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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by John Romine 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. John Romine

1 0

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

April 28, 2019

I am a .org registrant. If you are to remove price caps, then you MUST break the monopoly held by PIR. Not only should you break the monopoly but PIR should have to PAY MARKET PRICE for the TLD if you want to remove the caps. They were GIVEN a monopoly on .org. PIR should be a steward and if they cannot fulfill this role then another organization should take over 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. Thank you for your consideration

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] My comment
by Troy S April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Please DO NOT implement the proposed agreement for .org registry. This will make prices skyrocket and you will inevitably stall the ability for organizations to spin up support for their organizations now and in the future. DO NOT implement this PLEASE. Troy <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] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Dustin DeMeglio April 28, 2019

April 28, 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!

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Do not support removing caps for .org
by Brian Putnam April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

I am writing to let you know that I do not support removing price caps for legacy tlds like .org. These domains serve an important role on the internet, and should continue to be broadly available to internet users. Removing price caps will increase the price of these domains, and will make it impossible for many nonprofits and smaller companies to retain their domains, or register new ones. -Brian Putnam

1 0

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

April 28, 2019

I am a .org registrant (not-for-profit). 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!

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] price cap provisions
by Xtian Simon April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

"...and the goal of treating the Registry Operator equitably with registry operators of new gTLDs and other legacy gTLDs utilizing the base registry agreement." I believe the stewards of domain registry must consider the development of the internet was built on certain principles. Just because you have the power to effect change on those principles, I understand no reason why you should. Do not change the price cap provisions for .org domains.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] .org
by Tim Burford April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Hello - I have a travel blog that means a lot to me but isn’t monetised in any way and frankly has not very many followers. If prices for .org domains go up for no good reason, I will probably have to give up. What’s the benefit of that? best wishes, Tim Burford Tim Burford Writing guidebooks and leading hiking trips since 1991 Now blogging at unraveltravel.org Follow us at facebook.com/unraveltravel.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Jean Baptiste Hugo April 28, 2019

April 28, 2019

Sir or Madam, I am a .org registrant. 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? Yours faithfully Jean Baptiste Hugo

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Zero Dean 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. ⁣Get BlueMail for Android

1 0