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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Lim Zhi Yang April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a .org 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?

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Form Post from Firefox
by Studio Solutions - Andrew April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

utf8=? authenticity_token=wh/W1eUN3ujhHOYF6CLP3MNnhHQI4FWM8DuIJRIgHwcDQiJUjjrmWXYhUvzJgeRGEZRHjBlH3v44h9c1/JiMGw== terms_of_services=yes commit=Continue It’s as if you guys got really REALLY bored with the way things are, and someone got all excited with the idea of uncapping prices. Just because it’s something you can do doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. Andrew Smith

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by X D April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I work for a non-profit organization that is a registrant of a .org domain. Our mission is aimed at increasing public knowledge towards the protection of the natural world and as is usually the case, we rely on donations and grants for operational costs. Implementing the removal of price caps for legacy TLDs will inevitably lead to domain prices skyrocketing, diverting precious resources and effort from this mission and focusing it on sustaining this domain, which is necessary as it provides visibility, trust and the required reach for an audience willing to participate in this effort. I believe this is the case for many similar organizations and the trade-off here can be reduced to a simple: "profit for the sake of profit" vs "enabling affordable visibility for benevolent efforts" I oppose the removal of price caps for legacy TLDs, if only to maintain the accessibility of these types of registrants and allow this kind of message to reach its intended audience. Raul C.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Sairam Kunala April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hi, I am a .org 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. Unrestrained price increases on the millions of .org registrants who are not-for-profits or non-profits would be unfair to them. Unchecked price increases have the potential to result in hundreds of millions of dollars being transferred from these organizations to one non-profit, the Internet Society, with .org 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! - sairam

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Lukas Kawerau 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. I have used my .org domain for years, and all my mail and correspondence goes through it. If price caps are removed, the cost to renew my domain name may become too expensive, and I could be forced to give up a website that is integral to my life. 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?

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by J H April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. I've read about a lot of bad decisions under the UDRP. The URS seems even worse. I heard the URS is very new and is being reviewed now to see if it is working properly. It is too soon to include an untested policy on .org domains where for a few hundred dollars anyone could try to shut down someone else's website. Telling the .org registry that it can charge any price it wants for renewing a domain name is a terrible idea. Why would you allow them to set a crazy high price? They could try to force the domain owners to pay a very high price each year to renew their domain name, and if the domain owner either won't or can't, then the .org registry could take away their domain name, set a high registration price on it, and then try to find someone else who is willing to pay a high price for it. This is very unfair to long time .org domain owners who may see their prices raised sky high for no reason. You let the new domain extensions charge any price they want, but that hasn't gone so well. Lots of people got burned when the new registries offered low rates for the first year, and then after people registered the domain names and some built web sites on them, some of the prices were raised through the roof. .Org has been working just fine for decades where the prices maybe go up a little bit each year. Allowing huge price increases from one year to the next could ruin .org for everybody. I think you should pay a little more attention to what is good for the owners of .org domain names. The registries are doing fine. They don't need your help as they are already making plenty of money. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Don’t remove the price cap on .org domains
by Bernard Go April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Don’t do it because most people will not be able to afford it.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Sergey Semenov April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hello, 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 .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. Regards, Sergey Domain Name Registrant

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Price renewal deregulation
by Ingo Zen April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hi! The renewal price deregulation is a BAD BAD IDEA!! In that case providers can 10x the price for existing domains and make them impossible for clients to renew. Same for all domains .org .info Keep it fair!!! Thank you! Greetings Ingo Michehl, M.Ed.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] What is the driver for this proposal?
by Michael Judd April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Since ICANN and PIR are both non-profit organisations, the registration price of the various domains maintained by PIR should obviously be set to a fair price which covers the efficient running of the organisation and nothing more. If ICANN wants to remove price restrictions in the name of deregulation than they need to open up the tender process so that groups that believe they can provide the required level of service for lower prices that PIR currently charge are allowed to compete. This should be the case anyway of course. If the decision is made to let PIR have a monopoly along with deregulated pricing we'll all immediately know that ICANN has been infiltrated by either blatant corruption or gross incompetence. In fact, looking at the current list of board members of ICANN and PIR it is immediately obvious there is a huge overlap and conflict of interest. Both organisations are effectively now one and the same. I guess we're screwed. Regards, Michael Judd.

1 0