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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Nattapak Atichartakarn April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a .org 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. Thanks, Nat Atichartakarn

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] (no subject)
by Harshal Carpenter April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Hello icann, Please do not change the rules for .org domains as a lot of organizations that I donate too already face problems with collecting donations for running the organization and a company which is monopolistic will be a much more trouble for struggling organizations. I hope that you are listening to us. Thank you, Harshal Carpenter

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] CORRECTION Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Myhelp Book April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

As a domain name registrant, I oppose ICANN’s proposed changes to legacy TLDs that will subject them to unlimited price increases with no maximums. I agree with others who express great concern about this and who oppose the proposed changes. Specifically: -Registrants of legacy TLDs need price stability and should not be subject to price increases with no maximums. -Unrestrained price increases on millions non-profits and not-for-profits .org registrants will have an unpredictable and negative impact. -Unchecked price increases means hundreds of millions of dollars transferred from these organizations to the Internet Society. The .org registrants would receive no benefit in return. -ICANN should not allow funds from many non-profits to flow to just one non-profit. -ICANN must not remove price caps in order to cater to registries. -ICANN must represent what is best for the public interest and registrants. -ICANN must protect price stability for legacy domains in order that millions of long-term established registrants can continue to expect stable, affordable and predictable domain expenses and not unexpected price increases with no limit. . - The proposed change to legacy TLDs will NOT do what is best for the public interest. Sincerely, C. A. L'Hirondelle Livableincome.org 3PennyPublishing.com MyHelpBook.m

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Thomas Palmer April 28, 2019

April 28, 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 .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 remove the cap! against the propoasal
by thorsten ebers April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am completely opposed to the plan of removing the pricing caps. It is only good the for isps/registrars. there is no much work related for the isp to keep up a domain.if teh fees will rise to much peopel will loo out for alternatives. and regarding to tcpip. other registarts could rise and dont follow icann. it could lead to a split of dns. we need to keep against the trrend of the internet as it was designed ages ago. we alreday face a split america and eu due to the new copyright laws. people will do their own internet independant from icann etc or create their own dark web/internet

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] (no subject)
by Adipa Wijayathilaka April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Hello, Please reconsider the change to the .org tld. This has the potential to negatively impact a lot of non profits and other organizations which have not previously entered into agreements with their registrars for fixed pricing for their domains. This change could drive a lot of such organizations away from .org, making the tld fairly meaningless. Regards. A

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Dave Whitaker April 28, 2019

April 28, 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] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Myhelp Book April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

As a domain name registrant, I oppose ICANN’s proposed changes to legacy TLDs that will subject them to unlimited price increases with no maximums. I agree with others who express great concern about this and who oppose the proposed changes. Specifically: -Registrants of legacy TLDs need price stability and should not be subject to price increases with no maximums. -Unrestrained price increases on millions non-profits and not-for-profits .org registrants will have an unpredictable and negative impact. -Unchecked price increases means hundreds of millions of dollars transferred from these organizations to the Internet Society. The .org registrants would receive no benefit in return. -ICANN should not allow funds from many non-profits to flow to just one non-profit. -ICANN must not remove price caps in order to cater to registries. -ICANN must represent what is best for the public interest and registrants. -ICANN must protect price stability for legacy domains in order that millions of long-term established registrants can continue to expect stable, affordable and predictable domain expenses and not unexpected price increases with no limit. . - The proposed change to legacy TLDs will do what is best for the public interest. Sincerely, C. A. L'Hirondelle Livableincome.org 3PennyPublishing.com MyHelpBook.me

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Arman Poghosyan April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am a .org 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.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Chris Still April 28, 2019

April 28, 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. Regards, Chris Still

1 0