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

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

Feb. 11, 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. ashwin shahapurkar India

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Stop ruin .com domains
by Adw Heroes Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Hi! Stop ruin .com domains! I completely agree with the points in this post https://www.namecheap.com/blog/icann-allows-com-price-increases-gets-more-m… (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/4458CEC5-7E8D-4498-A8B5-3EE0F4024335@ge…)

1 0

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

Feb. 11, 2020

Dear Sir/Madam, >From what I understand the proposed changes will mean that .COM wholesale domain prices can grow by more than 70% over and above current prices over the next decade. The contract also allows for other price increases, which could drive prices up further, ultimately making .COM domains less accessible and more expensive for everybody. Alongside these contract changes, I understand that Verisign has 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. Overall, it doesn't sound like a good deal for consumers but instead a good deal for Verisign and ICANN. Yours faithfully, Matthew Lilley ------------------------------ *My PGP Public Key Identity* pub 2048R/*76552385* 2018-03-20 [expires: 2020-07-31] Key fingerprint = *1EB5 F55E 6C5E 5A90 7732 8EBB 5E72 058C 7655 2385* uid Matthew Lilley <m.k.lilley(a)gmail.com> sub 2048R/0C7A597A 2018-03-20 Public key available to download from here <https://keys.openpgp.org/search?q=m.k.lilley%40gmail.com> ------------------------------

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Don't raise the proce of TLD
by bzargui jihade Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Hello we have heard that icann is about to raise the price of TLD we hope that you not raise the price think about all the populations in the world. The price of tld is already high please stop this action

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] ridiculous
by Jonathan Greenwood Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Hi, Just heard about the icann's relationship and new deal with Verisign. Sounds like monopoly maffia. Internet is for everyone, not the few who can afford it. Make your proposals open and discuss with other parties who may be in a better position to offer help and even take over Verisign's current position. Regards, Jonathan Greenwood m: +44 7507324014

1 0

Re: [Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Chad Fullerton Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

Dear ICANN stakeholders, I own many .com domain names and I am against Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement in its current form. While I am not opposed to a price increase every 3-6 years in order to cover increased costs due to maintaining infrastructure, a 7% increase cap is too high. 28% cost increase every six years is unreasonable. It should be lowered to something more reasonable between 2-3% every few years (unless Verisign can justify otherwise needing the funds). Any increases need to be substantiated with costs detailed specifically for the public to see why such an increase is taking place. How did Verisign come to conclude that this level of increase is acceptable to the .com owners without consulting the public first? What specifically are the "security, stability and resiliency enhancements" that Verisign claims the increase is necessary for? In the ICANN press release dated January 3, 2020, you state that "ICANN is not a price regulator", and that you defer to the Department of Commerce for the "regulation of pricing for .COM registry services", yet this Proposed Amendment appears to be strictly about pricing. It is strange to me that you're making a decision about price changes while also stating you don't regulate pricing. If you don't deal with pricing changes, then shouldn't ICANN dismiss this amendment request and instead have the Department of Commerce make the final decision and consult the public in their own process? It is also being reported that ICANN is receiving $20 million dollars over five years from Verisign with no explanation why they are all of a sudden giving this money to ICANN or what it is to be used for. If this is true, the optics of the situation look really bad to the public. It makes it appear Verisign paid to get rules passed through ICANN that only benefited themselves. Verisign has a monopoly over .COM wholesale pricing, they give ICANN $20 million and at the same time try to push through an amendment to let them increase prices upwards of 28% every 6 years. It comes across as a corrupt system. The timing is very suspect. Price increases are a big deal to the average individual and small business owner. The .COM TLD is universally recognized. It isn't one that is purely used by commercial entities. Individuals purchase .COM domains for personal use as well. Small increases in the cost may not seem like a lot to large companies, but for individuals and small businesses - especially if they have many .COM domains to secure and renew each year - every increase is compounded and adds up to be a lot. Please find a common ground and fair balance between the demands of Verisign, and what the owners of .COM domains are voicing opinions about this proposed change. I hope when making this very important decision about the .COM TLD that you read all comments and take them seriously into consideration. Thank you, Regards, Chad

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Do not increase fees!
by luisa vieira Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

I am a woman entrepreneur opening my small business, as a way to escape unemployment. Starting with little money, every expense is important for me. Increasing anual fees at this pace will make it impossible for small businesses like mine to prosper, specially at their beginning. Please do not do this. Luisa Bogéa Low Impact Box - Solutions to decrease your environmental impact CEO and founder lowimpactbox.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Remove amendment 3
by Eric Park Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

ICANN, please allow the Internet to continue to function as an open platform. The suggested changes through amendment 3 is going to be disastrous for new domain purchasers and old domain holders alike. Price increases would mean having a domain may no longer be feasible for some. Please do not go through with amendment 3 and help the Internet stay as an open platform. Thank you! - Eric

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com is a backbone of the internet - prices need to be kept at a minimum
by Reece Neumann Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

The .com TLD is the most well known domain name and to many is the only domain name that they will have heard of making .com and the internet synonymous with each other. As such .com can be considered a backbone of the internet and therefore must be safeguarded in the interest of all users. The price of the .com should be kept as low as possible in order to allow as many individuals as possible to continue to innovate and keep the internet as free flowing as possible. A significant increase in the price of .com could result in individuals choosing not to buy a domain where they otherwise would have took the chance, and therefore not contribute their project to world wide web. As such this has a real potential to lower innovation across the internet and thus ultimately contribute towards stifling competition. This goes against the nature of the internet as a whole and must be avoided. Therefore I would suggest that the price of the .com domain name be made as low as is possible as to allow it to function and no more. Profits should not be the main factor in running this important internet backbone component. As .com can be considered crucial to a thriving current day internet, it should be the primary domain that is protected from price rises and in doing so will help all those who wish to use, innovate and advance the internet further. Kind regards, Reece Neumann

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Against .COM Price Increases
by harry mochi Feb. 11, 2020

Feb. 11, 2020

I am against .COM Price Increases. Owning domains became the de facto standard nowadays, so it should be easy and economical to access to owning domains for even low income people.

1 0