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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] lifting the price cap on .org domains
by Mike Perushek April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I help a local veterans charity by donating the .org domain they use for their website. If the caps were lifted, I could no longer afford to do such and I doubt the charity would be able to pick up the tab themselves. Thank you, Mike Perushe Sent from my iPad

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Keep Price Increase Cap ICANN
by Eric Browning April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

I am on the board of directors of two nonprofits which have websites with the .org TLD, as well as a member of another. Nonprofits work hard to advance their mission and serve others on an extremely limited budget. Today, helping advance the cause means having a website. Costs for website hosting and maintenance can be managed, but we depend on a static URL for our audience, and shopping for cheaper domain names is not an option. The only reason to remove a cap is to allow prices to increase beyond what they otherwise would, so we can assume that this will happen. Therefore the potential for unlimited increases to the registration costs for an established domain is unacceptable risk to organizations properly employing this TLD. Such a change would fly in the face of the original intent of the price cap. I can't escape the feeling that this would amount to highway robbery. An organization "purchases" and uses a domain for years, and includes registration in their operating budget, only to have it rise uncontrolled with no acceptable recourse. In some cases this could devastate smaller nonprofits, by forcing them off the internet. Who does benefit? Another non-profit. Do not remove the current price increase cap. Eric W. Browning

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Glen Eichenblatt 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! --- Glen Eichenblatt Director of Information Systems ACLU of Southern California 1313 W 8th Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90017-4441 213-977-9500 x210 | 213-201-7875 (f) aclusocal.org<http://www.aclusocal.org/> || facebook<https://www.facebook.com/ACLU.SoCal> || twitter<http://twitter.com/#!/ACLU_SoCal> || blog<https://www.aclu-sc.org/blog/> The ACLU: Stand for Justice This correspondence may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or have received it in error, please reply to this message indicating so, then delete it. Any unauthorized distribution of the contents of this message is unlawful and not very nice.

1 0

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

April 27, 2019

I am an .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 ‘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] Comment re: .org price cap removal
by William LePera 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 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. -- William LePera Vice-President and Treasurer The Jennie Foundation wlepera(a)jenniefoundation.org www.jenniefoundation.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by CyberPartyGal 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] Price controls
by Mike Claffey April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

The .org domain has generally been a helpful place of people trying to put out useful information without selfish priorities. It would be a sad loss if the end of price caps lead to take over by those willing to pay those most, and subsequently needing to extract from their visitors. There are still some nice places on the internet. Please protect them. Mike Claffey

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Not okay
by Nick Kim April 27, 2019

April 27, 2019

Do not agree with the proposal to remove price caps on .org domain names. Please do not do that.

1 0

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

April 27, 2019

I am a domain name 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. 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 Plexiscore 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 ‘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