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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Please remember who you serve.
by Lee Quinn April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I started my comment's subject with a reminder. You should be reflecting on the consumer. Keeping prices low helps the .org community as a whole. Most of the .org community is a "Not For Profit" entity and run on small margins or entirely on donations. Keeping cost low for even small things like domain regulations has impacts on our operations. I encourage you to consider policies that keep our prices low and at a predictable cost. Thank you for your time. ~Lee Quinn

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to the provisions of the .org agreement!
by Eividas Mačiulis April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

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. -- Bedste hilsner / Best regards Eividas Maciulis Site Reliability Support Phone: [+45] 42413371 Better Collective A/S Toldbodgade 12 1253 Copenhagen K bettercollective.com

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] .org
by Robert Wood April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

ICANN, Please help organizations both government, private, and public to come up with reasonable costs associated with annual domain registration. We would agree to a slight annual increase, but if PIR would set the price in excess this would hamper our ability to maintain the website and would adversely affect the internet as we know it today. The internet must always remain free and to do that we need to work together to keep cost measures and subscriptions in check with what organization types are using such domains. I.E. Not for profit, victim's assistance, public safety, ETC. Thank you, Robert N. Wood, Jr. #16 Detective Sergeant Northern Berks Regional Police Department 37 Ontelaunee Drive Reading, PA 19605 www.nbrpd.org<http://www.nbrpd.org/> Office (610) 926-2999 Voicemail (610) 916-2290 x210 Mobile (484) 772-6724 Fax (610) 926-0309 [cid:image001.jpg@01D445D9.D17DA840] This message and the attachment(s) are intended for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication including attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone or reply to the original message at the above address and then delete all copies of the message. Thank you. "Please note that email sent to and from this address may be subject to the Pennsylvania Right to Know Act and may be disclosed to third parties."

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] No price increase for .org
by Peter Schurman April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Nonprofits use .org and contribute to improving the world, not exploiting others. Don’t exploit us.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to the provisions of the .org agreement
by Dotty Guerrera April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I am a .org registrant and a not-for-profit or non-profit organization. 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! As a non-profit organization I ask for your help. The caps allow us to afford a website. Florida Presbyterian Pilgrimage.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Don't Do It
by Steven April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I believe in capitalism but some things, like roads, police and fire services, et al, require both competent government supervision as well as risk containment covered by a public guarantee. The internet has provided a massive force for good for our society and allowing unfettered raising of the domain prices would suppress much of that positive effect. I strongly urge you to reconsider your current plans. Thank you

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Comments objecting to the .org renewal
by Slim K April 25, 2019

April 25, 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?

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] limit org domains price increase
by daniel＠dsgraves.com April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hi, I urge that org domains have at most a limited and restricted price increase. Small organizations and nonprofits often don’t have the money for hefty price increases. Increases should be based on actual cost increases. —Dan daniel(a)dsgraves.com Tomorrow’s history has already been written...at the name of Jesus every knee must bow. —Paul E. Kauffman

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Submitting comments opposed to the proposed .org registry agreement
by Ann Marot April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Thank you for the opportunity to submit a comment. Dear ICANN, I am a domain name registrant and included in my portfolio is a .biz domain. 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. *ANN MAROT* *MARKETOLOGIST (MMR)**Marketing with Excellence!* Mobile: +27825789989 www.facebook.com/ann.marot

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to Removal of Price Cap on .ORG Domains
by Matt Edwards April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Removing the 10% cap from .ORG domain renewals would be a mistake. The legacy gTLD space (including ORG) is not owned by that Registry Operator - it is owned by the people who built those domains into something of value. New gTLD’s can certainly be looked at in this way, but for legacy gTLD’s the idea should remain as payment for service, and not as if the Registry Operator were an owner of those domains. The change to remove the 10% price cap will render legacy registrants vulnerable to exploitative pricing - you cannot simply move to a different domain when pricing on a .ORG or .COM varies wildly from year to year. Please, consider the interests of the registrants over the registries. The registrants are the more vulnerable population. Allowing various and wild price swings year over year creates an unjustified transfer of wealth from the registrants (who built the equity of those ORG domains) to the registries (who it was understood were providing a fee for service model, not ownership). Thank you, Matthew J Edwards

1 0