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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] .org Domain Price Increases
by Nicole Foster April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

To whom it may concern: We at NumFOCUS are opposed to removing the price cap on .org domains. Allowing ICANN to raise prices beyond the 10% increase allowed at this time creates the potential for uncontrollable price hikes. As a non-profit entity this is a big concern for us. Large increases in critical services greatly affect our ability to serve our mission at a fundamental level. Thank you, -- Nicole Foster Executive Operations Administrator, NumFOCUS nicole(a)numfocus.org 512-831-2870 <http://www.numfocus.org/> <https://twitter.com/NumFOCUS> <https://www.facebook.com/NumFOCUS/>

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Hobi Michalec April 29, 2019

April 29, 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 are 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, Hobi Michalec <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Unlimited increases in .org
by Sri Ananda Sarvasri April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

The renewal of .org domain names should be going down, not up. These are generally non-profit organizations. The net is already benefitting from economies of scale. With automation and AI, the costs should be coming down. If that’s not happening, find out why. In any case, do not allow unlimited increases in domain name registrations. It need to be capped. Sarvasri

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Jon Satrom April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

By removing the price cap of 10% in the proposed renewal of .org registry agreement will open the door to price gouging for some of the web’s most dynamic, vulnerable, and positive players. Non-profits, often with limited budgets, have flocked to the .org TLD. By lifting the price cap, ICANN is saying that non-profits should sink their hard earned budgets into Public Interest Registry’s profit, rather than into their missions-serving social causes and the public good. I emphatically urge you to reconsider the elimination of the 10% price cap for PIR. Without it, many small .org organizations will face challenges and will potentially be forced to sacrifice crucial program spending at the whim of PIR. The .org TLD celebrates a positive, trustworthy, and kinetic space on the web. Please, don’t threaten it with exorbitant price hikes (like we’ve seen on other TLDs). Don’t side with profit in a non-profit space… Jon Satrom http://studiothread.com

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Carlos Birdsong April 29, 2019

April 29, 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. 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! Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Russ Goodwin April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Hi- 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-org-renewal-18mar19] .org Registry Concerns
by Matthew Lisonbee April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

To Whom it May Concern: As a small non-profit organization that relies on our .org domain to further our cause, we are concerned that if prices for .org renewal were to steeply increase that would hinder what good we can do. The more costs we have the less we can help single-mom families in need. With Gratitude, *Matthew Lisonbee* Vice President <https://www.carsformoms.org>

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Phil Newton April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

I work with various non-profits that rely on .org domains for their online presence, and many of them have very small budgets for their websites. Removing price caps on .org domains will negatively affect their operations, and could cause them to cease online operations if prices rise too high. Please do not remove these price protections. Sincerely, Phil Newton

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Robert Johnson April 29, 2019

April 29, 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. JRJ

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Removal of price increase caps on .org
by Dömötör Gulyás April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

It seems as though removing the price increase cap on domains is not needed to incentivize innovation or to account for unforeseen changes in the market. As noted in the proposal, the market is mature and stable. The domain registrants provide a public service with a veritable margin already, and the only possible result from removing the cap would be an increase in prices without any appreciable change in service quality, which would only disadvantage upstarts, small entities, and individuals, effectively increasing barrier to entry and upkeep for users of the service who are in a difficult position to begin with. Providing affordable basic services like these is important to keep the internet open, to provide a low barrier to entry for new ideas and innovations, and to encourage participation and democratic discourse. Best, Dömötör Gulyas

1 0