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

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

April 27, 2019

Removing price caps on .org domains is a further step in destroying the promise of the Internet. Affordable .org domains allow small groups and individuals to participate in the global conversations being conducted across the Internet. Despite the regrettable centralization and focus of large players to re-create television's "broadcast" model, many, including myself, have availed ourselves of .org domains to push back against the centralization and inherent limiting of the sharing of thoughts and ideas that centralization., abusive ISP ToS and asymmetric upload/download bandwidth for consumer internet connections strives to create. The TCP/IP suite was designed, and rightly so, not as a client/server suite of protocols, but as a network of peers. Raising additional barriers to that design, as the removal of price caps on .org domains does, shortchanges all users of the Internet. As such, remission of such price caps should be excised from the proposed changes. Thank you. -- Richard Warwick Voice: (212) 665 6566 Email: Richard(a)Warwick.Org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by support＠sumnerdavenport.org April 27, 2019

April 27, 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.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by support＠pearlsofhope.com 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] (no subject)
by S MD 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 Cinnabar William Jones April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

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? Regards William Jones of Oakland. CA

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Comments on proposed fee structure change
by Ann Negendank April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

Please do not change the fee structure for the dot.org registry/other registries. It need not be a profit center; it should continue to be a service registry for businesses and others who already compete on so many fronts. Thank you Ann Negendank A. Negendank Sensible Space (r) Organizing Services

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Domain Names
by Diana Mckee April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

ICANN, Thank you for considering on raising the cost of domain names. Unfortunately this means as a nonprofit it cuts into our cost to maintain a vital part of our marketing outreach and communication with donors. We are requesting that pricing is reasonable for all consumers who need to keep our doors open. Sincerely, Diana L. McKee Executive Director Transforming Lives Charter Schools, Inc Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by nationalflags＠yahoo.com April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am a .org 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 â€˜bottom up, multi-stakeholder modelâ€™. 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] .org price increase
by Brian Hurley April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I oppose removing price caps on .org domain. Price increases should be limited to the rate of inflation, unless justified by the need to upgrade infrastructure. Regards, Brian Hurley (owner of a .org domain)

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] ICANN’s contract with Public Interest Registry
by Stephen Klautky April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

Removing the price controls will adversely affect access to domains. There is a significant risk that some domains will be out of reach for the public. I would vote to keep the contract as is. Thank you S. Klautky

1 0