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

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] cost increase leads to system replacement soon or later
by Edrusb April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hi, I don't believe that even DNS at the heart of Internet has been moving to such ransom approach. The spirit Internet had so far and which made its strength starts to vanish with increasing service cost, while real cost is rather decreasing or stable...(hardware, computing, power, memory, network bandwidth) what a pity... won't be surprised in the future if a new name-to-IP conversion system appears to replace what DNS is about to become: a costly service, connectivity is still here making DNS an option, it can be shortcut one day or another, I'm confident, this is just a matter of cost in front of gain and effort Ed.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] I'm opposed to the changes proposed.
by Ethereal Enigma April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I write to oppose the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs as doing so will only create a free-for-all on limitless price increases across the well-established board. The new GTLDs are already accepted as alternative options with price expectations that vary greatly based on the registry; however, current registrants of older well established extensions are expected to maintain some level of stability. These legacy domain names, some of which have been registered for many years, are unlike the new mess being created and owners of these legacy names have a reasonable expectation of affordability and stability. The old manta goes ‘if it is not broken, you do not try and fix it.’ The vast majority of domain owners will remain unaffected so long as the fluctuating and exorbitant prices remain in the newer name space; there will be plenty of years ahead for ICANN to benefit from those while allowing stability within the legacy name space. Leave well enough alone and move forward without effecting millions and millions of current and well established registrants who expect their domain expenses to remain reasonable, affordable and stable. Sincerely, Sandra Urquhart http://crossofpain.com Sent from Mail for Windows 10 --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Pedro Reis April 26, 2019

April 26, 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! The following entry is from ICANN's website- "ICANN is a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with participants from all over the world dedicated to keeping the Internet secure, stable and interoperable." ICANN is supposed to operate for the public benefit. I don't believe this policy would fall under "public benefit". It would certainly not be beneficial to domain registrants. There are no protections for them. Advancements in technology should be driving the cost of operating a registry down, yet domain prices keep going up. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. Thank you, Pedro reis Brad Mugford DataCube.com

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Opposition to removal of price caps for .org and other top level TLDs
by CreativeFuture Support April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

We are a non-profit and removal of price caps would be a significant burden for organizations such as ours. There are already alternatives which allow increased profits. Therefore, I write to oppose the removal of price caps on any of the “legacy” TLDs as doing so will only create a free-for-all on limitless price increases across the well-established board. The new GTLDs are already accepted as alternative options with price expectations that vary greatly based on the registry; however, current registrants of older well established extensions are expected to maintain some level of stability. These legacy domain names, some of which have been registered for many years, are unlike the new mess being created and owners of these legacy names have a reasonable expectation of affordability and stability. The old manta goes ‘if it is not broken, you do not try and fix it.’ The vast majority of domain owners will remain unaffected so long as the fluctuating and exorbitant prices remain in the newer name space; there will be plenty of years ahead for ICANN to benefit from those while allowing stability within the legacy name space. Leave well enough alone and move forward without effecting millions and millions of current and well established registrants who expect their domain expenses to remain reasonable, affordable and stable. ============================== Franklin Marder Apple Certified Support Professional (310) 704-6903 This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it. -----------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Ben Grant April 26, 2019

April 26, 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.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] I am against the proposed changes
by Bruce Timberlake April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. ICANN does not seem to recognize the difference between a legacy extension with millions of existing users, created with the support of the US government before ICANN existed, and the new TLDs 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. In accordance with it's self-professed status as a "...not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with participants from all over the world dedicated to keeping the Internet secure, stable and interoperable..." ICANN should be doing *more* to protect owners of .org domain names, not less. There is no "public benefit" justification to these changes. It is just a handout to business at the expense of registrants’ rights and protections. - Bruce Timberlake

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Peter Hill April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

Hello, I am a .org registrant, since 2009. We are a private organization, not a corporation. We do not receive any revenue of any kind, related to our .org domain and web site. Therefore we have no way to defray any increase in our .org domain price. Reasonable increases are expected. The proposed removal of price caps is not reasonable. 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? Peter F. Hill

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Keep .org price caps, keep open source projects online
by Timothy Pearson April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I would like to formally oppose the removal of price caps for .org domains. I maintain several open source projects on infrastructure that I pay to keep online, including domain name renewals. Some of these projects date back well over a decade at this point, and are not commercial, profitable ventures. As a result, if the registration fees increase, there is a high chance that these projects may either go offline entirely or move to a different domain extension, leading to significant confusion from users and the likely failure of the projects in question. At the very least, please provide some means of making sure we don't lose existing chunks of Internet history just because of domain renewal costs. The Internet was not built solely for commercial operators, and it would be a sad day indeed when non-commercial interests are kicked to the curb and booted off of identities they have built and held for many many years.

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] isn't the role of ICANN to benefit internet users?
by Deane Hartwell April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

ICANN, please do the right thing and stand up for the public interest instead of corporate greed!

1 0

[Comments-org-renewal-18mar19] Proposed Renewal of .org Registry Agreement
by Brian Glover April 26, 2019

April 26, 2019

I am a domain name registrant. 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? Thank you for your support! Brian Glover

1 0