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

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Please do not raise .com price
by Andrew Knox Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

Please keep .com accessible to all. Respect pioneers and innovators. -- Andrew Knox

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Opposed to amendment 3
by Luke Parkhurst Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

I am writing in opposition of the proposed amendment. I saw very little written in the proposal to justify the potential 7% annual increases. Has VeriSign been struggling since prices were frozen? Or is it a corporate hand out from the current US commerce department at the expense of hundreds of thousands of small businesses and individuals who maintain a presence on the web. Please either stop this amendment or at the very least limit the increases to a more reasonable 1 or 2% annually. Thanks for your consideration. Luke Parkhurst

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Marisa Womble Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 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. There is no justified reason for an increase. Marisa Womble Houston, Texas United States Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Montgomery Rob Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

Dear Mr. Namazi, Nat Cohen’s response (below) says it all. There is NO justification for a price increase. If ICANN members approve this, the only logical explanation is that ICANN members must stand to gain from it personally, one way or another. There is NO other possible justification. Please prove to the world that ICANN is NOT just looking out for itself and their Verisign buddies. Bluntly put, any approval of Verisign price increases will reek of collusion and another complete failure of ICANN to fulfill its mandate with regards to .COM. Regards, Rob Montgomery Nat Cohen’s full response: What is ICANN's justification for raising prices on millions of .com registrants? Why is Verisign entitled to make hundreds of millions of more dollars on top of the billion dollars it already makes from running .com? Why is ICANN allowing a company with market power to increase prices, without justification, and in the absence of meaningful competition that would restrain pricing? Does ICANN have any good answers to these questions? NTIA says it is ICANN's job to set prices on .com. ICANN says it is NTIA's job to set pricing. Who then is responsible for negotiating reasonable pricing on behalf of the public? Is NTIA wrong that it is ICANN's job to set prices? Was the DOJ wrong back in 2008 when it said that ICANN was failing to uphold its responsibility to constrain the market power of Verisign? NTIA did not mandate that ICANN increase .com prices, it merely set an upper limit beyond which prices should not go. ICANN retains the ability to freeze pricing while remaining consistent with NTIA guidance. It would be odd indeed if a U.S. Government agency was in favor of company raising prices on consumers without justification. At what point will ICANN start looking out for the public interest instead of only acting in the best interests of the registries? ICANN's preference for harming registrants to benefit registries highlights the fact that ICANN is unaccountable to the public, that its policy making structure provides no meaningful way for the public interest to be given any weight in developing policy, and that it lacks legitimacy. There is no justification for a price increase. Verisign is not facing higher costs that need to be passed along to customers. Verisign is already one of the most profitable companies in the world, enjoying extremely high profit margins and deriving enormous revenues per employee. ICANN's utter failure to protect the public from being ripped off by registries with market power setting ever higher prices is a sad reflection on ICANN. I urge ICANN to stop the needless transfer of hundreds of millions of dollars from registrants worldwide into the already overflowing pockets of Verisign by denying Verisign price increases. Regards, Nat Cohen President Telepathy, Inc.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] no .com price increases
by Void Walker Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

No price increases for .com, regulate higher up salaries instead. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Transfers are easy
by Corey Moyers Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

If you raise my prices I will simply transfer all my domains to another registrar. That’s how capitalism works. If you want to restructure your services to take advantage of customers who don’t know any better, your profits may increase the first year, but the long term effects will be a much smaller customer base. That customer base will have fewer domains as well. You only have a small portion of all the domains I own. Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] My Opinion on the Proposed .Com Price Increase
by Lonny Heaton Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

I strongly appose any price increases in .com domain registrations. Let's keep it simple and low cost. If anything, make it more simple and less expensive. Thanks!@ -- Lonny Heaton (435) 674-0555

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Randall Cooper Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 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.* This is a formal e-mail requesting that you take a serious look into Verisign with the price increase. They are turning million of dollars with .com already and they are trying to charge more from the public. This is not their only business but this may be there largest. Randall Cooper Leeds, Alabama United States

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Andy Gardner Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 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. Andrew Gardner Christchurch, New Zealand

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] (no subject)
by +18608199001＠mailmymobile.net Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

Lol cool it with the price increase buddy

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Where is my domain?
by andreamport＠gmail.com Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

I can no longer see my website. What happened?

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com registry pricing
by bob＠bounce-mania.com Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

I see no need to increase the current price nor do I see a need to register any domain name year after year. It should be a simple as filing the title to a land or home purchase. You file once and then never need to amend or change the deed unless there is a change in ownership. The fees for having to reregister the domain annually are an unnecessary burden and an increase in pricing will only increase the burden on small business owners like myself who have about 10 domain names registered for the numerous businesses I own. Thank you, Bob 817-692-2363 http://www.bounce-mania.com/ <http://www.bounce-mania.com/> Bounce-Mania PLEASE NOTE - Our address has changed. Please call before mailing in any payments.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] .com registry pricing
by bob＠bounce-mania.com Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

I see no need to increase the current price nor do I see a need to register any domain name year after year. It should be a simple as filing the title to a land or home purchase. You file once and then never need to amend or change the deed unless there is a change in ownership. The fees for having to reregister the domain annually are an unnecessary burden and an increase in pricing will only increase the burden on small business owners like myself who have about 10 domain names registered for the numerous businesses I own. Thank you, Bob 817-692-2363 http://www.bounce-mania.com/ <http://www.bounce-mania.com/> Bounce-Mania PLEASE NOTE - Our address has changed. Please call before mailing in any payments.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Don’t approve .com price increases
by Geoffrey Lowney Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

I am a registrant of multiple .com domain names used for my personal activities, email, sharing, etc. I am against the proposed price increases to .COM domains. Verisign just want increases in .COM prices to go back milking registrants as they did in the early days of the internet. It is very difficult to transition from one domain name to another, including from one TLD to another. This essentially locks registrants into their domain name, and gives Verisign a virtual monopoly. The current rate of $7.85 is already far more than justified, and higher than the prices for many other TLDs. Verisign is merely your manager of the .COM Registry – it should not be in the business of dictating the price. ICANN is supposed to govern the domain name system in the public interest. ICANN could choose to increase prices in small amounts to keep up with inflation, but 7% per year, even for only some years, is unconscionable. Thank you Geoffrey Lowney Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] It is my view that there is no purpose to increasing fees for domain names, other than rent-seeking.
by Jesse Feb. 8, 2020

Feb. 8, 2020

It is my view that there is no purpose to increasing fees for domain names, other than rent-seeking. Operational expenses required for running the domain name system should be progressively minimized until the system is entirely automated, seeking to have only the expenses for energy, equipment, and land. The system should increase in efficiency, rather than decrease. Proposals to allow the domain name system to further slip into feudalism only endangers its future. It then becomes entwined with the economic goals of of not those who support it via name license fees, but instead those who benefit from it in profit, the profiteers being monopolists and interlopers. There is little purpose to having people involved in the running of the system except to support such people economically. The domain name system should not support anyone’s economic livelihood. It should be divorced from the employment economy as possible so that it may stand the harsh test of technological evolution without being endangered doubly by the whims of that chaos called the economy. Forrest Fabian Jesse jesse(a)jesse.org <mailto:jesse@jesse.org> 北京曦轩实验室 Beijing Xixuan Laboratory ---- --++ -+-+ -+-+ --++ 北京市海淀区高梁桥斜街44号科教大楼13B 13th Floor National University Science & Technology Bld. Beijing Jiaotong University East Campus, Beijing, 100044 电话 Tel. +86 10 516 86 535 手机 mobile +86 138 1131 5130

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Holcomb Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 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. Mary Holcomb Tustin, California United States

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Please Keep The .com Price Low
by Flights To Bali Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

Dear Sir/Madam, I believe that internet presence is already all companies, all organization and even all people needs. For now a day, brick shops are shifting to virtual shop, freelance jobs are already a trend, home schooling is already a need for some family. So low cost internet and web presence are already people needs. Some small business are open their online shops with .com, because .com is internationally accepted and trust. Keeping .com low price will help a lot of small business for start their shops in low cost. The other hand there are a lot of people are need income from domains business. Not all these kind of people are rich enough to buy .com with high price. Making .com expensive will make it exclusive for big business. Keeping internet and web presence in low cost will help a lot of people. I am also .com user. I make a lot of bible as non profit activity, self financing Christian Mission. I use .com in bible such as my Prajurit.com. For financing some time I sell the domains of my bibles to financing the Bible Projects and buy a new one. Making .com expensive will restrict me to keep doing this social activity. Online Christian Bibles will help a lot of people to access bible easily, and it will help the world become peaceful in long term. That's is my comment. I hope you can help to make internet cost and web presence cost as low as possible. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Surya Giri

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Please do not raise our internet tax
by Charles Swann Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

Keep the internet accessible, to everyone, we don't higher prices on everything, we don't need a new "tax" on our business

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Evan Mitchell Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 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. Evan Mitchell Fountain Valley, California United States

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by andrea.paranormalpdx Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains.Please help stop these unjustifiable price increases, & support the average customer!Andrea StengerPortland Oregon, U.S.A.

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Ali Ghamrawy Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

I am a registrant of a .com domain name. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. Ali Ghamrawy Cairo

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Proposed Amendment 3 to the .COM Registry Agreement
by Hong Wan Koh Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

I am a domainer and websites owner of .com(I invest in domain names as a business) or am associated with the secondary market. I am against the proposed price increase to .COM domains. Koh hong wan Singapore, Singapore Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Price Increase
by Kelvin Myles Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

Whilst I can understand the reason to increase prices I do not agree with the amount being considered. I believe it would be far more equitable to restrict any price increase to no more than the annual cost of living increase in the USA. Kind regards, Kelvin Myles This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection. For more info visit www.bullguard.com <http://www.bullguard.com/tracking.aspx?affiliate=bullguard&buyaffiliate=smt p&url=/>

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Domain name pricing
by Sten Lilliestrom Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

Dear Icann, Some products are also critical infrastructure and basic necessities. Domain names fall in this category. To enforce price hikes unmotivated in any way by increased costs of operation is to take advantage of that. / Sten Lillieström

1 0

[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] Money grab
by Gary Page Feb. 7, 2020

Feb. 7, 2020

This amendment is nothing more than a money grab. The actual cost of administering the registry is negligible, and any fee charges are pure profit for the registry plain and simple. Sent from my iPhone

1 0