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

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Raising prices is the worst choice, ever.
by Andres Suarez Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hardware prices go down, data-center prices go down, but someone wants to increase the prices of the .com domains to make a lot of money without working for it, causing a de-facto restriction of access to the network. ICANN should be campaigning for the IPv6 now, instead of maintaining parasites. -- Andres Suarez (need a new name)

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Graham Jackson Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Do not raise pricing. Rediculous Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] ICANN / Verisign / .COM Changes
by Douglas Cox Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

The currently proposed changes to .COM domains between ICANN and Verisign that will inevitably lead to large price increases in these domains is extremely concerning and considerably unethical. There appears to be *no* description of how any funds from Verisign will be spent or even why this is necessary. We are currently drafting letters to all our congressmen to investigate how changes like this can be made with absolutely no oversight and asking them to investigate who these changes are actually benefiting. -Douglas & Carrie Cox

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Raised .com prices greatly will affect entrepreneurship
by Tom Sigler Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Web based business have always been a cheap way for people to explore new business ideas. By increasing prices, you will stifle innovation and increase the barrier of entry for new entrepreneurs. I am definitely against raising prices for name registration! -Tom Sigler

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. No one other than Verisign want increases in .COM prices, and ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. I have not received any supporting arguments for a price increase. This proposal conflicts with basic market logic - the price offering domains should approach zero as automation of this service increases. Georg Sievert Marketing Director Stockholm, Sweden Georg Sievert 0733-210110

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Congrats on getting a huge payoff from private parties, no other reason you would do any of this behind closed doors. Its operantly obvious that this serves no one but our cooperate overlords. Gotta love monopolies and unregulated capitalism ruining the internet. Please listen to the people and not the dollar signs that this is a terrible idea that will hurt the joe blows of the world. Best, Nick Tollefson NEWP IT?

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Regarding Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Adrian Del Grosso Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello, As a registrant of multiple .COM domains, and as a consultant who deals with .COM domains regularly, I oppose the changes to the pricing Verisign is allowed to charge as fees for registration of .COM domains. Furthermore, the fact that ICANN and Verisign discussed these changes in secret without public involvement (or even just ICANN community involvement) up to this point is appalling. Indeed for a body whose duty is to the public, it is anathema to me. This amendment doesn't pass even a basic sniff test - insufficient justification for the reasoning behind these fee changes has been provided to the public, .COM registrants, or even just the ICANN community. Please reconsider this amendment, as increasing these registration fees will only harm average Americans like myself, my clients, and will only serve to line the pockets of Verisign. The string of other recent ICANN changes, like with the .org price cap, plus this seem to indicate that ICANN is delinquent in its public duty and responsibility to people like myself. Thanks Adrian Adrian Del Grosso Engineering Omnitech, Inc | www.omnitech-inc.com 5841 South Corporate Place, Sioux Falls, SD 57108 | +1 6053360888 NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachment is private and meant for the sole use of the intended recipient. It may contain personally identifiable financial information protected by law. No confidentiality or other legal protection is waived by virtue of this information having been sent by e-mail. Any disclosure, use, dissemination, or copying of the information is strictly prohibited by anyone except the intended recipient or their agent. If you received this e-mail in error please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender, calling +1 6053360888 and immediately deleting this e-mail and any attachments.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Monopolies will be dealt with after the next election
by Jeffrey Silverman Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

If Verisign would like to stick its neck out pre-election when a liberal pro anti-trust candidate will likely be elected, please feel free.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Don't Increase .com Prices
by tolley.gil Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Please, do not allow this new contract to go through. Increasing the prices of .com domains, or any other online "real estate" will have a crippling effect on free speech over the internet. Right now, cheap domain names allow just about anyone to host a website and express their views. Jacking up the prices, which this new contract does for 8 out of the next 10 years, will only serve as a barrier to poorer people who are trying to own and operate a website. Please, just leave it alone. -Gil Tolley

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] The Pice .com domain
by Thi Tinh Nguyen Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hi ICANN, I am Tinh coming from Vietnam. I am a student, I like to buy the domain .com and the other domain that are cheap. In fact, I am a student so I have not much money. I write you to say that I don't agree with your decision that the price the domain .com will rise. Thanks a lots for listening me. I hope that you maintain the price the domain.com or it is possible, I can buy them cheaper. Thanks a lots for your comprehension and your kindness! Best Regard, Nguyen Thi Tinh -- Que le Seigneur vous bénisse et qu'il vous donne sa joie! Cordialement, NGUYEN Thi Tinh Licence 1 de Théologie Courriel: thi-tinh.nguyen4(a)etu.univ-lorraine.fr Drop here!

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .COM Price Increases - [I'm opposed, for the record]
by Greg Haygood Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

To Whom It May Concern @ ICANN - I'm opposed to the proposed change to increase prices for .COM domains as well as opposed to giving Verisign even more control over the DNS ecosystem. You're entitled to propose such changes, but since they concern a shared and public utility, such decisions should also be discussed and made with the affected constituents. The least you can do is publicly provide details on how that money will be spent and how Verisign's increased control will be restricted to prevent a monopoly. Sincerely, Greg Haygood Atlanta, GA

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I'm a small business owner trying to make a living. I'm opposed to the proposed price increase for Verisign. I believe it's not that they don't make a nice profit, but cooperate officer would like to see a nice increase in there bonus. Corporate greed is the drive behind this... not the best interest of the clients. Kane Monroe

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Againts the decission
by Ahmy Yulrizka Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

As it's already stated in multiple emails for the thread. Verisign has no business of setting up the price. I'm personally against this proposed price. ICAN should act in public interest, not big company. -- Ahmy Yulrizka http://ahmy.yulrizka.com @yulrizka

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Changes to .COM domains
by Max Davies Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Dear Sirs, The announcement that ICANN has agreed new terms behind closed doors with Verisign without the input from registrars and the wider internet community is something of a concern. The agreement announced, amongst other things, also appears to ignore a significant conflict of interest by not denying Verisign, through the possibility of investment through a 2nd company, to act as both gatekeeper for the dotCOM domains and to become a registrar in it's own right. Further, pricing changes allowed in the agreement would permit Verisign to increase wholesale pricing year on year (as well as allowing other price increases) and thus make the domain suffix far less accessible and more expensive for everyone at a time when the technical costs of management are in fact reducing - it could in effect act to enable Verisign as a monopoly for the TLD. This move is ultimately bad for consumers and registrars, though is clearly a windfall for Verisign investors at the expense of everyone else. Additionally, the sum that has been agreed to be paid by Verisign, some $20M also appears to be absent of the proper clarity of investment receipts one might expect of ICANN and there is little if any information on who is to provide the appropriate governance and how this funding will used to benefit domain infrastructure. All in all, this agreement seems to run counter to the transparency and engagement principles upon which ICANN is supposed to be based and as such, it would be improper other than to suggest that ICANN needs to carefully reconsider the amendment, publish what guidance formed part of the discussions with Verisign, and incorporate the views of the wider community and registrars who appear to have been entirely absent from the forum. Yours faithfully, D. Maxwell CTO, Xenon Design Group

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Don’t raise .com prices
by David MJ Schwartz, MSW Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Keep prices low and don’t let Verisign or any company rip off the masses. Thanks! Sincerely, David Mitchell Jacobs Schwartz (314) 363-8087 david(a)dmjs.us LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmjschwartz Professional Site: https://www.dmjs.us

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by frank franklin 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 %2�� it has no business dictating the price. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Frank Delight Lagos Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] 反对涨价！！还想你们降价！！
by 米多金 Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Against this amendment
by nikhil＠chalcal.com Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

To whom it may concern, as a website owner, I believe it is important to provide transparency to the public regarding the proposed price increases for .com domains. They are a public resource and merit broad community input before accepting these changes. Price increases should not be implemented without a clear layout of the proposed allocation of the funds. The proposed changes will price many people out of the market for this series of domains when there should be an effort to be more inclusive of people with limited means. I am against this amendment as it currently stands.

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I want to voice my opposition to this agreement made in secret between ICANN and Verisign. The whole process should have been open to the public. IMO, this new agreement will have an adverse impact on the Internet and its users. Aside from allowing prices to increase 8 out of the next 10 years, it will make .COM domains less accessible and more expensive for everyone! If this agreement is allowed to go through, it should be classified as a detrimental act committed against the people! To repeat: I'm against this proposed change! Alex Perdian

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Genevieve Chase 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Genevieve Chase Fairfield *genevieve* *“Accept the things to which fate binds you, and love the people with whom fate brings you together, but do so with all your heart.” * *― Marcus Aurelius* *FB/Twitter/IG/LI: @genevievechase*

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Verisign contract
by Sosan Raufie Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello, As a small business, it is crucial for our survival to keep as much as our marketing and overhead costs as low as possible to survive. There should be no contract with Verisign in place that would cause an increase in the price structure of how wholesale registries charge companies like namecheap which in the end will cause significant increases in costs for small business like mine. This contract should be reviewed and reassessed to find a better alternative. You can't make any type of changes without advising the public and all domain users of such high level increases. I AM NOT in favour of price increases and MY business suffering from what this contract indicates they plan to do. Thank you Sosan Raufie 6477619919

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Stop this price increase
by Klaus Ondrag Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

To whom it may concern, please stop this obvious money grab. There is zero benefit to regular people. There is no justification for this price increase. Everything is running well. Don't get power or money hungry. Best, Klaus Ondrag

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Sad that those running ICANN are lining their own pockets
by l reese Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Reading up on all of this, and knowing that likely nothing will happen in response to users' outrage, ICANN apparently is raking in extra cash from secret auctions. It's us users who create the wealth of the internet to begin with. Now .com prices will increase and create more hurdles for anyone trying to start a business legitimately. I am deeply disappointed that ICANN choses to be obscure and secretive. Maybe someone in Anonymous will dox you all. Regards, Lynnette Reese Linnet Media, LLC Technical Content lreese(a)linnetmedia.com 512-876-7899 Cell www.linkedin.com/in/lreese<https://www.linkedin.com/in/lreese/> Por<https://www.linkedin.com/in/lreese/>tfolio: http://linnetmedia.com<http://linnetmedia.com/>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Eric Lowe 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. There is no justification for this proposed price rise and i should not happen Eric Lowe Chelmsford, England, United Kingdom Best Regards Eric Lowe Director ELOWES™ Ltd DuvetMate™ M 07801 946965 E eric(a)elowes.com<mailto:eric@elowes.com> W www.elowes.com<http://www.elowes.com/> (Under construction)

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a registrant of multiple .com domain names. This is nothing more than a money grab. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. No one other than Verisign want increases in .COM prices. The current rate 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. *Damon Theis* *Systems Manager* *D&L Wood Products* *http://www.dlwoodproductsinc.com* <http://www.dlwoodproductsinc.com/> *617 N. Indiana Ave. * *Crown Point, IN 46307* *Office:** 219-662-9177 ext. 145* *Fax:** 219-662-9572* *mobile**: 219-712-1016* *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 other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. **If you received this in error, please contact the sender and destroy any copies of this document.*

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Increase fee on .com
by Art Runningbear Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

*www.NativeTruths.com <http://www.nativetruths.com/>* *owning one's truths and coming into one's native self* *HelloAll areas where the Deep State has its fingers in controlling money is now pushing to bring more money in because its loosing money to fight democracy. Thats because Democracy is winning. Do research find out WHO is demanding a raise and WHY. Dig deep and you will see every area that is being controlled is demanding higher prices. Art Runningbear DISCLAIMER:* This email is intended only for the named person or entity to which it is addressed and contains valuable business information that is privileged, confidential and/or otherwise protected from disclosure. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this email or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an employee, or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is strictly prohibited. All contents are the copyright property of the sender. If you are not the intended recipient, you are nevertheless bound to respect the sender's worldwide legal rights. We require that unintended recipients delete the email and destroy all electronic copies in their system, retaining no copies in any media.

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a domainer (I invest in domain names as a business). I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. shijunsheng Handan, Hebei China

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3
by Maher S. Maher Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello, Please do not allow this amendment to pass. Prices for .COMs are high enough, including the harsh margins placed upon them by consumer-end retailers. Thank you.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] DO NOT INCREASE PRICES ON .COM DOMAINS !!!
by D.M. DORCIC Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Please do not increase prices on .com domain names. Show the world some goodness and lower the prices. D.Mike

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment on Proposed Amendments 3
by Scott Kravitz Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

As a small business owner with multiple websites, I am extremely concerned about the proposal to allow Verisign to increase domain name prices, as well as the proposal to allow them to become a domain registrar. Neither of these changes would serve the public interest. Verisign will be granted the power to act as a near-monopoly, and everyone else will have to pay for it. Running a business is expensive. I do not have the funds to offer ICANN a $20 Million bribe, as Verisign has done. Please do not allow the Proposed Amendments 3 to go into effect. Sincerely, Scott Kravitz 2065 Oak St. San Francisco, CA 94131

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Harvey 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. 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 use your power to prevent these unfair and unnecessary increases. Dr. Harvey Jay Scarsdale, New York United States Sent from my iPhone

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Planned amendment
by Luke Carlson Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I am concerned about this new amendment and feel that a decision to move forward without a full discussion and disclosure would be a poor decision. There are more stakeholders involved and they should be given both a voice and answers to their questions before proceeding. Sincerely, Luke Carlson

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Dear ICANN, I am not in favor of such a ridiculous price increase. Those of us who have made .com websites to (on purpose) make no money but only use them as tools to communicate with the rest of the world will suffer and some will shut down. You allow a monopoly for the only wholesaler of domains for the biggest TLD. You accept that millions of people will be price gouged with no acceptable alternative because no competition is allowed. ICANN has fallen into the same unfortunate attitude as so many other companies of "it's easy to be generous with someone else's money." Will you ignore this feedback like you did with the .org price caps?, Dan Swan

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Price increase
by Valentina Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello. I’m writing this email to express my opinion regarding the decision of increasing the price for the .com domains over the next decade. I acknowledge that every company has the right to set its own prices and every company wishes to increase their profits, and that’s totally fine. However, the decision of increasing the price for the .com domains is something that affects countless companies, organizations, and businesses that already exist or that are about to come. So, in this case, it makes sense to listen to what these people have to say before making this change of price. I’m one of the people who administer a .com domain (fantasybooksland.com) so I’d like to point out that, nowadays, companies aren’t concerned only with the profits; they care about their reputation and impact on the world as well, and I believe that you are one of them. Increasing the prices for the .com domains may bring more profits for a while, but there’s no guarantee that it will continue to do so forever. Small business (including me) will definitely move to cheaper domains and that trend will soon catch on until the .com domains will no longer be seen as the best option for a new website, but “the ridiculously expensive” option. Do please think again about your decision to increase the price for the .com domains. In the long run, this change will bring more disadvantages than advantages for both of us, the small businesses, and your company. Thank you for reading my email. Regards, Valentina Zinculescu Contributor to fantasybooksland.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] DO NOT RAISE .COM COST!
by samshef＠yahoo.com Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Spend your time and money promoting the égalité of all domain name suffix that are not .COM rising the tide for all boats. www.samsheffler.com <http://www.samsheffler.com> www.sweetemulsion.us <http://www.sweetemulsion.us> www.waterbottleshop.online <http://www.waterbottleshop.online> to name a few -SS -- S. Sheffler Ft. Lauderdale, FL USA <mailto:SSheffler@plungebeachhotel.com> samshef(a)yahoo.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Verisign and .com price hikes
by Fraser Doerksen Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hi there, I am 100% opposed to giving Verisign more control, more power and more money via shady back room deals such as the one that has just happened. Making the internet less accessible by raising more costly barriers to entry in the online market space is a poor plan that only serves the interests of Verisign at the expense of everybody else. Thank you for your consideration.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment on Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by NonVidebunt＠verizon.net Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Comment on Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement As a volunteer with several non-profit organizations, I am concerned with the non-competitive nature of domain name registrations. Several of the non-profits I have helped had set up .com domains many years ago and do not have an option of changing their TLD. I would suggest that multiple domain registry services be allowed to compete for sale of domain name registrations across multiple TLDs, including .com. Mark

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am strongly against the proposed deal with Verisign. It will inevitably lead to steep increases to the price of .com addresses. This deal does not serve the consumer, but ICANN revenue. Please be more considerate to your stakeholders. Rob Mahoney

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Amendment 3
by Michael Morrow Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Please don't raise dot-com prices. This will have a negative effect on on small business as I have several dot-com's that I currently own. This will hurt small businesses and individuals who are already operating on tight budgets. Thank you.

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a holder of multiple .COM domains. At a time when technology is reducing costs and increasing scalability the proposed increases in registration costs for .COM domains does not make sense, if anything the cost of running the service should be decreasing. The public interest is not being served by ICANN providing a monopoly to Verisign, the fact that there is no competition at this level is tantamount to price fixing. Increasing the costs of .COM domains in the way proposed puts a very real barrier to entry to startups in tech commerce and other fields. One could even argue it is an economic curtail to free speech if you price a domain out of reach then you remove a powerful ability for people to use the web as platform for ideas and views. I sincerely hope you reconsider this move.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment regarding ICANN and potential price increases to domains
by David Y. Zhang Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hi, I would like to leave a comment regarding https://www.icann.org/public-comments/com-amendment-3-2020-01-03-en?utm_sou…. The form did not work for me, so I was told I could email this address. My main concern is that .com domains represent the ability of everyday people to set up a site of their interest and express their voice online. Exorbitant price increases could be damaging to this interest. I remember when I was much younger and setting up a site and contemplating the cost of a domain. The low cost can be a helpful motivator for people interested in expressing themselves, and even be quite the inspiration once they have a site online. All in all, please do not unfairly increase the price of domains. Best, David

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Price Increases
by Regina Winkles Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I want my voice heard- I say a big fat NO to the proposed price increases! Wow, unlimited price increases? Really? We have no idea how you will spend the money? Just another company out to stick it to anyone they can without any regards to whom they hurt. Greed is good I guess. Wish I could get an unlimited wage increase so I can pay for my domains! -- *Regina Winkles*

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Hi, I am a registrant of a .com domain name. Please do not raise the price of .com. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. Gabrielle Hildebrand San Bruno California

2 1

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by SEO Surat Training & Education Service. 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. The current rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified. hmaurya Ahmedabad, Gujarat India Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .COM disruption
by Syed Umar B Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Please don’t raise the rates. A lot of us are just starting out.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Price increase for .com should only happen after careful analysis of the financial capabilities of users internationally
by Radoslav Stoyanov Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Dear all, In my opinion price increases should not happen without careful analysis of the financial capabilities of the users worldwide. As one of the most popular domains, .com is very attractive and important for various users worldwide and boosts access to information - sometimes important ones. Affordable prices for this domain might be of crucial importance for civil society organizations and individual activists in poor countries suffering grave maltreatment from oppressive regimes. For this reason, I call you to carefully evaluate thepotential effects of raising the price for this domain that is already much more than daily income of people in some countries. Mr. Radoslav Stoyanov Sofia, Bulgaria Facebook: fb.com/radi.stoyanov Instagram: radi_stoyanov_bg <http://instagram.com/radi_stoyanov_bg> Twitter: @radi_stoyanov <https://twitter.com/radi_stoyanov>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Please keep dot.com affordable!
by Eduardo Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN We strongly disagree with the decision of increasing the dot.com We respectfully ask you to reconsider. Thanks in advance Sincerely, Eduardo v. Teran

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Enviado do Email<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> para Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Annette Hadley 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Thank you for your consideration. Annette M Hadley Overland Park, Kansas United States

1 1

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement I'm a quadriplegic on a limited income. I have a small personal website and also a small nonprofit organization both with .COM domain names. If you were to raise the prices of .COM significantly as it sounds like it is going to be, I would no longer be able to afford these. I have had my personal website for 23 years and my NPO for 10 years, if I had to change them from .COM to something else to save money it would take many years to get my NPO back in the search engines and would have to change my email addresses on so many websites that I would not remember them all. Please reconsider allowing such price changes for .COM Thank you, Dan Badur (Fishing Abilities, Inc.)

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement I'm a quadriplegic on a limited income. I have a small personal website and also a small nonprofit organization both with .COM domain names. If you were to raise the prices of .COM significantly as it sounds like it is going to be, I would no longer be able to afford these. I have had my personal website for 23 years and my NPO for 10 years, if I had to change them from .COM to something else to save money it would take many years to get my NPO back in the search engines and would have to change my email addresses on so many websites that I would not remember them all. Please reconsider allowing such price changes for .COM Thank you, Dan Badur

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Opposition to Price Increase
by Rob Davis Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Concerning: .com Price Increase Opposition I voice my opposition to your very existence in terms of the way that it is being organized, operated upon, and managed in a biased method by individuals that seemingly have too many connective compromises as it relates to their positioning assignments and the duties they are entrusted to uphold. The naked and transparent weaponization of this organization and platform is in fact seen by those who exist both in and outside of the operating realities that you take for granted. The special fund assignments, luxurious participation benefits, unscrupulous transitional planning, and mechanisms by which you work to achieve your long term objectives are on the wrong side of positive transformation. It should force intelligent reflection on exactly why past actions of the US Department of Commerce and its respective leadership chose to follow the path they did for oversight relinquishment. I would also bring attention to the notable absence of resistance and public opposition from some of the key leaders in the domaining sector. Especially those that we have again entrusted and helped loyally build over two decades. There is no glory in the intentional creation and manufacturing of additional burden to the millions of people who have been subjected to rely on the internal ethics and integrity of your management. Compounded by the fact that the subject Party that would benefit most from price increases was but an extension of critical infrastructure assurance in the first place, operating outside of transparent inclusion for free and open market participation. They cannot and should not be integrated into your organizational actions to produce added liquidity that is ultimately then distributed to a select few individuals. The handling alone of many of the facets related to thousands of new registry creations should bring further light onto your management competencies. Specifically your inability to forecast the need for any form of protective guidelines regarding recommended price increase thresholds as the most basic consumer protection mechanism. Or to rationally anticipate what free reign of operation would do in stimulating literally millions of new domain creations each year - issued at free or low cost to private users - who would then utilize them in wholesale fashion to grossly expand an already unprecedented rate of hostile attacks that can achieve outbounds as high as 15 billion individual spam attacks daily. This adds to a long and growing list of egregious deficiencies being coordinated under your watch. Including changes by which you would directly protect and limit the responsibilities of active registrars, especially those involved in the routine provision of domain privacy services to the worst of repeat offenders. Your actions illogically increased response times in the fight against denial-of-service and spoofing attacks being deployed against responsible business owners. They also extend and compound the rate of effectiveness for mass coordinated attacks that would utilize web addresses as an active delivery method. Your management and decisions made there would reduce the actions registrars are required to take, at the same time you drive more mandatory privacy allowances. In a world where every second of delay counts, your continued policy actions reveal a great many things as it relates to where your priorities rest. Your leadership direction has in turn also handicapped many of the world's intelligence services to react quickly and swiftly against digital threats. This impact of gross oversight and managerial negligence leads to millions of dollars of compounded damages against a global productivity basis every hour of every day. Yet your priority looks to satisfy shareholders, long term colleagues, and even direct friendships as you would serve to let profiteering further damage small business owners, hobbyists, collectors, and the millions of individuals who have freely participated together to build one of the greatest resources and collectives in human history. Shame on you. If you really feel the need to experiment with social engineering constructs, may I recommend two concepts for you that can be easily employed for short, mid, and long term improvements. 1. Eliminate privacy services all together, as they serve little functional use accept to protect against mass spam and attack campaigns by abusers. Transparency of ownership details will in turn lead to more efficient options to greatly reduce the level of spam attacks already in existence. The concept of transparency is already being addressed and implemented as a logical baseline for many social media platforms, as in some cases millions of false accounts have already been identified and deleted. Transparency to reduce harmful activities should be the minimum standard and expectation that we set for ourselves digitally, especially in our efforts to marginalize and help prevent billions of attempts of fraud, phishing, spoofing, and the harmful delivery of many levels of threats and viral distributions that happen each and every day. The alternative is to see fraud-centered spam grow to the point of needing more radical solutions to contain it. The Internet has been weaponized by a small handful of bad actors, who recognize that sending 10-15 billion threatening emails a day is reducing our ability to tackle real problems that exist. It impacts us emotionally, reduces productivity, elevates stress and anxiety, products a steady drip of individuals that reflect an image of theft and corruption, and unfortunately aids to diminish (and bury!) the real encouragements, messages, and connections we should be reviewing. An option for highly outspoken opponents who have the right to demand for privacy freedom, and feel that open transparency in itself is something they cannot support: make it available to them with two-step authentication for initial setup. The objective here is to cut down the millions of attempts made every minute to defraud others, and ultimately a high ratio of success is better than spending precious moments focused on enhancing Verisign's liquidity. Innovation and creativity will open much greater doors in the long run than lobbyist influence. 2. The second not-so-radical approach that should be implemented immediately as a point of logical common sense: run a simple deep index across every domain registration that exists. It is a number, it is a simple exercise, and one that can be coordinated with basic keyword overlays as well as secondary link extractions to build models that are directly being used (by the millions) as delivery agents to threaten online users in this world. In plain terms: if there are roughly 400 million domain names in existence, you can identify 25 million of them within a month that are being used illegally to harm our world at the costs of billions of dollars in gross productivity losses every week. Identify them. Double authenticate the nefarious purposes of their use. Delete them. Then take a look at the small number of registrars who are at large used as facilitation points to conduct this harmful activity, and how ICANN's policy adjustments have actually compounded the rate of abusive users online, not detracted from them. If I had two other points I would share: 1. If Verisign is in trouble and needs the boost, have one of our super billionaires write a check for 115 million domains x the increase proposal, place it in a trust, and let it pay out over the proposed implementation period as an offset to help 80 million people who trusted smart policy makers. 2. Then ask the major email platforms out there to spend some of their vast gross riches and fortunes to invest into instant, accessible, and intelligent methods to counter fraud and corruption being implemented almost in majority through their singular email provisions. There is no reason that spoofed emails (by the millions daily!) leading back to active Gmail addresses should ever exist longer than 30 seconds from reporting. I don't care who's uncle died and left them a fortune. Robert Davis | Intelliname | twitter.com/Intelliname

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Dear ICANN, I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. Yours sincerely, Robert Nisbet Robert Nisbet Grunewaldstraße 56 10825 Berlin Germany

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by David Loewy 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. David Loewy Falls Church, VA

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a domainer (I invest in domain names as a business). 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. zheng tianbing Shenzhen 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>应用

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Regarding .COM amendment 3
by j. calderone Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I am submitting this message to state I strongly oppose the raising of prices for .COM addresses. Not only was this change decided without consulting or incorporating feedback from the ICANN community or internet users, this change would do significant harm to individuals and small businesses without limitations on how much registrants can be charged over a period of continuing yearly price increases. There is also no transparency how ICANN will use their extra $20 million from Verisign or who will ensure these funds are properly spent. ICANN needs to listen to the voices of those whose livelihoods these changes will drastically affect. Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .COM Price Hike not necessary now
by Peter Ome Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

The decision to hike the price of .COM domain is very unnecessary. The parties involved should please reconsider their decisions and stands for the good of the internet world and the information age. Proceeding with that decision will cut a whole lot of people off from information and Technology and that's backward movement. Let's help the world access the internet more. Thank you

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I just happened to notice from the project that the prices should be increased significantly. That is insidious especially that no one other than Verisign want increases in .COM prices. The current rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified. Regards Kevin Broselge

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Do not allow .com domain price increases
by JASPAL SINGH Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hi, Request you to kindly reconsider the decision to allow .com domain price increases. This price increase does not help the internet grow and prosper. It will be detrimental to common users who rely for their businesses to be known by their websites. Once these price increases are in effect, the common users will have no balancing force on their side to help ensure they are not forced into paying large annual fees just to maintain their online brand identity. Please reconsider and remove the price increase. Act as the balancing force and help the internet grow. Best

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] I oppose the Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by David Adams Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I oppose allowing Verisign to increase the wholesale price to registrars for .COM domains. Since 2012, the infrastructure costs related to administering the domain name system have all declined. Other top level domains are available in the market for $2.50 or less. The only justification for increasing the wholesale price of .COM domains is to extract rents from businesses that have no choice but to comply. Since a .COM domain is an essential part of a business’ identity, moving to a less expensive domain isn’t a reasonable alternative. -- David Adams 801-598-2217

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Scott Gerber Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Nobody likes their costs of doing business to increase. Was there an increase in the cost of computers processing domains ??? Or do the people processing domains just think that they're entitled to more money ??? -- Scott

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] against price increase
by Jake Muzzy Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I am against the price increase. Jake Muzzy

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Hari Sudhan Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hi, I am small business owner. I am thriving very hard in my life to run a business which give me less revenue and run the family at the same time. It will be very hard to run my business or family, if any one of the operating cost increased by 30%+ Kindly consider and don't increase the domain owing cost. Thanks Mitais.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Aijaz Balkhi 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. 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. Aijaz Balkhi ITSSN.com Los Angeles, California United States

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] In support of price controls
by Jesse Lamas Calvillo Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I support price controls and price caps for TLD's. Please do not discount the opinions and needs those who use the internet. Many of the businesses here in Southern Spain don't operate with large operational profits. As online presence becomes even more important, getting squeezed by pricing increases to simply exist online is difficult. Thank you for your consideration. Regards, Jesse Calvillo Jesse Lamas Calvillo [jesse(a)cooperativalaunion.com]

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] YOUR CONTRACT CHANGES WITH VERISIGN
by Leslie Sheridan Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I DO NOT AT ALL LIKE OR AGREE WITH WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND THAT YOU ARE DOING IT SECRETLY BEHIND THE BACKS OF CONSUMERS! PLEASE END THIS! ICANN, the organization that oversees domain names, announced significant changes to the contract it has with Verisign, Inc. who operate the .COM top-level-domain (TLD). ICANN made these changes in secret, without consulting or incorporating feedback from the ICANN community or Internet users. Although ICANN has a history of making similar deals behind closed doors, and also of ignoring unified opposition against such action, we are focused on leading the fight against price increases that will harm our customers (and the Internet as a whole). 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. This 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.Why is ICANN doing this? 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. https://www.icann.org/public-comments/com-amendment-3-2020-01-03-en/mail_for m?utm_source=Iterable <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/com-amendment-3-2020-01-03-en/mail_fo rm?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Service_DomCPIv3_202002 10> &utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Service_DomCPIv3_20200210 ______________________________ Did you know that a recent UN study on climate change said that we have 11 years before planetary failure? Let that sink in! If you or someone you know is/wants to be an impact investor in a one-of-a-kind, world-scale solution to reversing climate change, ask me about Planet Cents. ________________________________________ Before us lie two paths - honesty and dishonesty. The shortsighted embark on the dishonest path; the wise on the honest. For the wise know the truth; in helping others we help ourselves; and in hurting others we hurt ourselves. Character overshadows money, and trust rises above fame. Honesty is still the best policy. ~ Napoleon Hill Cheers ~ Leslie13a (3) Leslie Sheridan Trailblazer, Rainmaker & Coach The Added Edge The Catalyst for Win/Win Consulting in . . . Human Resources, Marketing, Sales & Catalytic Coaching <http://www.theaddededge.com/> www.TheAddedEdge.com P.O. Box 726, Clearlake, CA 95422-0726 707.995.1034 <mailto:Leslie@TheAddedEdge.com> Leslie(a)TheAddedEdge.com Linkedin Profile: <http://www.linkedin.com/in/lesliemsheridan> http://www.linkedin.com/in/lesliemsheridan SKYPE: leslie.marie.sheridan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Come to the edge," she said. They said, "We are afraid." "Come to the edge," she said. They came. She pushed them . . . And they flew. ~Guillaume Apollinaire (with me replacing "he" with "she!") ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ P For the sake of our planet, please don't print this unless necessary.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Rudy Soltesz Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Raising prices for .coms is one of the most ridiculous ideas I've have heard in awhile. Why? If you raise prices, I'll just start getting rid of my 20 or so .coms I already pay for each month and don't use. I hold on to them in hopes of one day turning them into some types of businesses. This would hurt every small business. The prices have already risen, so why raise them again? Don't do it!!!

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] comments about .com price increase proposal
by Brian Minton Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I think 7% a year is pretty high. And no cap seems especially unreasonable. I have several .com domains and it would be prohibitively expensive if the cost was allowed to increase annually. I think it would have a chilling effect on .com domain registrations, and push people to other top-level domains instead.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Raising fees without raising service is taxation without representation.
by A. Walton Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Just stop the nonsense. Profiteering for the sake of profiteering is bullshit. Domain names are a service, and that service should be fairly and equitably operated, full stop. Stop the nonsense. -Andrew Walton.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] I'm sure that's a bad idea
by Maga Alkhasov Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Increasing price almost like just because, seriously? Very great idea from behind close doors for making internet less comfortable, that's what it is.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment on Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Paul McKee Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

It is proposed that Verisign be allowed to increase .COM registration fees by 7% per year for four out of six years. This is excessive. I very much doubt that the costs of running a database of some 140 million registrations are rising anywhere near that fast. It wouldn't surprise me if the technological costs are actually falling, though there are certainly non-technology costs (like salaries) as well. In short, Verisign should be allowed price increases only in line with inflation, not more. Thanks, Paul McKee Bellevue, WA, USA

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com price increase
by Jim Braunstein Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I am strongly against ICANN's contract changes with Verisign. These contract changes will likely drive domain prices up further, ultimately making .COM domains less accessible and more expensive for everybody. This will be potentially catastrophic for the micro businesses that currently use .COM extensions for their websites and rely on these websites to conduct business. Jim Braunstein President Bravo Zulu LLC www.bravozulullc.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Juan Pablo Rodriguez 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Juan Pablo Rodríguez Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires F.D. Argentina

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Opposition to proposed amendment No. 3
by Karen Deckert Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

ICANN and Verisign, I oppose the proposed amendment 3, as it gives you as a monopoly wholesale operator the ability for substantial price rises well in excess of CPI. If anything your wholesale prices should be falling because of greater economies of scale, and you can reinvest the difference into security and updates. There has been insufficient cause shown for the proposed amendment and just looks like a huge financial windfall for Verisign and ICANN. The amendment should be withdrawn. Regards,Karen

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Dear sirs, I am a french domainer : I invest in domain names as a business. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. The current rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified : the other extension in my domain portfolio is dot fr, with a rate lower than $5 USD and the registry AFNIC offers a very good domain management. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest : how can ICANN accept that a registry with 140.000.000 domains (VERISIGN) is more expensive than a registry with less than 4.000.000 domains (AFNIC) ???? Most of the costs are fixed cost and the dot com users should pay less than $4 USD. Kind regards Philippe FRANCK Domainium philippe(a)domainium.fr Tel +33 607 24 26 12 www.domainium.fr<https://www.domainium.fr/>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com Price Increases
by David Malek Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

It’s obvious you are blind to the reality of instagram, facebook and other platforms replacing domains as ways to do business. As these platforms continue to work for the public and business the number of people who own .com’s is shrinking and will further shrink if the prices continue to go up. What you should do instead is lower the cost to own a domain so people such as myself will actually keep the domains they have instead of getting rid of them and lowering my yearly spend on many unnecessary domain names that I have. David Malek

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Verisign deal
by Nathan Curry Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I'm writing to voice my position against the verisign deal. Giving verisign this much consolidated power can't be a good thing.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Luke Brookhart 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Luke Brookhart Apalachin, NY

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a registrant of multiple .com domain names. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. No one other than Verisign wants increases in .COM prices. Verisign is merely your manager of the .COM Registry – it has no business dictating the price. I believe ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Thank you for your consideration. Christopher Boudreau San Francisco, California United States

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Information requested
by Tyler Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

What is the cost justification for increasing 70% over over decade? Why is a governing body not transparent about where the $20M from Verisign is being used? ICANN needs to be responsible for the data it's using and selling to these companies.

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

I am a registrant of several .com domain names. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. The current price is more than fair for what it does. T.J. Kilian Kansas City, Kansas United States

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Against .com price increases
by Andrii / Warpgate Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello team ICANN, we writing to inform that we are very much *against *the .com price increases! We run a web hosting and our customers will definitely not like this move. Sincerely, Andrii / Owner at Warpgate

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Ibrahim Subeh Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

I oppose the price increase as it will negatively impact my startup.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com price increasing unchecked
by Evan Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello, I wanted to let you know that I do not like the idea of having .com domains rising in price un-checked. If this happens, costs will rise much more than normal and will most likely result in migrating to a cheaper domain. I wanted my voice to be heard that this does not seem like the best plan for domain name purchasers. Evan

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .COM shady underground deals
by Karpov Main Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

For an organization that trust and accountability is presumed upon, it is really disheartening to hear that you can sign deals with corporations without involving other stakeholders. You as an organization should always strive to make decisions that are for the greater good of all and not some self serving decisions. There is a saying that says,"where there is smoke there is a fire". This under-hand agreement are the smoke and for sure the financial misappropriation is the fire. please rethink this strategy

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Tamara Gross 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. Tamara Gross Orlando, Florida United States

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Just don't.

1 0

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

Feb. 12, 2020

Hi there, I'm extremely disappointed by this decision. Domain names are supposed to be available to anyone that wants to start a website. By allowing freedom to increase the prices as suggested, you will close off access to a huge population. It's a real shame, totally against the purpose of the internet. 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. Nabil New Malden, England United Kingdom Nabil Beirouty Founder Affios m: 07 505 134 336 w: affios.com e: nabil(a)affios.com Get your free website review, *click here.* <https://affios.com/website-review/>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed .com Price Increase
by Lee Steer Feb. 12, 2020

Feb. 12, 2020

Hello, I am writing this email in protest of your proposed price increases that are completely ungrounded in any real need for more funds and serve purely to inflate your own profits and allow for increased salaries that capitalise on a monopolistic position within a now-vital worldwide service that should be open, uninhibited by corporate influence and corruptions such as this. Regards, Lee

1 0

[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