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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] ICANN proposed changes on .org pricing
by Charles Rykken April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear Sirs/Madams: ???? I am adamantly opposed to any changes in pricing that will increase the cost to people who are purchasing or renewing ownership of domain names. jingoistic appeals to free market fundamentalism are clear prpaganda attempts to continue the fascist/corporatist ownership of the entire planet. Global warming is feeding a revolution against the psychopathic fascists who are destroying this planet. I hope ICANN will not be complicit in this outrage. The people of the world ARE watching. Actions can have unintended consequences.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Marci Beau April 25, 2019

April 25, 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. 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 ROJO April 25, 2019

April 25, 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. Cheers from the mediterranean side of life. :) David Quiles Guilló https://davidquilesguillo.com <https://davidquilesguillo.com/> +34 619 251 233 — now Guest curator @ AOS Arebyte London http://aos.arebyte.com/ <http://aos.arebyte.com/> upcoming The Wrong https://thewrong.org/ <http://thewrong.org/> recent press The New York Times _ https://nyti.ms/2qe3a6J <https://nyti.ms/2qe3a6J> El Pais _ https://bit.ly/2qdjGnz <https://bit.ly/2qdjGnz> Folha de Sao Paulo _ https://bit.ly/2OVnAAr <https://bit.ly/2OVnAAr> Massage _ https://bit.ly/2qdj7tX <https://bit.ly/2qdj7tX> — always doing strange things with weird people :)

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Abstract Editions April 25, 2019

April 25, 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. — David Quiles Guilló publisher A|E Partida Maitino, Polígono 2 Elche (Alicante) 03295 Spain www.abstracteditions.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by - agenciaCultural - April 25, 2019

April 25, 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. --- agenciaCultural™ David Quiles Guilló creative director davidquilesguillo(a)gmail.com +34 619 251 233 http://agenciacultural.org <http://agenciacultural.org/>

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by The Wrong April 25, 2019

April 25, 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! Cheers from the mediterranean side of life. :) David Quiles Guilló https://davidquilesguillo.com <https://davidquilesguillo.com/> +34 619 251 233 — now Guest curator @ AOS Arebyte London http://aos.arebyte.com/ <http://aos.arebyte.com/> upcoming The Wrong https://thewrong.org/ <http://thewrong.org/> recent press The New York Times _ https://nyti.ms/2qe3a6J <https://nyti.ms/2qe3a6J> El Pais _ https://bit.ly/2qdjGnz <https://bit.ly/2qdjGnz> Folha de Sao Paulo _ https://bit.ly/2OVnAAr <https://bit.ly/2OVnAAr> Massage _ https://bit.ly/2qdj7tX <https://bit.ly/2qdj7tX> — always doing strange things with weird people :)

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Organization Domain Registration Pricing Comments
by Jeff Wilson April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

ICANN, I run a one-person organization. It is only me, and I have no organization income to cover expenses. So far, I have been able to fund what minor expenses exist through my regular full-time employment, which is in an unrelated industry. If domain prices escalate in a dramatic and unexpected way, I will have no choice but to shutter my organization. I don’t think I would be alone in the maelstrom of flotsam left behind by PIR’s desire to exploit organizations with deeper pockets than mine. Please continue to provide sanity in the domain space, as you have done so well in the past. Thank you for considering my comments, Jeff Wilson InOneVoice.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Andrew Sachs | sachs & sachs April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I am a domain name 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. Andrew L. Sachs as(a)sachsandsachs.com Sachs and Sachs www.sachsandsachs.com Miami Beach Florida 33140 USA off. +1.786.264.2245 mob. +1.305.987.4564

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] .org proposed rule changes
by J.E. de Sequera April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

With respect to .org proposed rule changes. I am fundamentally opposed to rule changes which would allow unfettered price increases by ICANN and PIR. The organizations that use .org are exactly the organizations that should not be saddled with the possibility that their domains will be too expensive to maintain. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. -- J.E. de Sequera Business Printers <http://www.bizprinters.com/> 7636 Miramar Road #1400 San Diego, CA 92126 (858) 549-6777 Reply to: je(a)bizprinters.com

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Dan Dulaney April 25, 2019

April 25, 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. 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