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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Miroslav Violinov April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am a .org registrant (non-profit). 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] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Richmond of Richelieu Skrzypinski April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. The idea to increase the older .org name prices is shameful, and just shows how ICANN has become a corrupt entity just like any other company or organization who believes profits come before people.Shame!!! 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] ICANN domain names
by Chris Schroeck April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

ICANN should be doing MORE, not less, to protect owners of .org domain names. What is the point of 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? What possible advantage does it have? As many of these .org owners are non-profits it means that every single additional dollar going to domain registration is 1 less dollar that goes to help the needs these non-profits protect. Do the right thing and do not eliminate any caps on registration costs. Sincerely, Chris Schroeck

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Mark Polson April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I write to to express my opinion and provide opposition of the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs. These TLDs have millions of people who depend on them and an unlimited price restriction would hurt many people, particularly not for profits .orgs. Please do not proceed with this action. Kind Regards, Mark -- Mark Polson, President Code Greene I respond fastest to email: mark(a)codegreene.com

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by mikael parks April 27, 2019

April 27, 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. Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Sara Alsherif April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am a .org registrant (non-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] Domains operate on artificial scarcity
by Bryan Sheasby April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I oppose lifting the caps on the prices for .org domain renewals because domain names are existent based on artificial scarcity. In addition, there is zero innovation to be had in the domain registrar space. Therefore, there is no reason for prices to rise beyond the cap. -- -Bryan Sheasby

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Ri Gr April 27, 2019

April 27, 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 remove cap for .org
by Kim Allen April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

Hello ICANN, I maintain a website for a small youth, all-volunteer run non-profit organization. I also pay for the domain name each year as a donation, as the organization has very little income. Removing the cap would put at risk this organization and many others for being able to maintain or obtain domain names. I urge you not to remove the cap. Thank you, Kim Allen

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Unrestrained domain increases
by Ley April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

As .org domain owners, unrestrained price increases would affect our non-profit greatly. We ask that ICANN please re-consider this move, which at the end of the day would be injurious to organizations who exist for the betterment of society. We ask you to please protect the registrants’ interests by capping the annual increase. Dr Douglas and Paula Ley

1 0