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

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment on ICANN/Verisign .com Price Increases
by Andrew Posmontier Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

I am a student, programmer, software researcher and .com domain owner who relies on reasonably priced domains in order to get my work out into the world. Unilateral price increases like the ones proposed in the ICANN/Verisign deal will do serious harm to my ability to do business and document my work, as well as getting in the way of recreation and personal websites. I vigorously object to deals like this made without any concern for or consultation with users like me. Andrew Posmontier

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] You're Hurting Small Businesses
by KIM TUMEY Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Why would you increase prices knowing small businesses are the backbone of America?

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement Comments
by Erwin de Haan Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Dear Sir/Madam, As the holder of quite some domains for quite some time, I feel like letting those prices rise with the proposed rates is very detrimental to smaller parties and private parties. Making them unable to own (for now the .com domain, but many will follow) any of the more popular domain names. Essentially this proposal gives VeriSign free reign to become a complete monopoly on the .com domain at unreachable prices for anyone but the large enterprise. In the past the .com domain is the standard and this means some very old hobby projects will lose their domain since the they can no longer afford the price and we all know how important names are, changing a domain while retaining traffic is not easy. It sets a very bad precedent, and since .com is part of the “core” of the domain namespace and many others are looking to what going to happen, I feel like there should be a lot of restraint from deviating from the status quo when it might have detrimental effects on the accessibility of .com domains. Since the effects will spread. Kind regards, Erwin de Haan

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Albert Personal Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

I am a registrant of .com domain names. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. If anything, the cost for this should in fact be reducing. Albert Surovik Caldwell,Texas United States Albert

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] mailto:comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20@icann.org
by Praxis | Darian Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Hello, I would like to voice my opposition to Proposed Amendment 3. I believe that the global DNS registration system should be run primarily as a public concern. The only entities that stand to benefit from the proposed arrangement are verisign itself, at the expense of the public. These price hikes will impact the millions of small, independent businesses and developers that rely on the system as is to make their livelihood. Further, this could prove yet another point of pressure that convinces a small business to make their online presence exclusively in the Facebook walled garden and eschew the web itself. The web, and global DNS, were envisioned to be run for the public good, and they SHOULD be run for the public good. Deals such as this are an abdication of that mandate; short sighted profit chasing at the expense of all else. Please do not adopt this proposal. Yours truly, Darian Reck

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Jordan Ettinger Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Hello Jordan, 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Please take this feedback into consideration. Thank you. Jordan Ettinger Victoria, British Columbia Canada

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Shakil Shaikh Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

I am a .com registrant and am associated with the secondary market. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. No one other than Verisign wants 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 - and already makes profits at current price levels in excess of the operating needs to maintain a registry. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. The public has a vested interest in reasonably priced domain registrations to foster innovation on the internet and allow the individuals to maintain a presence on the web.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Feedback
by Shukry Zablah Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Pls don't make things that will increase the price of my domain.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Anne Jan Hempenius Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Hello, I would like to voice my opinion on the price increase. It shouldn't happen. Thanks

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Public Comment - Kirby Best
by Kirby Best Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

To whom it may concern, According to this new agreement, Verisign will be allowed to increase the > wholesale price to registrars for .COM domains every year for 8 out of the > next 10 years, and the increases don’t stop there. > What additional benefit to the public will coincide with these increases? Managing a public good like domain registration means that you have to act as a good caretaker. It would be one thing if there was some new benefit to the public that would justify years of cost increases. Instead it seems like you're using your near-monopoly to allow a private company to extract profits for no discernible reason. Alongside these contract changes, *Verisign agreed to pay ICANN an > additional $20 million dollars over five years to support* ICANN's domain > name system initiatives, without any clarity about how ICANN will spend the > money, or who will ensure that the funds are properly spent on domain > infrastructure. > I think the proposed changes will be a net negative. Thank you, Kirby Best

1 0