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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Writing to express opposition to the terms of the proposed renewal of the .org registry agreement
by Cody Greene April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern: 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.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Comments for .org renewal fees
by Drew DeVault April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I'd like to register a strong opposition to the proposed change. .org is largely used by organizations that can't afford extortion from the domain registrars. Uphold your duty to the internet and dismiss this proposal.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to the provisions of the .org agreement
by Jody Joy April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I respectfully make the following comments. 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] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Amos Levy April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Please do not remove price regulations for .org domains. These domains are mostly used by nonprofits who operate to serve the public good, providing services that are not offered by the public sector, or covered by the market. Every additional dollar that these organizations pay towards domain registry is a dollar less that they have to provide these important services that hold our society together, and improve our quality of life.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposition to the removal of price caps on any of the «legacy» TLDs (.ORG, .INFO, .BIZ)
by Benoit Duguay April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear Madam, Dear Sir, I oppose the removal of price caps on any of the «legacy» TLDs (.ORG, .INFO, .BIZ). Sooner or later, removing said caps will inevitably result in significant price increases, thereby restricting the ownership of a Web site to larger players disposing of substantial financial resources. Such move would go against a democratic use of the Internet and silence people whose views must be given an equal opportunity to be known. Surely ICANN can draw enough revenue from major commercial Internet users and the newer name spaces. Regards, -- Benoit Duguay Benoit Duguay, Full Professor ESG UQAM School of Management Phone: +1 (514) 987-3000 ext. 8171 Email: duguay.benoit(a)uqam.ca <mailto:duguay.benoit@gmail.com> Web:http://duguay.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Comments objecting to the .org renewal
by Rick Denzien April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern: I am a .org registrant and a not-for-profit or non-profit organization. No Price Increases! This would be harmful to our organization. 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?

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Price cap for org
by Steve Murr April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

LLCA is a non-profit school that seeks to help students of different backgrounds. We have been very successful over the first 10 years while keeping cost for parents at a minimum. Our website has helped us reach students who would have otherwise not known of what we offer. If we cannot afford the increase, we would be forced to close down our website.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] .org price cap
by Andy Pfeiffer April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

L.S., as a holder of a .org domain I’d like to ask you to reconsider the lifting of the rate increase limits. A .org domain is one choice for small organizations and persons. With best regards, Andy Pfeiffer

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposal
by Ray & Mae April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Making such a change would cause a classic example of capitalism. Sure, prices can now be increased more, but all that would do is drive all the customers somewhere else. In turn, you’d have higher prices, but less people paying for it. I for one, would be looking for an alternative, and I am very sure many will follow. - Raymond -

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposed to the new .org agreement
by Josh Bergman April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

To whom it may concern: I am a domain name registrant. It seems to me this might be another case of someone finding a way to make more profit at the expense of others. On top of that, it is at the expense of Organizations that are operating to help others. I understand the need for price increases over time, but to drop any safeguards that keep people protected from price gouging is irresponsible. Regulations help people and hurt crooks. Show us which side you're on. --- 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