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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Please do not increase the price of .ORG more than 10%
by Naresh Bhagtani April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Thank you Naresh Bhagtani mailto:naresh.bhagtani@nichelive.com <naresh.bhagtani(a)nichelive.com> Mobile: +91.98230.59008

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to the new .org agreement
by Berkshire/Coventry HOA April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear ICANN, I am a .org registrant and a not-for-profit or non-profit organization. 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] Don't make life harder for non-profits and people who want to give something back
by Adrian Matei April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hello there, Please don't make the life harder for non-profit organisations and people who want to give something back, we struggle to collect funds anyway. And by all means a 10% increase each year, as now the case is, is still too much if applied... Thanks and best regards, Adrian

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] No
by david morley April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please do not allow unlimited fees on .org domains. We use .org for npo and can not afford more increases.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Price Hires
by GRAHAM SSETTALA April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

thanks for the work but a price increase on the .org domain is not in our favor. -- GRAHAM FRANKLIN SSETTALA C.E.O GRAHAM NETWARE SOFTWARE DIVISION.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to the new .org agreement
by Gregory Smith April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern: 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. Greg Smith, community volunteer

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Regarding the pricing change on .org
by Mahesh Kumar April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hi ICANN , This is to request you not to increase the pricing for .org The .org domain is normally used by NGO's and not-for profit organisations. So kindly consider and avoid price increase and add more burden on us Thanks., Mahesh

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Against the price increase
by Armando Valdes-Prieto April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

As .org registrant, I am very concerned about what lifting the cap on price increases could do to my costs. I am very much against this needless change. Armando Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Do Not Approve the .Org Agreement Renewal
by Maitrik Patel April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Thank you for the opportunity to submit a comment. 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. Thank you Maitrik Patel

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to the new .org agreement
by Gregory Smith April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern: 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. Greg Smith, community volunteer

1 0