ICANN At It Again - Need to Act Fast!

[Ron Jackson]

ICANN has put the controversial new contract agreements for the .org, .info and .biz registries back on their agenda for a board meeting next Wednesday (Nov. 22). They seem bent on rushing these things through before anyone has time to react.

You will recall that there was almost unanimous disapproval of these agreements in the first open public commentary period. So ICANN made some minor revisions and opened a very brief new commentary period so they can say few people objected to the "new revised" agreements. I think we need to log our objections to the revised agreements before the meeting which apparently can only be done by sending an email to [email protected]
(I understand the "official" comment period ended Nov. 14, but they are still accepting and posting comments).

They should send you a reply with a link to follow to authenticate your email and it can take several hours for your comments to appear on the ICANN public comment page here: http://forum.icann.org/lists/revised-biz-info-org-agreements/

If you need to brush up on the revised contracts and the dangers they pose, read this very detailed protest letter that Phil Corwin, legal counsel for the Internet Commerce Association, sent to the ICANN board on Tuesday: http://forum.icann.org/lists/revised-biz-info-org-agreements/msg00015.html

In addition, ICA President Bob Martin sent a letter today to U.S. Senator Ted Stevens who has already voiced dissatisfaction about ICANN's lack of transparency: http://www.dnjournal.com/docs/ica-senatecommitteeletter-nov17-2006.htm

It looks like ICANN plans to keep hammering away at this, hoping to catch domain owners asleep, until they can get away with giving the registries unlimited pricing power over everyone's domains.

 

[matt_bodis]

Can you explain in brief what they are trying to do?

 

[Ron Jackson]

Can you explain in brief what they are trying to do?

Phil Corwin explains all of the issues in his letter that I linked to in my original post. This one quote from it is a decent synopsis though:

"the allowance of unjustified registry price increases under these
agreements by perpetual monopolists subject neither to effective price
regulation nor market re-testing of pricing levels and service quality would
allow them to levy an unjustifiable tax of the property value of domain names
and would thereby unjustly enrich registries at the expense of the registrant
community."

In short - if these contracts are approved, you are going to pay far more for domain registrations and renewals than you should be paying.

 

[BidNo]

** bump **

Everyone on this forum needs to send an email. This is important to your future.

Mod's can we make this sticky?

 

[briman1970]

Yes mods, please please please put this at the top of the domain discussion forum. Highlight it in bright purple if you have to, but this MUST BE SEEN!

These b*st*rds think that by adding a few hoops to jump through, they can keep a larger percentage of us from voicing our opinions. What greedy lowlifes!!!

I'm going to make my voice heard right now! :yell:

 

[Domainator]

Take the time and please send a professional email...I just did.

 

[BidNo]

* bump*

If you're short of ideas/words, you're welcome to borrow from what I sent:

Subj: We said NO!!!! Is it time for the FBI?

Here are a few of the objections to the prior contract:

1) Insufficient time for public comment
2) Lack of competitive bidding for renewal (i.e. awarding a permanent monopoly)
3) Uncapped price increases in the face of declining costs of required technology
4) Permitting differential pricing on domain renewals
5) Registry ownership and the unfettered resale of public and private data

You have responded with:

1) Even less time for public comment
2) Lack of competitive bidding for renewal (i.e. a permanent monopoly)
3) 10% annual price increases in the face of declining costs
4) Permitting differential pricing
5) Registry ownership and the unfettered resale of public and private data

I publicly question ICANNs motives in rushing to push through such a fundamentally flawed contract to award monopolies. There is either undeniable incompetence or corruption at hand. These contracts are clearly a sweetheart deal for a few registries at the expense of thousands of businesses and individuals who’s views ICANN is also supposed to consider, and who have strongly voiced their opposition to these terms.

 

[briman1970]

Excellent email Bidno! :tu:

 

[BidNo]

Thanks! I held my tongue last time around but decided to call a spade a spade. If I get banned from the internet, well, I've enjoyed my time here.

To everyone who has not done so, take a moment and make your voice heard. An email simply saying "I am opposed" can make a difference.

(bump...)

 

[briman1970]

Bumperoooo...

Don't let this slide!!! Send ICANN an email today or don't bitch when your .biz, .info and .org name registrations triple, quadruple OR MORE in price! :yell:

 

[JBebbington]

E-Mailed. Someone should issue a challenge to ICANN to have a representative to come on here and explain themselves and answer our queries.

 

[Namedelivery.com]

"The server at forum.icann.org is taking too long to respond."

Doesn't that seem fitting.

 

[BidNo]

E-Mailed. Someone should issue a challenge to ICANN to have a representative to come on here and explain themselves and answer our queries.

Not likely. It's clear ICANN is trying to push these through before anybody can object. They are already ignoring their own committees and "independent" experts.

The only thing between them and the award of these sweetheart deals is you and me (i.g. public comment). They allowed a ridicuously short time for public comment -- and now their site is down?

>ping forum.icann.org
Ping request could not find host forum.icann.org. Please check the name and try again.

Only coincidence the org contract is one of these sweetheart deals?

Everyone on this forum needs to register their objection or they will get away with it.

 

[seeker]

something needs to be done to get ICANN to no longer have control over these things.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!.

 

[JBebbington]

That something is everyone on these boards to email in their disgust at this proposal. They are rushing it through.

 

[xeno439]

I emailed them copying your example. Thanks

 

[Mark]

"Stickied" for a good cause

Folks , Please do Voice your opinions :tu:

 

[Mike]

email sent. let's hope that this succeeds, after all, there has got to be one last environment where corruption and incompetence (quote BidNo) is not influencing free trade.

 

[briman1970]

C'mon guys and gals!!! EVERYONE who is aware of this must send an email, even a short one! We've got to do better!

 

[RareIQ]

whats with those guys.............