free market” are misnomers to let controlling interests charge as much as they can reasonably get away with. Where the Internet has opened up to a free market, the consumer has usually suffered. Letting PIR charge whatever it wants can hardly be described as in the users best interest. Please reconsider this proposal. Kind Regards, Anthony Wolfenden [cid:image001.png@01D36136.AD32C430]<http://www.facebook.com/anthony.wolfenden>[cid:image002.png@01D36136.AD32C430]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/anthonywolfenden>[cid:image003.png@01D36136.AD32C430]<http://twitter.com/awolfend>[cid:image004.png@01D36136.AD32C430]<skype:awolfend?call>[cid:image005.png@01D36136.AD32C430]<https://zoom.us/j/2483378908>[cid:image006.png@01D36136.AD32C430]<http://wolfenden.net/>[cid:image007.png@01D36136.AD32C430]<mailto:pandf.systems.tss.qld.edu.au> Email:pandf.systems@tss.qld.edu.au<mailto:pandf.systems@tss.qld.edu.au> Phone:0416 444 444<tel:+61416-444-444>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Deregulating .Biz
by Blair at Neolith April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

It's just greed driving this and the people pushing for it just want to take what others have worked for via a tax. I suspect his will only lead to a slight increase in revenue before everyone switches to another TLD. I expect the general masses of small to medium businesses to abandon .BIZ for TLD's that don't demand ridiculous sums of money yearly. -- *Neolith Graphics Logo <https://ngprint.com>* *Blair Wolf* Administrator Neolith Graphics <https://ngprint.com> Blair(a)NGprint.com <mailto:Blair@ngprint.com> /"if it holds an image, we produce it"/ 2981 K St. San Diego, CA 92102 USA Direct: *+1 (702) 624-0498* Office: *+1 (702) 546-8338* skype: *blair_wolf* Blair on Twitter <https://twitter.com/Blair_Wolf>Blair on Linked in <https://www.linkedin.com/in/blairwolf>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] No to this increase
by Andrea Alexandria April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I write to oppose the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs as doing so will only create a free-for-all on limitless price increases across the well-established board. The new GTLDs are already accepted as alternative options with price expectations that vary greatly based on the registry; however, current registrants of older well established extensions are expected to maintain some level of stability. These legacy domain names, some of which have been registered for many years, are unlike the new mess being created and owners of these legacy names have a reasonable expectation of affordability and stability. The old manta goes ‘if it is not broken, you do not try and fix it.’ The vast majority of domain owners will remain unaffected so long as the fluctuating and exorbitant prices remain in the newer name space; there will be plenty of years ahead for ICANN to benefit from those while allowing stability within the legacy name space. Leave well enough alone and move forward without effecting millions and millions of current and well established registrants who expect their domain expenses to remain reasonable, affordable and stable. Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] No to this increase
by Andrea Alexandria April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] (no subject)
by Robert Allen April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I understand this change will allow PIR to increase domain rates by 100x YoY. That is contrary to my interests. As such, I oppose this proposed change. -Robert Allen 512-666-7539

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Bruce Lerner April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

As both a private and commercial user of the communication network developed by the US government with protocols developed by innumerable individuals and organizations without any expectation for remuneration, I find the idea of letting a political organization set prices that have no relation to their cost -of-doing-business. You are proposing thievery in place of humanity or even socially conscious capitalism. BE ASHAMED. Bruce -- Bruce Lerner <bruce(a)brucelerner.com>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Domain name pricing changes
by Lisa Helminiak April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom It May Concern, "ICANN’s current contract with Public Interest Registry (PIR), the group that runs the .org domain name, allows PIR to increase the wholesale price of .org domains by 10% a year. Now ICANN is proposing extending the contract to operate .biz but *letting PIR set whatever prices it wants*." Domain names are a public resource and should not be made profit centers. This is bad policy and will affect organizations ability to retain their hard won place on the public Internet. Please stop this policy of allowing PIR to set whatever prices they want to keep this resource affordable. Thank you, Lisa ----- Lisa Helminiak Principal | Azul Seven 612-767-4335 skype: lisaazul azulseven.com *The difficult is what takes a little time; the impossible is what takes a little longer.* *-Fridtjof Nansen, Nobel Peace Prize Winner*

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Domain price increase
by Naureen Ashraf April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please don’t do it The domains are already very expensive Specially for people outside USA n UK As 1 usd = 141-145 PKR Home entrepreneur like me will get highly effected Regards, Naureen Ashraf Customer Namecheap

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz Domain Costs
by Nathan L Krause April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I am requesting that the cap which limits the annual increase on the cost of .biz domains remain in effect. Removing it would very likely create unbearable financial strain on individuals and small businesses, which are the primary registrants of .biz domains. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Against the Removal of Limit Increase of .biz domains
by merissakelley＠infraredcamerasinc.com April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

M Kelley Web Designer + Developer Infrared Cameras Inc InfraredCameras.com <https://infraredcameras.com/> Lab # 409.554.0081 Office # 409.861.0788 --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by Nestor Pabon April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern. The proposed removal of price caps on .biz top level domains is going to have a devastating effect on many small business who can not compete with fortune 500 companies. I own a small business and although I have no direct employees, I do retain a cadre of professional support in different disciplines. Managing cost and providing the best service I can for my clients has kept me in business for several years. If caps are removed from .biz top level domains small internet based business like mine will lose their competitive edge, and may even cause many such small business to close their doors. Many of these business are owned by individuals who because of physical handicaps and other limitations cannot find gainful employment. Their online business provides a means to an income otherwise unobtainable. Removal of price caps on .biz top level domains will force many self-employee individuals to go out of business. These are individuals who make quarterly contributions to the revenues this country collects via taxes. Please do not remove the price caps on .biz level domains. Nestor Pabon novapco(a)gmail.com

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz Price Caps
by Tricia Williams April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

As the owner of many domain names, I do not want to see price-caps removed and believe price increases would be unfair. Further, legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different and registrants of legacy TLDs are entitled to price stability and predictability, and should not be subject to price increases with no maximums. Unlike new gTLDs, registrants of legacy TLDs registered their names and made their online presence on legacy TLDs on the basis that price caps would continue to exist. Thanks, Tricia Williams Help Desk Specialist II Crawford Contractor Connection 10550 Deerwood Park Blvd., Suite 100 Jacksonville, FL 32256 (904) 513-7385 office Email: tricia.williams(a)contractorconnection.com<mailto:tricia.williams@contractorconnection.com> Web: www.contractorconnection.com<http://www.contractorconnection.com/> [CC_Logo_black] [cid:4__=0ABB09B2DFCBFFA98f9e8a93df@us.crawco.com] ________________________________ [cid:image001.png@01CCE4E6.068F3000]<http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Contractor-Connection/243149982407353>[cid:image002.png@01CCE4E6.068F3000]<https://plus.google.com/u/0/114768479285109610490#114768479285109610490/pos…>[cid:image004.png@01CCE4E6.068F3000]<http://twitter.com/#!/ContrConnection>[cid:image005.png@01CCE4E6.068F3000]<http://www.youtube.com/user/ContractorConnection>[cid:image006.png@01CCE4E6.068F3000]<http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Crawford-Contractor-Connection-4206088?trk=m…> ________________________________ This transmission is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure. The unauthorized distribution or publication of Crawford Contractor Connection communications is strictly prohibited. If you are not the named addressee, you are NOT authorized to read, print, retain copy or disseminate this communication, its attachments or any part of them. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this communication from all computers. This communication does not form any contractual obligation on behalf of the sender, the sender's employer, or the employer's parent company, affiliates or subsidiaries.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] ICANN fees
by Todd Warren April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please do NOT support letting PIR set whatever prices it wants

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price caps removals
by Ville Valkonen April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

This is just silly. ICANN should be the instance not craving for money. If this happens, you have failed. Badly. -- Kinds regards, Ville Valkonen

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] don't raise prices
by Jeri Hampton April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please renew current limitations on pricing when they expire in June. Thanks, Jeri Anne Hampton

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Opposition to Elimination of Price Cap for .Biz Domains
by Derek DeVries April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern, I would like to express my objection to the proposed removal of the price cap on the .biz domain for wholesale domain registrars like Public Interest Registry (PIR). The Internet is a utility, and given PIR's position as a natural monopoly, costs must be controlled by government oversight to protect citizens and businesses. Best, - Derek Derek DeVries Director Digital & Social Strategy Direct: 616.258.5782 Mobile: 616.723.1073 www.lambert.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lambert…> [signature_104015828]<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flambert.co…> 47 Commerce Ave Grand Rapids, MI 49503 Detroit | New York | PROI Worldwide Partner

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] biz-renewal
by August Wusterhausen April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

stop these price increases -- August Wusterhausen

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price changes
by Tyler Kunz April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hello, Please reconsider these changes which could potentially allow large increases to the cost of domains. It's so important for the internet to remain open, and removing any limitations on prices will push out a lot of individuals who would otherwise be able to afford an online presence. Thank you for your consideration.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please do not increase prices
by Rachel Wolfe April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I am writing to request the prices do not increase. I have been a namecheap.com <http://namecheap.com/> customer for several years, and my business if very small-operated just by me, and the costs of doing business are felt on every level. When things start costing more than those providing a service can afford, the weight gets distributed to those at the bottom who can least afford it. Rachel Wolfe +47 400 56 846 +1 310 905 9763 www.rachelwolfe.com <http://www.rachelwolfe.com/> atelierwolfe(a)icloud.com <mailto:atelierwolfe@icloud.com> Instagram.com/atelierwolfe <http://instagram.com/atelierwolfe>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please don't increase .biz prices
by Erica Douglass April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hi, I run a fairly popular blog and website at erica.biz. .biz domains have always been looked down upon vs. a .com domain, but from the beginning I've been a supporter of .biz. Increasing .biz renewal prices will negatively affect how .biz domains are viewed by the general public. I would ask that ICANN consider not allowing the .biz registry to increase prices further, as a way to keep the .biz TLD accessible to more people. -Erica Douglass erica at erica dot biz

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz price cap removal
by Mary Kate Riecks April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern, I’m an artist and small business, with a lot of overhead and very little profit margin. If my .biz domain name price rose, it would be devastating to my brand and all of the materials I’ve printed and distributed that link to my site would be null, because I would potentially have to make an entirely new website with a domain I could afford. Please consider the small business owners when making this decision. We can’t afford such a price jump like big companies could. Thanks for your time Mary Kate Riecks

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Writing in opposition of uncapping fees for .biz domains
by Oshyan April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hello, As a small business owner and entrepreneur, I work with a limited budget and constant financial challenges. Like most modern businesses I also rely heavily on the Internet to reach my customers. The .biz domain has been offered for sale at reasonable prices that businesses like mine can afford for years. The proposal to uncap fees that the registry operator can charge will have a dramatic negative impact on the hundreds of thousands of small business owners and entrepreneurs like myself. There is no compelling reason aside from pure profit motive to allow this rule change and I strongly oppose it. Please remove this change for the renewed agreement for the .biz domain name. Sincerely, Oshyan Greene

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] don't allow massive rate hits for domain purchases
by Dave Ruder April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Domain vendors being free to raise rates drastically each year would be a disaster for internet users and content creators. It would encourage unscrupulous bulk domain name purchasing, lining the pockets of scammers at the expense of individuals and organizations who are trying to make a home for their work on the internet. It would needlessly strengthen the hand of the Facebooks, Amazons, and Googles of the internet but stifling anything smaller in the ecosystem. Just as cities and states need rent control to prevent landlords from further crippling tenants, the goals of the internet are far better served when domains are kept inexpensive and readily available. Sincerely, Dave Ruder Brooklyn, NY

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz
by Orlando Big O Barrera April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I'm writing to request that ICANN reconsiders removing registration price caps on .biz domains. .org is one of the most widely used and recognized TLD's. If price caps are removed, registration and renewal of these domains may become uneconomical, forcing many important organizations to change their addresses and threatening the prominence of .org. Unlike newer gTLD’s, .biz is already very established. Allowing PIR, the registry operator, to act monopolistically with such a prominent TLD goes against what the Web should be. Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Proposed Removal of Price Caps
by Steve Baker April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I understand that ICANN is considering removing price caps on all .org. ,info, and .biz TLDs and I wish to express my outrage. As a consumer and business owner of several domains that fall under these categories, this could result in huge price increases in the annual cost to me. I beseech you to not remove the caps to the annual price increase or change the amount of the annual price increase currently allowed. Thank you, Steven Baker 615-606-2608

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Price
by Михаил Михаил April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

As domains owners we would like to inform that we stand against price increasing. Please do Your best not to increase prices. <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_cam…> Без вирусов. www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_cam…> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] NO to removal of price caps
by Tish Summerville April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I write to oppose the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs as doing so will only create a free-for-all on limitless price increases across the well-established board. The new GTLDs are already accepted as alternative options with price expectations that vary greatly based on the registry; however, current registrants of older well established extensions are expected to maintain some level of stability. These legacy domain names, some of which have been registered for many years, are unlike the new mess being created and owners of these legacy names have a reasonable expectation of affordability and stability. The old manta goes ‘if it is not broken, you do not try and fix it.’ The vast majority of domain owners will remain unaffected so long as the fluctuating and exorbitant prices remain in the newer name space; there will be plenty of years ahead for ICANN to benefit from those while allowing stability within the legacy name space. Leave well enough alone and move forward without effecting millions and millions of current and well established registrants who expect their domain expenses to remain reasonable, affordable and stable. Tish Summerville

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz comment
by Johny Volodzskis April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I am a .biz registrant ICANN staff should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN policy making is supposed to be a ‘bottom up, multi-stakeholder model’. I believe that legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs. Legacy TLDs are essentially a public trust, unlike new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private interests. Registrants of legacy TLDs are entitled to price stability and predictability, and should not be subject to price increases with no maximums. Unlike new gTLDs, registrants of legacy TLDs registered their names and made their online presence on legacy TLDs on the basis that price caps would continue to exist. Unrestrained price increases on the millions of .biz registrants who are not-for-profits or non-profits would be unfair to them. Unchecked price increases have the potential to result in hundreds of millions of dollars being transferred from these organizations to one non-profit, the Internet Society, with .biz registrants receiving no benefit in return. ICANN should not allow one non-profit nearly unlimited access to the funds of other non-profits. ICANN appears to be entirely catering to registries by removing price caps. ICANN should stand up for the public interest and registrants! Thanks Johny

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] DoNot Remove Price Caps
by E Francisco April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I agree with previous comment from Steve Sun Steven Sun sunwenyang at gmail.com Wed Apr 24 17:15:25 UTC 2019 "ICANN is a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with participants from all over the world dedicated to keeping the Internet secure, stable and interoperable." I do not understand how ICANN can achieve the above while allowing unrestrained price increases on millions of domain names, I am objecting the proposal of removing the price cap provisions in the current .biz agreement. Instead, ICANN should actively seeking new providers who can lower the cost of the .biz domain names and award the agreement to a winning bidder, for the public's benefit. An open, fair and competitive process should be taken to procure the .biz domain name operator before renewing any agreement.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please no price increase
by John Jester Ching April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hi I'm a small business owner and purchase domains regularly. I heard about the planned price increase and removing the limits of 10% increase per year to whatever they desire. It would greatly affect our business and would like to request if you could stop the price increase please. It would greatly help us small businesses and would be bad for our economy overall Looking forward for your support in this matter. Thanks -- Thank you for your email! Due to my current workload I am only checking email at 11am and 4pm. If you need anything immediately please call me on my cell so that I can address this important matter with you. Thank you and have a great day! - John Jester Ching

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Opposed to removing the price cap.
by Daniel Carrera April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz domain names 10% cap
by Anne Odenwald April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

In the intetest of the public, retain the 10% cap on .biz domain names Sincerely, Anne Odenwald Cell 972-333-2513

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please don't remove price caps.
by Goeckner-Wald, Claire M. April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please don't remove price caps.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Domain Name Increases
by Mike Ande April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please, DO NOT increase the price for .biz domain names. Most of us are just small businesses and cannot afford the increase. Thanks, Mike Andre 2904 SE 8th St., #1129 Renton, WA 98058 (425) 533-1317 mjandre(a)comcast.net

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Contract Renewal Proposal
by Vince Chris April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Removing pricing caps for top level domains will benefit only the few. This is a stupid idea ICANN.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] .biz price increase unfair
by williamaderin2 April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I totally disagree with increasing domain purchases for .biz as I am a consumer who will not be happy if domain names increases Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Comments: Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry Agreement
by admin＠finhosting.fi April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Absolutely do NOT proceed with the removal of price caps on the "Legacy" TLDs. There's no reason, no excuse, no anything, for such a thing. It would just be extended to the .com etc. later anyway.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Do not remove pricing cap!
by Johann Beda April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I do not think that the pricing cap on should be removed. No need to do so has been justified, and it provides a small bit of protection against unjustified future increases.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Keep things as they are!
by Nate Moore April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

The current system for managing TLDs, specifically as it pertains to the original set (.org, .net, .com) is perfect and adequate. Do not change it. It's not broken. The proposed changes will open things up to unregulated price changes, and possible significant increases to the cost to run a domain. I remember the late 90's, when your average individual was prices out of domain ownership. That has changed. I proudly run my own stuff now. Don't adopt this change. The consumers will lose. ~Nathaniel Moore Livermore, CA

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please Protect the .Biz Domain Name
by Brandon Warner April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Do not allow monopoly control over the .Biz domain name. We already have record wealth and income inequality in the world right now. Don't do your part to make it worse. The internet is one of the last places where we still have some elements of democracy and equality left. Don't unleash the greed. Do the right thing. Regards, Brandon Warner

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] The domain prices are high enough!
by Lonell Multimedia April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dont raise it! -- [image: --] Cedric Lonell [image: https://]about.me/cedriclonell <https://about.me/cedriclonell?promo=email_sig&utm_source=email_sig&utm_medi…>

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please stop price increases
by ブライトンUSA April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear: ICANN I’m using my .biz domain for over 2 years and I love my domain. It is essential for my activity. Please stop increasing the price. Sincerely, Akihiro Yasuda

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] This is an awful idea
by Tony Cardenas April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

This is a monopoly and increasing the prices will surely make the internet as a whole way less competitive. Please do not allow free increase of prices. If you want free increase of prices, why not allow free market to take place? Either it's a controlled monopoly, or it's a free market, but you can't have a monopoly free of rules.

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Please don't increase prices
by Nancy O'Donohue April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

It will damage small business owners like me. Nancy O'Donohue joy(a)lakeshorehealing.com

1 0

[Comments-biz-renewal-03apr19] Against PIR pricing changes
by Delwin Holeman April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I'm against letting PIR set whatever prices it wants for .biz domains Delwin Holeman ID Web and Print, LLC P: 706-338-1464 idwebandprint.com <http://www.idwebandprint.com> delwin(a)idwebandprint.com

1 0