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

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Impeach icann
by Daniel Wruck Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. Why are you going into collusion with a greedy company to raise rates? The current rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified. Daniel W Indiana

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment in opposition to Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by pub 144 Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

To Whom it May Concern, I am a dot com domain registrant and I am deeply disappointed to hear that ICANN is proposing a new contract amendment with Verisign, the operator of the dot com registry that, among other things, will impose a string of annual price increases on domain registrants. Unfortunately, almost everything you hear these days coming out of ICANN is negative for domain registrants and positive for domain registries. Registrants, the most important part of the domain name ecosystem, are the least valued, and their pocketbooks are treated as a playground for powerful companies such as Verisign. You hear people say, “well, it’s only a dollar a year. It doesn’t really make a difference. I can afford it.” But I believe it’s important to see the forest for the trees. When viewed in the aggregate, this proposed price increase does in fact make a difference when you consider that it will have a negative financial impact on over a hundred million dot com registrants worldwide. Beginning in the first year, dot com registrants will lose approximately $100 million due to this price increase, By the end of the contract, 2024, the annual loss to consumers will be approximately $300 million. By any standards, that is a massive giveaway to the operator of the dot com registry that comes straight from the pocketbooks of mom and pops, small businesses, entrepreneurs, and other individuals around the world. ICANN has agreed to grant Verisign the right to seek not just one price hikes, but a string of four annual price hikes up to 7% a year which will, on a cumulative basis, significantly increase the price of dot com domains by the end of the contract term. Verisign is seeking to implement the maximum 7% increase allowed under the proposed contract. That 7% price increase is well above any common measure of inflation, which currently runs around 2% annually. How can a price increase of 7% possibly be justified? Further, the cost to operate domain registry services on a per domain basis continues to decrease. Thus, ICANN should be seeking price decreases for domain registrants rather than price increases. Let alone price increases that are 300% above the general rate of inflation. The unchallenged position of Verisign as the sole operator and perpetual incumbent of the global behemoth dot com domain extension with creates an unhealthy imbalance of power in the domain name system that ICANN is ill-equipped to manage. Registry operators such as Verisign are contracted parties that operate according to ICANN’s terms, not the other way around. Yet, the proposed contract perpetuates this imbalance and grants Verisign even more economic profits and corporate power. (It should be noted that my comments are not directed at Verisign in particular. Indeed, any company that was granted the unchallenged right to oversee the dot com registry and virtually dictate the terms of its contract would assume such outsized financial and political power. ICANN is solely responsible for creating and perpetuating the existence of such as Frankenstein. ICANN states that it is not a price regulator. However, the DOJ and DOC are not interested for political purposes in fulfilling such a role, so then who is in charge of protecting global consumers from abuses of pricing power in the domain name system? It seems the registries are in control and imposing their wishes upon consumers through ICANN’s policymaking processes and domain registrants have no one looking out for them. ICANN seems content to pass contracts which bestow upon registry operators uncontested price increases and even removals of all price protections for consumers, and if registrants don’t like it, they are forced to pursue costly private litigation to prevent the price hikes from being imposed upon them. That is untenable and unfair. As ICANN must know, even at the $7.85 annual wholesale fees Verisign has been limited to since 2012, Verisign Corporation has already grown into a financial behemoth. It operates with unrivaled levels of profitability by commonly-accepted financial measures such as operating margins and EBITDA. As a result of its no-bid, perpetual right to operate the dot com registry, Verisign operates as a massive cash cow and pockets virtually all of the income from charged for dot com domain registrations. Each year, Verisign has more than $600 million in profits that it has no use for and does nothing with but buy back its own stock. This is money that comes straight from the bank accounts of domain registrants. And now ICANN is working with Verisign to implement price hikes that by 2024 will add an additional $300 million a year to the enormous annual windfall that Verisign already enjoys. ICANN must be aware that that money is coming from the pockets of businesses and individuals, akin to a massive private tax imposed upon registrants. Those millions of dollars that will be going to one large private company at ICANN’s behest are being sucked out of communities and out of households which have far greater need and purpose for the money than an already fatly rich company does. Worse, many dot com registrants come from poorer parts of the world, where domain registrations are a luxury, and ICANN is making the promise of an opportunity to escape poverty harder to achieve by raising prices on these less fortunate registrants. ICANN has stated that the comments period is an important part of enforcing the multi-stakeholder model. However, we have seen ICANN attempt to disregard thousands of comments opposing price increases and removal of price caps on the dot org extension. ICANN’s own ombudsman attempted to rule out thousands of comments opposed to the dot org contract amendment on the grounds that they were engineered by one trade association. ICANN, here is the hypocrisy of the comments period and of what happened in the dot org comments period and what is happening in the dot com comments period now: ICANN has no requirement incumbent upon registrars, and itself makes no effort whatsoever, to notify domain registrants that a comment period has been opened during which registrants can voice their opinion against such price increases. So, you have a situation where just a tiny percentage of the tens or hundreds of millions of impacted registrants are even aware that such a price hike is being proposed. How can they possibly let ICANN know that they oppose the increases if they are not aware of them? If all those registrants were notified and urged to comment, ICANN would receive hundreds of thousands or even millions of comments against the increases. Yet, it seems ICANN and its registry partners seem to prefer the status quo and operating with little public awareness of these changes that negatively impact the average registrant. And when an independent entity attempts to expend its own resources to help make registrants aware of the comments period and encourage them to submit a comment for or against the contract changes, instead of thanking that entity for its help in engaging the public in the multi-stakeholder model ICANN supposedly supports, ICANN goes out of its way to criticize that entity as a “self-interested” party and does what it can to delegitimize all comments that came from its laborious efforts to raise public awareness. How can anyone but conclude that ICANN and the powerful registries seem to prefer operating in the dark, and public engagement in the policymaking process is in fact not valued or even wanted by ICANN or the registries. It is worth noting that in winning the auction to operate the .web domain extension several years ago, Verisign - disguising its identity through the use of a stalking horse bidder -, opted against an auction format that would split the proceeds amongst the many other bidders competing for the .web extension, as was commonplace in other auctions with multiple bidders during the rollout of ICANN’s new gtld program. This maneuver had the effect of directing the entirety of Verisign’s $135 million bid solely to ICANN, rather than being shared amongst the losing bidders. Hence, Verisign paid $135 million AND secured the single domain extension that was widely agreed to present the greatest competitive challenge to Verisign’s dot com extension. That series of events prompted a Department of Justice investigation, (which in fairness was closed without remedial action). Nevertheless, the .web incident is important because many have noted that as part of granting the proposed contract which grants highly lucrative financial gains to Verisign, ICANN has also arranged a $20 million payment for itself from Verisign (ostensibly to promote efforts to maintain security of the domain name system). While it is indeed circumstantial, I would propose that readers of this comment consider the $135 million payment that Verisign made to ICANN as part of the atypical .web auction process in the context of this proposed lucrative contract renewal, in addition the $20 million that Verisign is paying to ICANN in conjunction with the new contract. ICANN must be blind not to see how this is being perceived by the general public and the media as a quid pro quo or payoff for approving the contract with price hikes. This may or may not be true, but perceptions matter. ICANN has created the perception that it is incapable of fair policymaking, that it is in the service of powerful companies it is supposed to oversee, that it favors those powerful few companies over the many million of registrants who do not have the same financial clout and small army of consultants and lobbyists who work the insides of ICANN and Washington to promote their own agenda the way those companies do. Despite the appearance of soliciting community input through comments periods, ICANN really has no true mechanism to protect the interests of registrants and, based on its actions, seems to be okay with that. That is deeply disappointing. With such actions as approving the price hikes contained in the proposed contract amendment, ICANN seriously risks losing its legitimacy as an impartial governing body. Domain name registrants need a strong, fair, and trustworthy governing body that looks out for the rights of registrants too. I oppose the proposed contract amendment and call for ICANN to amend it to better protect consumers from unwarranted price hikes. ICANAN can do this by eliminating the price increases it has granted as part of the contract, or reducing the size of annual percentage increases on dot com fees granted therein. I also propose that, in return for maintaining the perpetual, no-bid contract to operate the dot com extension, ICANN should consider requiring Verisign to relinquish the right to operate the dot net and dot web extensions in an effort to promote vibrant competition among domain registries and prevent concentration of power in the domain name system. Further, ICANN should make all efforts to put the contract to operate the dot com registry out to bid and let the market decide what the wholesale cost of a dot com should be based on those bids. Open bidding to operate the dot com registry would undoubtedly result in LOWER prices for consumers, not the ever-increasing annual registration fees that registrants are forced to endure under this perpetual, no bid contract ICANN has bestowed upon Verisign. Respectfully Submitted, Matthew Klein

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] To Who--icann,
by Imago Dei Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

As a small business owner and a sole proprietor I'm concerned about .com rate increase in the coming years. I may have to drop a site because so I can afford to operate and support my family. Please attend to this and fight for those of us who have smaller operation that cannot easily absorb rate increase. Thanks. Sincerely, Chris Cavanaugh http://www.ChrisCavMusic.com http://www.musiclessonsnh.com http://www.weddingmusicnh.com FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/suzukiviolinstudio https://www.facebook.com/ChrisCavmusic cell/text 785 1884

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed.Com price increase
by Kevin Deutsch Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please do not increase the cost to maintain my .com domains. An increase will cause a huge hardship. Thank your...Kevin

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Do not increase .COM prices
by Bojidar Kardalev Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

This price hike will have a stifling effect on a lot of small businnesses and initiatives online. Internet's inception was based around fundamental ideas as freedom of expression and enterprise. And now more and more it's about different groups trying to 'privatize' it and get a piece of the pie. Keep it's spirit alive! Don't raise the prices!

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment on amendment
by Joe Pavlisko Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hello, These price increases are an obvious way to generate an extra $500 million without doing any extra work, an unacceptable and dishonest increase. If the price increases go through, I will advocate that the rights to register for .com domains be transferred to another party. Thanks, Joe Joe Pavlisko Full-Stack Developer P 440 488 5055 [image: www.alpha-sense.com] www.alpha-sense.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3
by Victoria Tennant Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I strongly oppose the "Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement". It is a monopoly and will hurt small businesses. Victoria Tennant

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Andrei Igna Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi, I am a registrant of a .com domain name and 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. Hope you can do something about this Andrei Ig Barcelona, Spain https://andrei.net

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] No
by daniel.gordon Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

No increase is needed

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Justin Godfrey Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am a domainer (I invest in domain names as a business). I am also a US Air Force Veteran and have been running my own domain name business for the past 13 years. It has allowed me to attend every school function with my children and put them to bed at night. An increase in .com domains would significantly impact my 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. 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. Justin Godfrey Marquette, Michigan United States -- Justin Godfrey Domain Investment Services Inc Marquette, MI

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Don’t shut out small entrepreneurs
by Horace Torys Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

The internet deserves transparency and accountability for all decisions affecting everyone. Price increases will hurt small entrepreneurs. Please change your policy to include us all. Jay

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Concerns about increases
by Ty Johnston Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I have four main concerns with ICANN’s decision: *1. Price Increases* Verisign will be allowed to increase the wholesale price to registrars for .COM domains by 7% each year in 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023. After a two year “freeze”, Verisign can increase prices by 7% annually during 2026-2029, then another two year “freeze”. This cycle will continue, meaning that within 10 years, .COM domains could cost approximately 70% more than the current wholesale price of $7.85 — and the sky is the limit. It is not clear how much of these price increases registrars will pass along to consumers, but it is likely that most of these increases will be paid by domain name registrants. The contract does allow for other price increases for certain extraordinary situations, so it is possible prices could increase more than anticipated. *2. ICANN Will Receive an Extra $20 Million * With the contract changes, Verisign agreed to pay ICANN an additional $20 million dollars over five years to support ICANN’s initiatives regarding the security and stability of the domain name system. There is no explanation why Verisign did this, how ICANN will spend the money, or who will ensure that the funds are properly spent. *3. Verisign Can Operate as a Domain Registrar* ICANN also had rules that the operator of a TLD could not operate a domain name registrar. Although in 2012 ICANN allowed operators of new gTLDs to have domain name registrars, it did not apply to Verisign. The new contract will allow Verisign to operate its own registrar, except for selling .COM domain names itself. To circumvent this, it is also possible that Verisign could act as a reseller of .COM domains, through another registrar. This result is that the company that controls almost 80% of the registrar pricing for domain names will compete directly with all domain registrars, maximizing its control of domain name pricing to the detriment of other competing registrars. While this might result in lower prices to consumers, fewer registrars will harm competition, choice, and domain name services. Verisign’s registrar could also use its dominant position to charge higher prices to consumers, while at the same time raising registrar prices. *4. ICANN Ignored Previous Comments* As detailed on Standing Up to ICANN to Keep Domain Prices in Check and pricecaps.org, over 3,500 comments were submitted in support of price controls for the .ORG, .INFO, and .BIZ TLDs. Only six comments supported removing price controls. ICANN discounted the comments that were in favor of maintaining price caps. A number of the comments were submitted using an online tool, which caused the comments to be discounted as “spam” by the ICANN Ombudsman. ICANN removed the price caps, primarily relying upon a biased preliminary analysis from 2009 by an economics professor that did not reference any data. This is bullshit and you know it :)

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Eyuphan OZDEMIR Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I use the Internet but I am not a .com registrant. 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. Thanks for your valuable time. Eyuphan Ozdemir Bursa, Bursa Turkey Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] small business and club manager
by JesSwift DotDotDot Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

we use .com for our organization and for my very small business. any increase in cost will make it difficult to maintain a web presence apart from social media please keep costs for the small guy low thanks Jes dotdotdottshirts.com dotdotdottshirtproductions(a)gmail.com Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/DotDotDottshirtproductions/> Twitter <http://twitter.com/dotdotdot_tshir> Instagram <https://www.instagram.com/dotdotdottshirts/?hl=en> 784-571-4368

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Keep the pricing fair
by Stuart Brent Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please maintain transparency in the Verisign / ICANN relationship, and do not hike domain registration costs arbitrarily. A fair and open internet means accessibility to all, and lower prices help accessibility.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Amendment Comment
by Matt Mleziva Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Request you not take actions that would raise the price of domain name registrations – support freedom of speech! – thanks & cheers, Matt Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Amit kirkole Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Against this amendment
by Karademir, Ertugrul Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear ICANN, Internet has been a good money source for a lot of companies who have contributed a little but demanded their cut. If you squeeze your user too much though, people will choose choice over convenience. Ertugrul Karademir Senior Software Engineer

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Wayne Gonzales Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. 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. Wayne Gonzales Tustin, California United States Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed price increases of .com
by Diane Bush Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Absurd that there would be such massive price increases proposed to a .com domain name. You will be taking advantage of countless small businesses who operate on minimal funds, yet make a huge impact in the community. NO price increases.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com price increase
by Bob Coleman Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I'm an ultra small business owner. One thing I do buy and own are .com domain names. Please don't increase my expenses, putting my potentially growing business into stagnation or worse, decline. You have control over that. The rate of increase I've heard you're wanting to implement will affect my ability to buy more domains. Capitalism works best when you have a cheaper product you sell to everyone instead of selling an expensive product to a select few. Bob

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com domain price increases
by Vincent Tavera Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Good morning, I as spokesperson for our 53 year old business and my own interest in developing websites, .com are a foundational base for most companies trying to create an online presence. An increase in.com pricing would have a major impact on every companies ability to establish an online marketing presence. Please do not move forward with the verisign deal. If needed, I'd be happy to come speak with someone in regards to this issue. -- Best Regards, Vincent Tavera | Marketing EPI Electrical Enclosures & Engineering (210) 673-3580

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Comment
by Meagan Lang Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please do go forward with this deal. Raising the cost of .com domains will limit access, depriving people with low income of a significant professional tool for self promotion. Meagan Lang

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Sébastien Chazaud Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hello, I have to buy a lot of domains for my job (SEO expert), so I’m against the increase of the prices. Regards, Sébastien Chazaud referencer-son-site.ch

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Opposed to price increases for Dot com domain names
by Lorraine Maita, MD Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Any price increase to dot com domain names will make it increasingly difficult for small businesses to compete in a global market. Small businesses provide a significant amount of jobs and contribution to the overall economy. Instituting ongoing price increases will cause many to shutter and the marketplace will be dominated by multinational corporations fraying the fabric of our country. I want to voice my concerns and objections Lorraine Maita, MD Vibrance for Life 64 River Road, First Floor Summit, NJ 07901 (973) 218-1199 www.HowToLiveYounger.com<http://www.HowToLiveYounger.com> www.VibranceForLife.com<http://www.VibranceForLife.com> --

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Website Prices
by Jen Monderer Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

As a student and designer, this change is very frustrating to hear. I need a portfolio as a designer to get a job and if prices increase I will not be able to afford an online presence. Not having this limits my future opportunities. I urge you to reconsider this change

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] I don't like ICANN taking $20, 000, 000 from VERISIGN
by Bob Butler Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hello ICANN, I don't like ICANN taking $20,000,000 from VERISIGN. My costs will increase because of it. Don’t take it. You must have Hillary giving you advice. Bob Butler Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Price increase .com domains
by Ben Van Dijk Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. If price increases are needed than it should be opened up to competitive bidding to ensure the System remains competitive , why guaranteed profits for a privately owned corporation. Ben Van Dyk

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] No to repeated increases in registrations.
by Kemner Paul (LSL) Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

The repeated 7% increases are abusive and unnecessary. End Verisign's monopoly now. Kind Regards / Mit freundlichen Grüssen Paul Kemner Database Administrator / Information Technology Liebherr Aerospace Saline, Inc. 1465 Woodland Drive Saline, MI 48176 Tel: +1 (734) 944-6390 Email: Paul.Kemner(a)liebherr.com Internet: http://www.liebherr.com<http://www.liebherr.com/>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .COM Registry Amendment
by Owen Raccuglia Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi, I'm writing to express concern about the proposed change to the ICANN's registry agreement with Verisign. It opens the door to price increases, and I'll likely stop renewing my .com domain if it goes into effect. Maintaining and expanding the accessibility of .com domains should be a higher priority. Thanks, Owen Raccuglia

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Opposition to recent contract changes
by Becky Marshall Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hello, I’m writing to express wholehearted opposition to the recent contract changes between ICANN and Verisign that will have direct impact on consumers and small business owners like me. Greed in this form should have no place in internet infrastructure. Becky Marshall

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by thibault＠thyb.net Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I write to oppose the proposed changes to the contract ICANN has with Verisign, Inc. who operate the .COM top-level-domain (TLD). 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. .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. Thank you. Thibault Baradat London, UK

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by 戚文华 Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. 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. wenhua qi China

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Marcos Vinicius Ribeiro Artigas Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. Marcos Artigas Gravataí, Rio Grande do Sul Brazil redehost.com.br / umbler.com?

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .COM Proposal comment
by David Fonseca Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

To whom it may concern: Recently i knew about the pretension of creating a monopoly inflating the prices of .COM domains in the following years. I think it is not the way to make that increases without clarity and with proporcionality, only searching profit by a third party company (VeriSign) that with your pretended agreement could cause al speculation pricing on the .COM pricing in the near future. Hope you reconsider this . Thanks and Regards David Fonseca CEO Comercial Siamex LLC Enviado desde Correo para Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Radical Price Increase
by Gary Schimmelpfenig Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am totally against what appears to me to be greed oriented price gouging for those of us with .COM web sites. I don’t make money from my site and maintain it as a service to help people deepen their relationship with the natural world. I don’t do FaceBook or Twitter but rely on my web site singularly. I’m sad that ICANN is making this poor choice!! Gary Schimmelpfenig earthmirrors.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] no to .com price increase
by i stand against this new increase to the cost of dormain name .com Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I Patrick Nwogu stand against the .com domain price increase Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Public Comment
by Kursat E. Gundogan Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing in response to the proposed changes to the .COM registry contract in place with Verisign. As a user of the domain system, I am opposed to any action that results in unnecessary price increases. I believe this will effectively stifle competition in the wholesale registrar industry and adversely affect innovation by countless entrepreneurs in the Internet sector. A vibrant Internet community is only viable with proper oversight and affordable access. Therefore, I urge you to reconsider the proposed changes allowing Verisign to increase prices by 7% annually. Kind Regards, K. E. Gundogan

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] In opposition to the Proposed Amendment 3
by Charlie Knight Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please do not allow this amendment to pass. Allowing this will created a monopoly and remove competition among domain registrars. This will only hurt the consumer and limit innovation among web developers and businesses using Internet communications. The end result is that the small businesses and individuals who now have access to domain registration will slowly be choked out by larger companies. It is essential to maintain a competitive and fair marketplace. Thank you, Charlie Knight

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] COM Pricing
by Dustin Stage Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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 Dustin Dustin Stage 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] Please keep the TLD price caps in place.
by Sebastian Felix Zappe Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear ICANN, Please keep the existing TLD price caps in place to avoid - damage to your name - damage to society as a whole - class action lawsuits. Your job is to keep the internet running, not to sell it to private companies. Regards, Sebastian -- Sebastian Felix Zappe Tech Lead SOZIALHELDEN e.V., Andreasstr. 10, 10243 Berlin, Germany

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] ICANN .com pricing
by Andru Matthews Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I write to oppose the proposed rules that will allow Verisign to raise prices on registrars for .com domains and to become a registrar itself and compete with other registrars. This move will put existing registrars at a disadvantage and lead to market consolidation that will hurt competition and increase prices for consumers. Thank you,Andru Matthews

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Opposing .com domain name price increases
by Matthew Herman Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am writing to voice my opposition to increasing .com domain name registration prices. While I think it is important to pay a fair price for a service, this appears to be a case of unilateral price making, rather than market-driven pricing. Therefore, I do not believe it is appropriate or necessary to raise registration prices at this time. Thank you for your time.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] You Can't Pour Anything Out Of An Empty Cup
by Andy Frisella Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

You Can't Pour Anything Out Of An Empty Cup <https://andyfrisella.com/blogs/andygram/how-to-make-a-difference> Greedy. Selfish. Wrong. Materialistic. Money hungry. Morally misaligned. Just a few of the names certain people use to describe others who have higher ambition than them These days it's popular for people to be "Mr. I'm Enlightened" and act like they are above "money" and are dedicated to "helping people" instead. These are the same folks that will try and make you feel bad for having ambitions for financial success. I call bullshit. If your goal is to really help people then let me ask you a question Can you help more people by working a minimum wage job that just pays the bills and you donate your time on evenings & weekends to the local food bank as a volunteer? OR Can you help more people by grinding out a successful career that makes you enough money to open 100 food banks? And yes...you can still donate your time as well. If you're a young man or young woman with ambition to be financially successful and you have the "care bears" trying to make you feel bad for what your goals are... Remember...you can't pour anything out of an empty cup. 99% of people who try and make you feel guilty for your wants, dreams, goals are people who are incapable of doing it themselves. It's far easier for them to be "Mr. Nobility" than it is to actually go out and build something! Pay attention. 50% of the time these people will tell you their life has gone as planned and they are happy living a modest life. The other 50% of the time these people will bitch about how the world screwed them. Well, if you're exactly where you want to be...how could the world have screwed you? Ask these people if they'd like an extra 1000 bucks and see what they say... There is nothing wrong with money...no matter what ANYONE tells you. The reason most people have an issue making any is that they, for some reason, believe deep down it's a bad thing. Well, if you really think it's bad, refer to my set of questions above and retrain your money thoughts. Want to REALLY help people? Want to really make a difference? Make success a priority for YOU. —Andy Read this post on my website <https://andyfrisella.com/blogs/andygram/how-to-make-a-difference> Subscribe to the Real AF Podcast <https://link.chtbl.com/raf-main?sid=ag-daily> Most Importantly: Share this message with someone who needs to hear it today ... <https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://andyfrisella.com/blogs…> <https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=You Can't Pour Anything Out Of An Empty Cup&url=https://andyfrisella.com/blogs/andygram/how-to-make-a-difference> <http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://andyfrisella.com… Can't Pour Anything Out Of An Empty Cup&source=https://andyfrisella.com> I wrote this email to help you, but if the truth hurts and you absolutely hate it you can Unsubscribe <https://manage.kmail-lists.com/subscriptions/unsubscribe?a=QBvhy9&c=JYdanU&…> :( 44Seven Media 9779 Green Park Industrial Dr Saint Louis, MO 63123

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] com TLD Price!
by Eyyubov Azer Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am really annoyed with domain prices and do not understand why it is not enough for you millions of dollars which we pay for you every time when we buy or prolong duration of domains. Instead of protecting the rights of users you help companies to make big money on us. Azer Eyyubov Orbis AV MMC +994504300889 Azerbaijan +905418540999 Turkiye Xətai rayonu Zığ Şossesi Bina 1v Mən.117 AZ1027 Azerbaijan, Baku.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Against Domain name to be increased
by Easy Mummy Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Verisign is has a monopoly on .com registrations. It is an unfair abuse of power for the price to go up so much when the actual cost of providing the service continues to decline. EasyMummyStore Mom

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] No to price increase
by Princess [e3 Energy Evolved] Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Don't Increase price of .com
by Nazmus Nasir Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please don't increase the price of .com domains. It is a staple of the internet and needs to be preserved.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] accessibility of .com's is a big deal
by Jaclyn Hawtin Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear ICANN, please consider this: Today I heard that you are making a deal with Verisign Inc. regarding the sale of of .com's. And that this deal is going to increase the cost of .coms over the next year by more than 70%. We all know that .com's are the TLD to buy, and that using something else makes it confusing for users to access and thus for businesses to gain traction. If the prices get raised like this basically what is going to happen is a large segment of people are going to get pushed out of being able to afford to purchase .com domains. They will be forced to buy other TLD's that don't perform as well for them. These people that can't afford are going to be the up and coming entrepreneurs from places like developing countries of which the world REALLY needs right now. Few people in the US will be affected. But this move totally goes against the principles of an *open and accessible internet*. If it is your intention to keep a level playing field for all people online then I urge you to repeal this decision. I help families build business online. Often times it starts with a simple beautiful idea, maybe it's a family selling seeds online that come from the farm in Indonesia, or a Mom that makes textiles from her house in Mexico. They can barely afford to pay for domain and hosting services for the business. But they're doing it and the businesses are growing. If the costs go up on the domain side, that would become a barrier into which many would give up before even getting started because of the financial strain. Accessibility matters, I hope that you really think through how this price increase will affect accessibility for all people around the world. with gratitude, *Jaclyn Hawtin* Managing Partner, Digital Dames jaclyn(a)digitaldames.io | digitaldames.io *Empowering entrepreneurs through technology * *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.*

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] (no subject)
by Omar McIver Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

To whom it may concern, Echoing my friends comments... I am writing you today to protest the proposed price increase to .COM domains. As a company, Verisign already enjoys some of the highest profit margins in the domain industry. (Or any industry, for that matter.) The company maintains a monopoly on the .COM registry, and incredulously, is proposing a price increase as its costs of operation are actually going *down!* (This contention is bolstered by the many other registrars who maintain that, given an opportunity, they can run the .COM registry at much lower costs.) As if to add insult to injury, this is a company that is supposed to be operating in the public interest. All parties would agree, with the possible exception of Verisign themselves, that the burden of a .COM price increase at this time on individuals and small business would most decidedly NOT be in their best interests. For all the reasons noted above, I urge that the proposed amendment be rejected. Sincerely, Omar McIver Operations Lead / Senior Applications Consultant EPS Asset Management, Petrofac Inc. Desk : +1-832-626-4001 Cell: +1-832-277-6586 Email: omar.mciver(a)petrofac.com<mailto:omar.mciver@petrofac.com> LinkedIn: http://bit.ly/omarmciver Web: www.petrofac.com<http://www.petrofac.com/> Petrofac - 15021 Katy Freeway, Suite 300C, Houston, TX 77094 P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to This message, including any attachments, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, or authorised to receive information for the recipient, please contact the sender by reply email, and delete all copies of this message. Thank you This message, including any attachments, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, or authorised to receive information on behalf of the recipient, please contact the sender by reply email, and delete all copies of this message. While we have taken reasonable precautions to ensure that this message and any attachments are free from viruses, we cannot guarantee that they are virus free and accept no liability for any damage caused by this message or any attachments. Messages sent or received through our networks may be monitored to ensure compliance with the law, regulation and/or our policies.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] This amendment is not in the public interest
by Josh Mahan Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

This collusion with Verisign is being done in the opposite of public interest. It solely benefits Verisign and ICANN (thru what amounts to bribery) at the expense of the public and small business. I oppose this amendment.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Sean Esterhuizen Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear ICANN Committee, I run a small software development business, and own approximately 30 domain names. Every year I have to pay not only for the domain name, but also the privacy protection piece, and the payments always seem to come at a time when I can barely afford it. Hiking the .com domain prices will have a negative impact on my business, so I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. Looking at the situation, and from what I have read, no one other than Verisign wants to increase the .COM prices. I feel like the current base rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified, and that Verisign, as manager of the .COM Registry - has no business dictating the price. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest and keeping the prices at their current level is in the public interest. Regards, Sean Esterhuizen Worktrainer Software Misenheimer, North Carolina, United States

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] To improve the world internet ecosystem
by engin＠baku.hosting Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Increase in .COM domain prices
by Ugah Daniel Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I write to express my dissatisfaction towards the lack of transparency in dealings related to domain name regulations and most importantly, the recent moves to increase the cost of .COM domains. This will undermine the accessible of the internet and its largely celebrated benefits. Pls put the policy to a halt. Thank you

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] COM Amendment 3
by Thomas Anderson Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

ICANN's decisions recently have proved its comprehensive inability to perform its vital function regarding domain registration. By selling .org to a for-profit firm with no price cap, ICANN has already endangered millions of non-profits for decades to come. Now ICANN decides that, despite administration costs for registrars decreasing due to automation and cheaper infrastructure, the price ceiling on the .com domain should be lifted as well, allowing a 7% price increase in each of the last 4 years of every 6 year period, AND increases the other 2 years if VeriSign decides it wants more money. This is CLEARLY a back-door deal to line the pockets of VeriSign and ICANN. Bribery, pure and simple. Unless you have another explanation? We would all fucking LOVE to hear it. Remember when transparency used to matter? What was once a critical check in the domain registration hierarchy is now a powerful goose that sells the ability to lay golden eggs to other, already greedy and bloated geese. The behavior of the board and of the organization is deplorable, and you should ALL be disgusted with yourselves. Even though you will NEVER actually read this email. SIX out of the THREE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN community comments agreed with selling .org, while THREE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY TWO (keep in mind, that is 98.1% of respondents) commented against the motion. And yet, ICANN goes through with the deal with no explanation, and no care for the global community; its only care seems to be its ability to buy a new solid gold margarita bar inside of its diamond-encrusted swimming pool, and allow its other rich friends to do the same. Fuck you, fuck your decisions, and fuck your greedy board. Instead of protecting the world's most valuable asset, you are purposefully continuing the destruction of a free and open internet, accessible and usable by all. You should be positively ashamed of your actions, though you've already proved you are incapable of that. Sincerely, A normal guy who you keep trying to fuck over.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] NO increase in .COM
by Rashid Khalifa Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am not in support of increase in .COM

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Increase to domain name prices
by ADMIN Alan Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear Sir, I strongly object to the proposed massive price increases. By staggering these increases over 10 years you hope to mask the fact that this is a 70% increase in price. This is totally unreasonable, and does not relate to normal commercial practice or to the current rate of inflation. It is clearly a selfish act of self-aggrandisement by those with power in Verisign and ICANN. Regards, Alan Miller

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Frank Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi, I'm hoping that you don't proceed with this proposed amendment. .COM domains make up the majority of registered domains and this amendment will only raise the barrier to entry for everybody. Thanks for your time, -Frank http://franksemails.com

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Reject proposed amendments to .COM TLD management and fees
by Michael Chupa Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

The details provided on the ICANN.org site indicate that wholesale pricing for .COM TLD registry services has been static at $7.85 since 2012. CPI data shows that the aggregate inflation index since 2012 was 255.657 (avg. CY 2019) / 229.594 (avg. CY 2012) or a total of 11.4% over eight years, for an annual rate of ~1.4%. The proposed changes provide that, "..., among other things, Verisign and ICANN may agree to amend the .COM Registry Agreement to permit an increase to the price for .COM registry services, up to a maximum of 7 percent in each of the final four years of each six-year period (the first six-year period commenced on October 26, 2018). The proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM RA reflects this change, essentially restoring the pricing structure from the 2006 .COM Registry Agreement." As an illustration, a 7% increase in 2020, 2021, and then in each of 2024-2027 inclusive would yield an aggregate price increase for .COM domains of 50.1%, for an annual rate for 2020-2027 of ~5.2%. Clearly, this is an excessive price increase, based on the past eight years of inflation data. Unless ICANN, Verisign and the U.S. DOC and DOJ can provide details justifying cost increases outpacing inflation by nearly a factor of four, this proposed amendment must be rejected as unfairly burdensome to .COM registrants. Coupled with the fact that Verisign is benefitting from decades of U.S. taxpayer-funded research and development, leading to the existence of the .COM TLD, prior to any cost increases associated with the operation of the .COM TLD, there should be a full audit of the actual costs of operating .COM, along with any proposed changes or enhancements of DNS as outlined in the proposed amendment. Any cost increases passed on to consumers and wholesalers of internet domain name services must be tied directly to actual costs, and not hidden in yearly "cost-of-services" increases without justification. Further, a U.S. DOC and DOJ inquiry should be initiated to assess whether a core network provider such as Verisign has an innate conflict of interest in managing any TLDs, much less securing hyper-inflationary cost increases with the cooperation of ICANN. Sincerely, Michael A. Chupa <chupa(a)acm.org>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Changes to .com registry agreement
by Toby Balla Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear Sir/Madam, I am unhappy about these proposed changes and would prefer they did not occur. I have two .com names and it would have a negative effect on me and I believe on the world wide web in general. Kind regards, Toby Balla

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My humble comment
by Milan Velebit Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Don't do this. Thanks.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Ricardo Gomes da Silva Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

This is outrageous. Do not let this pass, for the sake of the Internet.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Do not increase .COM pricing
by Patrick O'Friel Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

This is bad for all parties except verisign. .COM is literally an idea, there is no overhead to pay for.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Increasing domain prices
by Angelica Bustamante Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please do not increase the costs, I am a small business of 1. There are many of us out there. I am a single mother, with two teenagers in college. My business and I have to live lean, efficient and smart to help my children pay for college. Please keep in mind that some small businesses are really small and are trying to stand out amongst others on the internet to stay in business. Please keep our costs down. Thank you for your time, Angelica, lmt

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] concern over amendment 3
by Joanna Pieters Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I’m extremely concerned by the proposed changes to the Proposed Amendment 3 to the .com registry agreement. In particular, the significantly increased registration and renewal fees. I am a solo business owner, but competition in a busy market. I don’t compete with the huge brands for attention, but my online presence is extremely important. To that end, I have a number of .com websites reflecting different areas of my business. Those are extremely important to me. It would be commercially deadly for someone else to purchase those domains as a .com. But I will still be subject to large increases to keep and renew those domains. The increases are significantly over the rate of inflation, year on year. This disproportionally affects small business owners like me, whose need for a .com is every bit as significant as a large corporate business. I am also concerned about the market distortion caused by allowing Version to operate its own registrar. I realise this currently does not include .com domains, although it seems clear there are ways this can be circumvented by Verisign acting as a reseller through another registrar. This will give Verisign, which already controls almost 80% of the registrar pricing for domain names, a position that manipulates and controls domain pricing. I understand the short-term gain of possibly pushing other registrars to price more cheaply, but the long-term probability is that those registrars are pushed out of the market, reducing choice and competition. I hope that this will be revisited and amended to support business owners and entrepreneurs who are so important to the global economy. Sincerely Joanna Pieters joannapieters.com London, UK

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Scott Xiong Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .COM Price Increases
by Rafael Rodriguez Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hello, As an internet professional and heavy user, I would like to say you that I think this decision to increase the .com prices is not good for the world of the internet in general. Regards. -- Rafael Rodríguez. 0034-644295049

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Thariq Rafiq Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. baecon.comManchester, England United Kingdom

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by John Wang Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. Faversham, England United Kingdom

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Vinith Almeida Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hello, I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. I have been in the field for over 15 years and the current price of the dot com domain is what makes it valuable and accessible to all. To increase the price is completely against public interest and would hurt the community. Regards, Vinith Almeida

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Price caps on .com domains
by Ashleigh McGarity Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please don't remove the price caps on .com domains. This will hurt so many site owners who had no say in this decision. It will hamper the free speech that the internet provides, by limiting site ownership to those with greater means. The low barrier of entry to site ownership is a thing of beauty; please don't destroy it. Thank you for taking the time to listen, - Ashleigh McGarity

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Please Don't Increase the Price of .COM
by Ali Raza Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi ICANN team, Please amend your proposal to allow Verisign raise fees for .COM domains. The domains are already expensive as they are for individuals and small businesses. Internet and IT have always demonstrated economies of scale. While I understand that there are costs involved to maintain the security of it, Verisign should be addressing them through innovation and by lowering the expenses for domain registration, and then using those efficiency gains to drive other important goals. If other companies can do it, Verisign has no excuse. Only companies who have monopoly and do not innovate allow themselves to raise prices. Raising prices and not innovating is not good for consumers or 21st century society when we should be internet more accessible for people. Owning a .COM domain should not be a luxury, and therefore any price increases is a step in the wrong direction. Thank you, Ali Raza Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com price increases
by Vlad Ciobotea Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

This is unacceptable. Stop making deals behind closed doors. Even more so when such deals affect 40% of all domain names online. Don't let greed destroy our beloved internet. The prices are high enough as it is and this whole thing will spur a lot of outrage.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Alistair MacDonald Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hello, I would like to register my concerns about the proposed amendment 3. Like many who have an identity online the cost of my domain name is already a significant part of my online costs. Any increase will be a problem to me. My domain name costs are already higher than the rest of my hosting costs. These costs are already causing me to close down or sell off products. While the open and free market should find the price the domain name registry is not an open and free market. It is a very clear monopoly. The reason the caps existed in the first place. Please take this email as an objection to the change in the price caps. All the best, Alistair

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Sergiu Cociug Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. Sergiu Cociug Chisinau, Chișinău Municipality Republic of Moldova The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Any opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Company. Emails are susceptible to interference. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, do not open any attachments but please notify the Endava Service Desk on (+44 (0)870 423 0187), and delete this message from your system. The sender accepts no responsibility for information, errors or omissions in this email, or for its use or misuse, or for any act committed or omitted in connection with this communication. If in doubt, please verify the authenticity of the contents with the sender. Please rely on your own virus checkers as no responsibility is taken by the sender for any damage rising out of any bug or virus infection. Endava plc is a company registered in England under company number 5722669 whose registered office is at 125 Old Broad Street, London, EC2N 1AR, United Kingdom. Endava plc is the Endava group holding company and does not provide any services to clients. Each of Endava plc and its subsidiaries is a separate legal entity and has no liability for another such entity's acts or omissions.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Dissaproval - .com register agreement
by Benjamin Henry Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I just wanted to comment on my disapproval of “Amend 3 to the .com register agreement” I run a web agency with a majority international client base, who use .com domains. You are choosing to remove the cap on a TLD that make up 40% of registered domains. Apart from that, you have done it in secret, in partnership with a private company. This absolutely smacks of greed and corruption, where you are benefiting with a private company, and the only people loosing out are companies and customers like us, who will have to pay the increased prices.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Complaint regarding price changes for .COM domains
by Tal Binder Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Dear ICANN, I own personally and through my businesses many domains, your price increase without any clarity how the service quality will increase is outrageous. I respectfully ask you to cancel the price changes. Thanks, Tal

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Stop .com price increase
by PRAVEEN KUMAR Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi, I think this will impact bloggers and small busines organisations who has branded their business with dot com. This may have adverse effect in the internet industry. There are lots of non profit websites and information websites that run on small revenues. Regards, Praveen.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] The .COM registry is a monopoly and price increases are unjustified
by Paul Westley Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am a registrant of some .COM domain names, used for business and personal purposes. Verisign has a monopoly. ICANN is allowing Verisign to increase prices without putting the contract for running the .COM registry out to competitive tender. A number of other registry companies are on record as being willing to run the .COM registry at much lower prices than Verisign. This proposal will severely limit the degree of competition inside a market and reinforce the monopoly power of an established business to command excess profits. It is a fallacy to suggest that the existence of other gTLDs is an alternative to using the .COM domain name. It is not an option for businesses to re-brand themselves under an alternative gTLD. They have no choice but to continue with their .COM domain name, and they are at the mercy of the monopoly of Verisign. I am very opposed to this contract change and price increases. This whole proposal should be rejected.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Don't let greed overwhelm you!
by Steven Small Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I whole-heartedly disapprove of this proposal. Please consider the users and avoid the desire to increase your own profits by manipulating the monopoly held through .COM domains. Ultimately we will be the ones who suffer from this decision. Unless it’s completely necessary, this is simply profiteering.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Objection
by Zeonfung NGAU Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Egor Matveev Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. Egor Moscow, Moscow Russia

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Please, don't raise the prices ... .
by Aimee Jardon Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi! I wrote on behalf of CaputChain LLC and now as myself. Raising the prices of .com domains so very much would make them unusable for myself, at least. Please, do reconsider. :) Sincerely, Aimee Jardon

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Noel Springer Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am the owner of several dot com domains and I am opposed to the proposal to allow Verisign to increase wholesale prices of dot com domains. It has been estimated that the true cost for Verisign of running the dot com registry is somewhere between $1 to $3.50 per domain per year. It would seem the current wholesale price of $7.85 is more than adequate to run the registry and generate a fair profit. If the proposed increases are applied in full then a price increase to $10.26 in a mere 6 years would be 30%. Additionally according to figures for the US inflation rate at https://inflationdata.com/ the proposed 7% incremental increases are more than double the current annual inflation rate (for 2019). Verisign does not own the dot com domain space. It's role is to provide technical services. It is already well compensated for the services it provides and thus higher fees for Verisign are not justified. Noel Springer

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Do not adopt Amendment 3
by David Black Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Ladies and Gentlemen: Amendment 3 is inappropriate and unacceptable for an organization chartered to serve the public. At best, a payment on the part of Verisign to ICANN that then results in the increase of .COM registration fees creates the appearance of a conflict of interest. The relationship between a for-profit entity (Verisign) and non-profit (ICANN) must be transparent, and this certainly isn't. Over time, implementation of the proposal would effectively shut out the small businesses relying on a reasonably-priced registration system. Do not adopt this proposal. Regards, David Black

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Opposition to Verisign-ICANN Changes
by Flip Yours Fitness & Wellness Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

To Whom It May Concern: I adamantly oppose the contract changes between Versisign and ICANN. The price increase on .COM domains is unreasonably inflated and bordering on price gouging. Also, it is extremely unsettling that Version could be allowed to monopolize .COM registrations through the loophole of reselling domain names. I would hope that you will reconsider the terms of your new contract. Your main reasons for existence, as a nonprofit publicly-benefit corporation, are to ensure the operational security and stability of the Internet and to foster competition among the domain registrant stakeholders. The terms of this new contract read as being more self-serving and Cari Pierce CPT / CHC / CISSN / CFSC Certified Personal Trainer / Certified Health Coach / Certified Sports Nutritionist / Certified Functional Strength Coach providing Holistic Lifestyle Coaching & Personal Training at Flip Yours Fitness & Wellness and at Change Space Meditation Room & Wellness Lifestyle Supply cari(a)flipyourdog.com |. 410.259.8176 www.flipyourdog.com <http://www.flipyourdog.com/> | FB @ <http://www.facebook.com/flipyours>flipyours <https://www.facebook.com/flipyours/> | IG @flipyoursfit <http://www.instagram.com/flipyoursfit> www.changespacecommunity.com | FB @changespacecommunity <http://www.facebook.com/changespacecommunity> | IG @changespacecommunity <http://www.instagram.com/changespacecommunity> Flip Your Dog LLC

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] The .com's are already expensive ... .
by Aimee Jardon Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi! Leaving a comment here about the proposed price rise for .com domains. :) That's plain terrible … . I'll probably have to sell the .com domains I have and get something cheaper, if the price hike happens. Thanks for listening. :) Sincerely, Aimee Jardon, Managing Member of CaputChain LLC

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by shirosakimieru＠outlook.com Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I use the Internet but I am not a .com registrant. 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. ShirosakiMieru Guangdong,China

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by admin＠shirosakimieru.com Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. ShirosakiMieru Beijing, Beijing China

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by ITw3 Domain Admin Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Internet to to public
by Richard van Oeffel Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

LS, The ICANN should support the open internet community in the broadest way, independent of organizations. The ICCAN may outsource activities, but not the accountability of the tlds. With the proposed amendment, the ICANN will give parts of the open/public parts of the internet to commercial organizations which are focused on profit and not the benefit of the public and open world. I have no problems that ICANN seeks support from private companies and pays them accordingly, but the ICANN must not run away from their responsibilities as the will do in this amendment. With Kind Regards, Richard Richard van Oeffel MSc CISSP CISA QSA QPA Information Security Consultant [cid:image001.png@01CF8FBA.D9936BC0] Schroeder van der Kolklaan 14 3734 VG DEN DOLDER The Netherlands Tel: +31 30 274 0708 Mob: +31 6 3011 6367 Fax: +31 15 212 7746 Web: www.voc-consultancy.nl<http://www.voc-consultancy.nl/> Email: rvanoeffel(a)voc-consultancy.nl<mailto:rvanoeffel@voc-consultancy.nl> Registration no: NL30237444

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] comment on Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Senor Duende Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

To Whom It May Concern I am both a customer of the .COM domain system and a seller as a through my Hosting Business. The .COM domain name enjoys a de facto "default" status that encourages most new domain names to flow through to the .COM registrar, even after the introduction of the new gTLDs and country-specific TLDs. In the same way that the .ORG domain name should be managed and reserved for the enrichment of public organisations, .COM domain name should be made freely available to all people at a relatively cheap price. As we see an ever increasing amount of entrepreneurship, we see a massive decrease in the cost of compute; if anything we should see the wholesale prices for domain names lower. This should be done to make the internet more free and open, and encourage everyone to get domain names. I love domain names, and for me I would love it if domain names proliferated to the same extent as email addresses. I make a note of ICANN's vision which is "To be a champion of the single, open, and globally interoperable Internet". I do not see how increasing the price of Domain Names, which will only increase the operating costs of small business and individuals and not affect incumbent players in all markets (which the price increase will not even be noticeable). This action is completely in opposition of this vision. Please also refer to one of ICANN's Strategic Goals: "Sustain and improve openness, inclusivity, accountability, and transparency". How are you making the system more inclusive if the cost of a .COM domain name is about eight times more than what one third of the world's population makes per day? If anything, ICANN should be focusing on reducing the wholesale .COM domain price to make it more open and available. I wholeheartedly disagree with this move to make obtaining .COM domains harder. ICANN should reconsider this decision. Regards, DD https://dev.to/hammotime/don-t-let-icann-increase-the-wholesale-domain-name…

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by KADİR TOMBAK Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am a 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. Kadir Tombak Selçuklu

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Murat Elbeye Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. Murat Elbeye Istanbul

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Michel BM Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Hi, I am a domainer (I invest in domain names as a business). 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. Best regards Bernand Paris, Île-de-France France

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Sylvain Le François Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 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. 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. sylvain le francois paris *Best regards,* *Sylvain Le François* *Skype : sylvain.lefran* *WhatsApp (emergency only) +66809265850*

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Thomas Fadum Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

The prices of .com domains should'nt increase. This is outrageous. What possible good could that do? More sites are being registered everyday, increasing the price is just being greedy

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Sylvain Le François Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

Please don't do it !! *Best regards,* *Sylvain Le François* *Skype : sylvain.lefran* *WhatsApp (emergency only) +66809265850*

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Berkay Nizam Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. Berkay Nizam Bursa -- İyi çalışmalar. Berkay

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by olcay mustafa akbaş Feb. 13, 2020

Feb. 13, 2020

olcay Istanbul, Istanbul Turkey

1 0