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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Feedback on the .org agreement
by Mauricio Jorge Yattah April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Thank you for the opportunity to submit a comment. I am a .org registrant and a not-for-profit or non-profit organization. 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.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] (no subject)
by adam April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Allowing an uncapped increase in domain price will allow the few markets that control these domains to widely spike prices beyond reasonable increases. This will inevitably make renewals, or even new purchases, harder for people to justify and could lead to a decrease in overall usage. Please keep the 10% annual cap. Adam

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Keep .org pricing low - don't raise
by Matt Vaughan April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hello, I work with two non-profit organizations. I highly recommend that ICANN not allow PIR to raise pricing on .org domain registrations. The proposed agreement with PIR represents the kind of free-for-all pricing that could diminish the effectiveness of ICANN. Please retain the current pricing agreement to cap domain renewals at 10% increases. Thank you. Matt Vaughan

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Please do not remove price caps on legacy TLDs
by Junaid April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

I am a .org registrant. I bought it to make it part of my non-profile organization as many people done already. Removing its price, which most non-profits use, is totally unacceptable. ~ Junaid

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed changes to .org registry agreement
by Robert Lowe April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Hello, My organization is extremely concerned by the proposal to eliminate the existing caps on price for .org domain registrations as part of the renewed agreement between ICANN and Public Interest Registry. Like our peers in the for-profit sector, nonprofit organizations have long had business models that are highly dependent upon websites that are already a source of considerable expense for many small-budget nonprofits in particular. The prospect of potentially having to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars annually for domain name registrations that have hitherto been priced at a much more affordable level is unnerving, to say the least. Nonprofit organizations will be far more challenged to absorb arbitrary and potentially large price increases in domain name registration costs than for-profit organizations which have the option of passing such costs on to their customers in various ways. Extracting rents from the nonprofit sector in the guise of an agreement that "takes into consideration the maturation of the domain name market and the goal of treating the Registry Operator equitably with registry operators of new gTLDs and other legacy gTLDs utilizing the base registry agreement" is not a progressive or responsible policy. We strongly urge ICANN to retain the existing policy of capping the allowable prices and annual price increases for .org registrations. Regards, Robert R. Lowe Chief Operating Officer American Society on Aging 575 Market Street | Suite 2100 San Francisco, California 94105-2869 o 415-974-9624 | c 415-706-2607 www.asaging.org ASA membership information | www.asaging.org/join<http://www.asaging.org/join> Aging in America Conference | www.asaging.org/aia

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Do not eliminate price caps on legacy domains!
by Marc Z April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

The following article details the potential harm this will do to existing legacy domain holders. Please don't eliminate price caps on legacy domains! The Spurious Justifications for Eliminating Price Caps on .org and Other Legacy Domains By Nat Cohen http://www.circleid.com/posts/20190423_spurious_justifications_for_eliminat…

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Comment on Potential Renewal Prices
by Ian Fry April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Our .org sited organization does philanthropic work in rural Zimbabwe, a really poor area. A price increase would limit the resources that can be used to actually help people. Every dollar a company gets for .org sites like ours actually decreases the good happening in the world. A profit is already being made, why does it make sense to put a limitless increase on the negotiating party. We wouldn’t be pleased or believe ICANN is serving humanity well if this goes through. Sincerely, Ian Fry Eden Ministries Inc.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Feedback on the .org agreement
by Brendan April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear ICANN, 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. Regards, Brendan

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Comment on proposed changes to the .org registry agreement
by Dany Kaiser - ADC April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear Sirs and Madams: I am a .org registrant and a not-for-profit or non-profit organization. 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! Thanks for considering my opinion.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Comments objecting to the .org renewal
by Web Solutions Lanka April 25, 2019

April 25, 2019

Dear ICANN, 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. Sent from my Huawei Mobile

1 0