February 2020 - comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20@icann.org

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Adonis Ramirez Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. No one other than Verisign want increases in .COM prices. The current rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified. Verisign is merely your manager of the .COM Registry – it has no business dictating the price. Adonis Tucson

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] No justification for price increase
by Chris Lowry Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

It's completely unreasonable. No justification at all. Why allow it?!

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by J n G Mann Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

To Drafters of Proposed Amendment 3, Price controls are necessary to ensure equal access to essential, public resources, which includes internet properties and the .COM domain in particular. Furthermore, transparency of all financial arrangements related to essential resources are necessary to maintain the public's trust and the accountability of those stewards of essential, public resources. The proposed deal outlined in Amendment 3 falls short of being transparent and under reasonable control. I urge ICANN to shed light on A3 and revisit its terms with direct input from public representatives, not just the private entities who seek financial gain from A3. Sincerely, GM

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Do not approve .COM price increases
by Jamie Purches Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

As the owner of .com domains from which I run my business I'm absolutely not on board with the idea of a price increase to maintain them. For what reason should we pay more for our domains? I'll tell you why. It's a money grab, similar to what the GOP is doing in the US–and just as secretively it seems. They know they're on their way out so they're taking what they can, while they can. It's the same with .com domains. The public is moving away from .com in favour of alternate domains that allow them to be more creative with their URLs, so the fat cats want to get as fat as they can–as fast as they can–while they can still skim. I am vehemently against the Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement. _____________________________ Jamie Purches Donkey Ink Design Phone 604 837 9447 Email jamie(a)donkeyink.com Website donkeyink.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com price rise plans
by Sandeep Verma Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello, I was alerted that the Verisign can increase .com prices over the next few years. I have also understood that Verisign have agreed to fund $20 million to ICANN over 5 years with no explanation as to why or how these funds will be allocated. I am firmly against the notion of .com price rises. The general community was not consulted and this will have an impact on online growth. I would like you to take this a formal request not to proceed with .com price increases. kind regards Sandeep sandeep.verma(a)NewestReveal.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by El Hombre Patata Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a domainer (I invest in domain names as a business). The current rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified. José Pujante Murcia, Murcia Spain

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] (no subject)
by Rod Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Any change in the direction of the openness and universal availability are welcome. Obviously this include keeping the cost as low as possible.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Lisa Moore Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

To Whom It May Concern: I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Lisa Moore London, UK Founder *URBAN GILT* www.urbangilt.com <https://www.urbangilt.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email%20signature&ut…> The Stanley Building 7 Pancras Square London N1C 4AG <https://www.linkedin.com/in/lisacmoore/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email%2…> <http://www.instagram.com/urbangilt?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email%20sign…> <http://www.facebook.com/urbangilt?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email%20signa…> <http://www.pinterest.com/urbangilt?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email%20sign…>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Public Comment
by Difan Zhang Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

As an engineer, I strongly oppose the proposed Amendment. With the amount of .com's increasing, administrative cost of Verisign per domain should decrease due to economy of scale, as maintaining a domain registration database and a global DNS infrastructure will definitely cost a very small fraction of the registration fee. Allowing Verisign to increase price alone is questionable -- the monopoly is essentially rent seeking from the public to profit certain private entities. Difan Zhang (@tifan)

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Public interest
by pmartel＠aol.com Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I can see that the proposed amendment is in the interest of Verisign: they get an increase in the wholesale price of .COM domains far in excess of the cost of living.I can see that the proposed amendment is is the interest of ICANN: they get a payment of $20 million.I can't see that the proposed ammendment is in the interest of the public. Best wishes,--Philip O Martel

1 0