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

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by ilangovan ramasamy Feb. 21, 2020

Feb. 21, 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. -- Thanks & Regards, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by ilangovan ramasamy Feb. 21, 2020

Feb. 21, 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. ilangovan Chennai, Tamil Nadu India Thanks & Regards, ilangovan ramasamy Handheld : +91 - 9600034588 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Follow us : https://twitter.com/ilangovanr Like us : https://www.facebook.com/ilangovanram Hangout : https://plus.google.com/+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposal to NOT increase .com domain prices
by James Chung Feb. 21, 2020

Feb. 21, 2020

I have a few legitimate online business that use the .com domain. It gives us credibility and authority status, which we appreciate. It also allow for global biz spread and thus improving the way biz can grow with much speed and balance. With the onslaught of a lot more option .shop, .tv etc, of course there is much administration work, and thus costs to keeping the industry intact. There should be more governance on these, as they are freely and abusively taken up by less than legitimate biz, and many fly-by-night, get-rich-quick practices, versus the regular registered businesses of .com. Perhaps the imposition of higher cost should focus on biz legitimacy than .com online entities. Moreover, I do not support the notion that Verisign should increases in .COM prices. The current rate of about $8 is already far more than justified, which is under 25c a domain, thus close to a 100% profit. ICANN can still do well to govern the domain name system in the public interest, without Verisign to exert a negative impact via higher costs. Thank you. Siah Chung Singapore

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Nishith Bhimani Feb. 21, 2020

Feb. 21, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. 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. Nishith Bhimani Rajkot, Gujarat India

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com price increases
by DarkStar Computing Feb. 21, 2020

Feb. 21, 2020

Hello, Do not allow Verisign to have the potential of a 7% price increase year after year to increase the cost of doing business on the internet. My company owns several domains and as a small business owner it's hard enough to make it without prices potentially doubling in the next few years. Thanks, David (623) 255- 8265 www.darkstarcomputing.com <http://www.darkstarcomputing.com/>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement Inbox
by David Harrison Feb. 21, 2020

Feb. 21, 2020

Hi, While I am not directly opposed to the idea of a price rise for .COM domains, I /am/ opposed to the idea that a for-profit company should be the sole authority to manage .COM domains, and thus receive the majority of the benefit of any price rise. I understand there are solid reasons to only have one entity managing the space so that splitting responsibility might be challenging for many reasons. I would like to suggest that the space be managed by an not-for-profit entity that has the best interests of Internet users in mind. I would like to nominate Mozilla as an entity that might be worth considering: - they have a strong track record of protecting the rights of Internet users - they have the experience and the systems in place to manage large-scale Internet projects - users can be confident that any revenue they generate will go back into other projects like Firefox which benefit everyone. Thanks for your consideration, -- Regards, David Harrison

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Outrageous
by Tejas R Feb. 21, 2020

Feb. 21, 2020

Respected members of the committee, I have been involved in the domain name industry as a consumer for nearly 13 years now, and this news of ICANN's collaboration with Verisign and the new pricing agreement, is nothing short of outrageous. Without adding much, I hope the committee will reconsider the serious implications of this decision, and make amends. Regards, Tejas Ramakrishnan

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by rajma＠rajma.net Feb. 20, 2020

Feb. 20, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. Rajma K McKenzie United Sates

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] FW: .COM Price Increases [ ref:_00D616tJk._5004MZLAvl:ref ]
by Tanya Owens Feb. 20, 2020

Feb. 20, 2020

I was told to resubmit my comments to a website where comments are closed, which is why I eMailed ICANN. [cid:image003.jpg@01D5E7CF.2989A230] My comment is: This price increase, this deal ICANN has made with Verisign will inordinately harm small businesses, hobbyists, and individuals with domains who are poor and marginalized. This deal will effectively kill small businesses and entrepreneurs who do not have a lot of capital and/or whose businesses barely keeps them afloat. It will stifle the voices of people who cannot afford the new exorbitant fees, making the internet less of a place for the people and more of a place for oligarchs. Do not do this. From: ICANN Global Support Center [mailto:globalsupport@icann.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 6:50 PM To: Tanya Owens Subject: RE: .COM Price Increases [ ref:_00D616tJk._5004MZLAvl:ref ] Dear Tanya Owens, Thank you for contacting ICANN Global Support. We have received a high volume of comments regarding the Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement. If you have experienced trouble submitting your comments, please try resubmitting your comments at https://www.icann.org/public-comments/com-amendment-3-2020-01-03-en or email your comments to "comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20(a)icann.org". I hope this information is helpful to you. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for contacting ICANN. Best Regards, Aisha Herrell Global Support Analyst II ICANN Global Support --------------- Original Message --------------- From: Tanya Owens [tanya(a)tanyaowens.com] Sent: 2/15/2020 12:58 PM To: globalsupport(a)icann.org Subject: .COM Price Increases Cyrus Namazi, This price increase, this deal ICANN has made with Verisign will inordinately harm small businesses, hobbyists, and individuals with domains who are poor and marginalized. Why are you doing this? Concerned, Tanya [http://icann-nsp.my.salesforce.com/servlet/servlet.ImageServer?oid=00D61000…]

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] ICANN Proposed Amendment #3 is Censorship on the World, a Threat to Democracy and Strengthens a Monopoly
by Arif M. Feb. 20, 2020

Feb. 20, 2020

Hello, my original (submitted at 11:58pm UTC 2020-Feb-14) submission did not go through and I was told by Ozin Sahin to resubmit my comments to this email. "By submitting my personal data, I agree that my personal data will be processed in accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy<https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>, and agree to abide by the website Terms of Service<https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>." Thank you, Arif Mirza Montreal, CANADA ======= Original Comment ======= ICANN Proposed Amendment #3 is Censorship on the World, a Threat to Democracy and Strengthens a Monopoly Dear Members, Board Members, Employees and Advisors of ICANN, I write to you today in hopes to make you aware of the potential damage your Proposed Amendment #3 will do to the Internet Community as a whole, as well as to all the citizens of the world. Before doing so, I feel I need to quote something to serve as a reminder some of you seem to have forgotten: "In performing its Mission, ICANN must operate in a manner consistent with these Bylaws for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole” - ICANN BYLAWS 1.2a (First Sentence) While your proposal to allow the raising of .com pricing 31% from $7.85 USD to $10.26 USD might not seem like much, I specifically specified “USD” to stress the fact that for the majority of the people you are charged to represent, almost any price in “USD” is already a challenging sum to accrue. Yet many people still pay what is a sizeable fee to them, because establishing themselves on a .com domain finally gives them a global voice, a planetary platform, a megaphone to the world; from which they can share information and ideas to improve their quality of life; or their political situation in the case of the oppressed or those who do not benefit from the same legal rights and freedoms of those in the nations where $7.85 seems insignificant; or even develop businesses from which the brightest entrepreneurs in the world can empower themselves to economic freedom for themselves, their families and communities while offering helpful goods and/or services to be benefited from by the rest of the world. In fact, it would be wrong for me to even try to list all the possible ways in which a globally understood Domain Name can benefit an individual, a community, a society or even humanity as a whole. Such a list could never actually be complete specifically because of the grandiose scale of imagination and diversity of thought throughout our shared planet. With regards to ANY increase in costs to .com domains, it is imperative that you understand that by allowing such increases to continue, you are removing the abilities of some to continue to have and share their voices, ideas and visions. What you would in fact be doing is censorship against the citizens of the world rather than helping those without a voice to finally have one. It would also be a threat to democracy in the cases where people struggle to share crucial information or their own ideas, and then go on to debate and challenge the status quo in hopes for something better. The foundational premise of the internet is to help bring every citizen of the world together, as such we should be fighting to remove and reduce the barriers to access in each and every way possible, with one of the most notable being the cost of having a voice, the cost of being relevant, the cost of sharing an idea, information, a vision, a concept, a project or any of another countless things from which the rest of humanity can learn or grow from. Beyond that, while clearly the pricing increases within Proposed Amendment #3 will be harmful to the people you are pledge to serve and protect, the “Internet Community” is still in growth. Also to be considered are not just the people currently with a .com domain who might no longer be able to afford the current global recognition thanks to having a .com domain; but also those who at $7.85 per year are already priced out of having such a voice. By implementing Proposed Amendment #3 you are effectively ignoring the voices of those who are currently unheard; of those who for whom having a global voice isn’t even possible now. By allowing the increasing of prices you would be diminishing their voices even more, sadly rendering them effectively meaningless because nobody will ever get a chance to listen to what they have to say. With private enterprise creating and operating ngTLD registries, I personally don’t mind them seeing them used and even priced based on different priorities. Some of such TLDs have great potential to improve the Internet. HOWEVER .. It should be very clear that there be a foundation of the Domain System and a minimum catalogue of TLDs available to anyone and everyone, regardless of race, location and fiscal capacity. By far the biggest and most significant of such TLDs is the .com TLD, of which there is currently no match and no realistic alternative. While the current partially private structure within which the .com TLD is set up indeed has certain basic costs that cannot be ignored; the current .com steward, Verisign, is one of the most profitable companies in the world when it comes cost:profit and employees:profit ratios. The term “Cash Cow” is one regularly used when discussing the fiscal strength and success of Verisign. While all companies should strive to remain profitable, in this specific case it needs to be VERY clear that any unreasonable profits made by verisign, comes at the cost of censorship upon the least fortunate people in the world. Please do not forget that fact, and do not ignore your mandate to serve the ENTIRE global community. ICANN should not and cannot simply ignore the facts and numbers, as those numbers prove that there is zero necessity or need to increase prices and therefore further incapacitate a larger portion of global citizens from acquiring a .com domain, one of the strongest globally recognised platforms in human history. Furthermore, not only should any potential .com pricing increases be removed from Proposed Amendment #3, but if indeed ICANN were truly concerned with ALL the people they are mandated to represent, they should end the monopolistic and anti-competitive nature of the .com TLD and open the .com registry to actual competition via a bidding process. This is not to say that the secure and stable history of the .com TLD under Verisign’s stewardship should be completely dismissed, nor that it shouldn’t even be given a premium versus other potential bidders. But without any real competition and a complete and fully transparent costing analysis of the operations of the .com registry, ANY increase in pricing in any way given the ever continuing reductions in technology costs is quite simply absurd. In the end I implore you to think of the millions and eventually potentially billions of people that WILL BE harmed if .com domains allowed to go up in price … and remember that it’s those very billions of people that ICANN is supposed to represent. Thank you for time and giving these comments the full consideration they deserve. If you have any questions or would like any clarifications, please do not hesitate to reach out. Regards, Arif Mirza Montreal, Canada

1 0