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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Don't hurt self hosters, small businesses, and non profits
by Elias Gasparis April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

Unlimited price increases will make it difficult for individuals, small businesses, and non profits to buy and keep their domain names. This is a bad idea. It will make the web even more corporate. Domain names should be for everybody. The internet is not just for deep pocketed corporations. 10% yearly increases!?! That's incredibly steep. Domain names are incredibly important on the net. Without one, you don't exist. Please reconsider this idea. Thank you. --Elias Gasparis Sent from ProtonMail mobile

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed renewal of .org registry agreement
by Steven Kennedy April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

I am a longtime .org domain name registrant. I believe that 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', and not forced from the top down as this proposal seeks to do. I believe that legacy TLDs 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. Domain switching costs are often prohibitively expensive. These legacy TLDs should be operated at the lowest possible pricing. The registry operators for legacy TLDs did not invent the TLDs nor do they "own" them. The registry management contracts should be put out to bid to reduce the price to registrants; they should not be granted indefinitely into the future to one group with unlimited price increases possible. This recent proposal by ICANN staff is the exact opposite of what should be happening. Prices should be going down, not upwards without restraint. 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 group, the Internet Society, with .org registrants receiving zero benefit in return. ICANN should not permit one group 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, and make moves to reduce the pricing of legacy TLDs by opening up the registry management agreements to competitive bidding. Regards, Steven Kennedy SK Creations, Inc. ᐧ

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Peter Maxymych April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

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! Sent from my iPhone

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposition to Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Thought Maybe April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

I vehemently oppose ICANN proposing to allow unlimited fee increases for .org domain names. We already have the allowed increase to a maximum of 10% annually, which came about after public outcry in 2006 when a comparable proposal to eliminate price caps was made, and successfully opposed by the public. It seems that ICANN is not learning! If these unlimited fee increases are permitted, it is likely that Verisign will seek to further increase their fees for .com and .net. These models are not financially sustainable for small independent groups who already face huge challenges with tech infrastructure costs.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Renewal of Org domains
by Ted McLaughlin April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

I am a volunteer leader for several Scouting related groups, all of which have .org websites. We are volunteer based groups who's leaders all spend way to much of our own money trying to help kids out. I personally pay for the renewal of our domain names simply because our groups don't have the available money for them. If I didn't pay for them the names, (and the associated sites), would end up going away. This is probably true for a lot of .org groups that work with youth. Please don't take the cap off the price increases. Every time these prices go up now it's bad enough for me, but at least knowing they are somewhat limited helps. Thank you. Ted McLaughlin Scoutmaster

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] No to increase of .org fees
by spiritplumber＠gmail.com April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

Please don't. A lot of nonprofits can barely stay afloat as it is. All you would achieve is them migrating exclusively to facebook for their web content, and everyone loses if that happens.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] OPPOSED! Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Kindle admin April 24, 2019

April 24, 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! john andrews kindle(a)johnandrews.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by john andrews April 24, 2019

April 24, 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! Also fire the ICANN people who advocated for this... they do not represent registrants! john andrews 206-459-9584 johnandrews.org

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Price cap
by Peter Taylor April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

The proposal to remove the price cap on .org registration seems to be unnecessary and unreasonable, and the justification given seems to be back-to-front. In evidence that it is unnecessary, one need merely observe that the registry has not found it necessary to increase prices up to the cap of the previous agreement. No argument has been given for why running a registry could be anticipated to suddenly become more expensive. As for reasonableness, one should consider the expectations of registrants and the power balance between registry and registrants. If the registry should choose to raise prices by orders of magnitude, the only options for existing registrants would be to capitulate and pay up or to spend even more on migration to a different TLD: the leverage is entirely one-sided. Registrants can reasonably expect ICANN to act in the interests of the many and not the few by maintaining the current stability mechanisms in the new agreement. Indeed, it is disappointing that the base registry agreement should not favour the many over the few, and this is what I mean when I say that the justification seems to be back-to-front. Equitable treatment would be equally well served, if not better, by requiring price stability in all gTLDs.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] ending price caps for .org
by Peter Slavcheff April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

I can’t think of a single reason that doesn’t involve greed that would propel this proposal. It’s tough enough doing business on the web. Please don’t make it more costly than it already is.

1 0