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

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Comment
by Lee Walters April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not change the capped rate. The internet system works well if it is affordable to profitable and non-profitable domain names alike. The majority of domain names are not linked to profit centres, and are widely used by individuals as the common method of communication. Changing this will create a damaging situation to our freedom of speech and expression. Thank you for considering my comment Regards Lee

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by Nathan 105 April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

This is a really bad idea. The older top level domain names, such as .info, should be available as an affordable resource for anyone who wishes to purchase them for use. There should remain a cap on how much they cost to renew or purchase. Many websites could end up going to the wall as prices increase year on year, which they inevitably will. Regards, Nathan Parkin.

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by Jonathan Hult April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am 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. Jonathan

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Opposition to removal of INFO price cap
by Chuck Hagelgans April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

To Whom It May Concern: I am opposed to the removal of the INFO domain name price cap. ICANN grants Afilias Limited a *de facto *monopoly on domain names. ICANN therefore has a public responsibility to impose limits on the use of that monopoly. ICANN'S abrogating of that responsibility would give Afilias Limited free rein to charge any amount they wished. In the past few hundred years, we have seen in the United States the stranglehold that monopolies in the oil, coal, railroad and communication companies have had on this nation. We have seen how difficult it is to dismantle such a power structure once it is in place. Please do not create another unlimited monopoly by removing the INFO domain name price cap. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Charles Hagelgans Gloversville, NY

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Price Increases for .info
by Jim April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

As a domain registrant, I am opposed to the potential price increase of .info domains by removing the existing price limitations. In order to maintain a budget, small businesses cannot afford to pay whatever prices may be set by bigger corporations. The existing price limitation helps with this. If it is removed, many registrants will not be able to maintain payment for their domains. -- Thanks.

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] I object.
by Ethereal Enigma April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hello! I strongly OBJECT to the plan of removing the pricing caps. They were put in place in 2006 for a good reason and should remain so for the upcoming years. Sincerely, Sandra Urquhart http://crossofpain.com Sent from Mail for Windows 10 --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] isn't the role of ICANN to benefit internet users?
by Deane Hartwell April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

ICANN, please do the right thing and stand up for the public interest instead of corporate greed!

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by Brian Glover April 26, 2019

April 26, 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 .org 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 .org 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? Thank you for your support! Brian Glover

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] NO Price increase please
by office＠wernerfilm.com April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Please do not increase prices!

1 0

[Comments-info-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .info Registry Agreement
by Saevon Kyomae April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

This applies to most well known TLDs: .org, .biz, *.info*, .com. This is basically sanctioning extortion, a domain name is closer to a trademark, except a company is apparently not allowed to own it... instead they must keep "leasing" their trademark from a registrar. What do I get for improving my domain name (making my business known, improving public trust, running a well known blog/ news site)? Clearly higher rent costs on that same name. The Registry Operator is not going to be passing along actual business costs, or selling "domain-names with more value-added-benefits"... they know their audience has no choice but to pay. Effectively this is like the insulin price hike: morally wrong. Yet with ICANN backing off, you expect the Registry Operator to police themselves. OR their audiences to do so (by switching registrars? most will likely follow suit as they're businesses)

1 0