April 2019 - comments-info-renewal-18mar19@icann.org

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by David Jimenez Sequero April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

To the attention of the ICANN committee, As an individual domain name registrant, I strongly believe legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .info registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders. I sincerely hope this proposal is not progressed any further. Thank you for your attention, David Jimenez Sequero -- David J. Sequero | davidjise (at) gmail (dot) com | PGP ID: 0432213D PGP FP: E219 213D 64F2 ADE4 5443 746E E59E 01A2 0432 213D

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] .info pricing
by Aaron B April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

ICANN, Please leave pricing controls as they are for .info domains. Thanks, Aaron

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by Jonathan Saewitz April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. ICANN staff should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN policy making is supposed to be a ‘bottom up, multi-stakeholder model’. I believe that legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs. Legacy TLDs are essentially a public trust, unlike new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private interests. Registrants of legacy TLDs are entitled to price stability and predictability, and should not be subject to price increases with no maximums. Unlike new gTLDs, registrants of legacy TLDs registered their names and made their online presence on legacy TLDs on the basis that price caps would continue to exist. Unchecked price increases have the potential to result in hundreds of millions of dollars being received by one non-profit, the Internet Society, with .info registrants receiving no benefit in return. ICANN should not allow one non-profit nearly unlimited access to the funds of other non-profits. ICANN appears to be entirely catering to registries by removing price caps. ICANN should stand up for the public interest and registrants!

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Keep price cap please
by Balazs Varga April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Hello, The proposed removal of price cap on .info domain would increase inequality on the Internet as small organizations, businesses and entities rely on an affordable and predictable price for their online presence. Legacy gTLDs should be protected and handled separately from new gTLDs as they already have a huge number of users who chose them consciously because of its conditions and predictability in pricing. Please reconsider keeping the price cap on .info, .org and .biz TLDs. Thank you, Balazs Varga

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] See Nay Yi on Google Maps
by Sai Sai April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Google Sai Sai Sai Sai I shared a place with you Nay Yi Nay Yi No. 1094, Thanthumar Road, South Okkalapa Township In front of Zayzwar Housing Yangon, Yangon 11091 09 515 7394 View on Google Maps Google © 2018 Google LLC 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043 Sent by Sai Sai via Google Maps

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by Thomas Knaub April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. ICANN does not seem to recognize the difference between a legacy extension created with the support of the US government, that predates the existence of ICANN and that has millions of existing users and the brand new extensions that started off with a new set of rules, in particular no price controls, and no existing registrants. They have completely different characteristics, history, and ownership structure. It is not acceptable for ICANN to ignore these differences and to propose that they be treated the same. Removing price caps is not fair to .info domain owners. Many of them have websites that they have used for years. If price caps are removed, the cost to renew their domain names may become too expensive, and they could be forced to give up websites that are important to them. The Uniform Rapid Suspension policy is too new and untested to apply on domain names that may be 20 years old or more. With the URS, the domain names could be taken down in a matter of days with little notice. ICANN should be doing more to protect owners of .info domain names. Why is ICANN trying to remove price protections for .org domain owners, so many of which are non-profits, so that they can be overcharged for their domain names?

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Please do not remove cap for domain names!
by Nenad Todorović April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

To whom it may concern, Please do not remove caps for domain names! It will create a fertile field for what is basically blackmailing - domain name is too much important fot business, and they will have to pay a lot to keep the name for themselves. Please! Best regards, Nenad Todorović

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] 10% cap removal & PIR setting price - NOT IDEAL
by Bams Bamgbade Adetoyese April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I’m commenting from Nigeria, please the idea of removing the 10% percent cap on domain reg, and letting PIR set whatever prices it wants, will only ruin/decapitate our effort [the developing part of the world- Africa/Nigeria] to grow and catch up with the ever changing technology of this world. The cost might be too unbearable that it will foil our plans of running with latest trends in technology, reason been that our economy is not as big and strong as the developed world and where you are operating from. So Please any & all help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you Bamgbade Adetoyese [From Nigeria]

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by 20190428_internetcommerce.org＠waltzingalong.org April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a .org registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .org registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders.

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by Jurgen April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a .info and a domain name registrant. Legacy gTLDs are fundamentally different from for-profit new gTLDs and should be treated that way. Legacy TLDs are what the internet was built on. They are essentially a public trust. They are very different than new gTLDs which were created, bought and paid for by private parties. Registrants of these legacy extensions should be entitled to price predictability & stability. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet prices keep going up? Removing price caps is unfair to the millions of domain registrants. They will have no price protections. Every registrant will be at the complete mercy and whims of the registry. This could result in a transfer of funds from millions of non-profits to one non-profit, with no benefits to the domain registrants. ICANN is supposed to represent a "bottom up, consensus-driven multistakeholder model". ICANN should not unilaterally impose URS in legacy TLDs when that issue is precisely what is being examined by the volunteer ICANN Working Group who has been mandated to review this issue. ICANN should be looking out for the .info registrants, in particular the non-profits. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Where are the protections for the millions of domain registrants that this could effect in a negative way? These changes would give way too much power to the registry. This is not acceptable for a "public benefit" organization that exists to represent many stakeholders.

1 0