Top Bottom
Dan.com

information Impact of the URS and Unlimited Fee Increases for Registrants in .ORG/BIZ/INFO/ASIA

NameSilo
I had a discussion today with several members of the ICANN At-Large community about the changes in the proposed .org, .info, .biz and .asia contracts, namely the imposition of the URS, and the unlimited fee increases. It was recorded, so I hope you find it educational:

https://freespeech.com/2019/04/10/i...ses-for-registrants-in-org-info-biz-and-asia/

There are upcoming comment periods, so hopefully folks will submit comments to ICANN opposing these changes.
 
Impact
8,515
“Pricing for Domain Name Registrations and Registry Services (Section 2.10 of the .org renewal agreement): In alignment with the base registry agreement, the price cap provisions in the current .org agreement, which limited the price of registrations and allowable price increases for registrations, are removed from the .org renewal agreement. Protections for existing registrants will remain in place, in line with the base registry agreement. This change will not only allow the .org renewal agreement to better conform with the base registry agreement, but also 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.”

https://www.icann.org/public-comments/org-renewal-2019-03-18-en

So, .org contract expires in a June, and all .org renewal prices can be increased arbitrarily and follow the .TV or .Whatever pricing.
 
Last edited:
Impact
963
So, .org contract expires in a June, and all .org renewal prices can be increased.....

Dot-Org was already priced higher vs .com and now it can get even more negative. In the past I loved dot-org but no more,

In addition I have noticed type-ins, traffic and sale inquiries to my .org's have declined considerably over past few years so I was thinking about non-auto renewals even before this news. I plan to let many .org's expire.
 
Last edited:
Impact
8,515
Dot-Org was already priced higher vs .com and now it can get even more negative. In the past I loved dot-org but no more,

In addition I have noticed type-ins, traffic and sale inquiries to my .org's have declined considerably over past few years so I was thinking about non-auto renewals even before this news. I plan to let many .org's expire.

Just think, what might happen with the .com and .net extensions? Upon the next 6 year contract renewal. Say Verisign squawks loud enough.

ICANN wants to “normalize” .org and other legacy tlds with the new gtlds. So, just suppose Verisign decides to push and push to do the same and use the resale value pricing model and raise all .com and .net dictionary words and LLL according to some new individualized and arbitrary value? Then Verisign being the public company they are, make shareholders happy (maybe) that might be a huge windfall to take all secondary market incentives away especially for large portfolios and speculation. Reverse the thinking and I know it sounds draconian, but this .org change should shed light on the future if it is a possibility.
 
Impact
4,474
It is in the best interest of Verisign as dot com registry. I would not be surprised if it was Verisign who lobbied this initiative. They already managed to secure their .com contract to be de-facto renewed forever, even though number of parties expessed interest and willingness to run .com registry cheaper (like GoDaddy under Bob Parsons ownership, he promised to run the registry for $2 per domain per year if I am not mistaken). Of course in the name of internet stability, no doubts. Now, with unlimited fees for .org and .info - .com will be the next. We all may need to start looking for new jobs, and soon - due to random/high registration and renewal .com prices
 

alcy

Top Contributor
Impact
34,201
raising reg prices for dead or dyign extensions like info biz org asia net etc... will mean nothing to most domainers.. and in fact will be good thing for newer domainers who won't waste money on those things..

but doign this to .com will make a lot of people very unhappy... some important people too... who really like their "job"... so I would expect it would create way more problems for the decision makers than it woudl solve..

seriously, I don't see them touching .com in this dirty way.
 

DomainRecap

Top Contributor
Impact
4,152
Amusing how everything started going south once ICANN was freed of all US oversight and became a law unto itself.

People who live in North America think the system is corrupt, but really have no idea how insanely corrupt the rest of the world really is. I've lived in Asia and Europe, and payoffs, bribery and graft are truly a way of life there, from doing business to simply crossing the border - everyone has their hand out and virtually all business deals or contracts are determined with a big payoff.

It is really no coincidence the minute US oversight ends, that all these "sweetheart deals" start becoming standard practice. It's what happens when corporations start driving truckloads of money to those in a position to help them.
 

Mr. Deleted

Slabaugh.com 800-266-2728
Impact
978
Amusing how everything started going south once ICANN was freed of all US oversight and became a law unto itself.
No, its not. It is just free from US control. But if it is going to bury itself, I am sure a newer and better naming system would emerge.
 
Impact
5,287
“In alignment with the base registry agreement, the price cap provisions in the current .org agreement, which limited the price of registrations and allowable price increases for registrations, are removed from the .org renewal agreement. Protections for existing registrants will remain in place, in line with the base registry agreement.

Does this mean renewal rates for pre-existing registrations are capped?
 
Does this mean renewal rates for pre-existing registrations are capped?

No, it doesn't. That language you refer to just means that existing registrants can't be charged a different renewal fee than everyone else (differential/tiered/variable pricing) or be retroactively deemed a "premium" domain name. If .org/biz/info/asia start to classify deleted domains as "premium", then they can be charged a different renewal price than "ordinary" domains (just like new gTLDs). So, if .org went from $10/yr to $50/yr, that would be allowed.

ICANN's language is very misleading, because the "base registry agreement" they're talking about is the one for new gTLDs, without referencing the actual current registry agreements (which were for "legacy" gTLDs like com/net/org, etc.).
 
Impact
4,474
In light of the above, I'm considering joining ICA Internet Commerce Association.... Even a small contribution may help to fight better. I did not yet join before just because I would prefer not to associate myself with at least one current corporate member and at least 2 current individual members in any way... members list is public and published on the website, and (a matter of personal and business preferences) I do _not_ want to see my name or my company name even mentioned together with these ~3 names of industry participants on the same page, in the same list.
But, in current situation, it might be better to forget about these preferences.
 
Last edited:
Impact
29,409
The existing cap already allows (allowed) up to 10% per annum increases, which seem pretty substantial. If they want to create a level playing field with the new registries (and I do agree with those who point out that there are important differences - the registries managing com/net/org etc. were presented with existing strong TLDs whereas the new had to compete and create new ones), but if ICANN decide they need the same rules it should be that ALL registries have a 10% per annum cap on renewal price increases.
JMHO.
Bob
 
Impact
21,719
Icann a good example of a supervisory body captured by the industry it is supposed to regulate.
But they are making a living on our money. And right now they are biting the hand that feeds them.

I don't understand how they can justify such plans when the legacy TLD registries enjoy monopolies and they don't even own the extensions they operate. They are merely the caretakers. This is daylight robbery.

In light of the above, I'm considering joining ICA Internet Commerce Association.... Even a small contribution may help to fight better. I did not yet join before just because I would prefer not to associate myself with at least one current corporate member and at least 2 current individual members in any way...
I am in the same situation as well.
 
Impact
29,409
A lot have overlooked that the cap change also applies to .asia as I understand it. I can't imagine that .biz, .asia and .info can take much of an increase without a significant weakening of interest. On the other hand .org, that has almost a decade of gradual but steady real world use can probably survive even if they are allowed to increase a bit.

Bob
 
Impact
8,515
In light of the above, I'm considering joining ICA Internet Commerce Association.... Even a small contribution may help to fight better. I did not yet join before just because I would prefer not to associate myself with at least one current corporate member and at least 2 current individual members in any way... members list is public and published on the website, and (a matter of personal and business preference) I do _not_ want to see my name or my company name even mentioned together with these ~3 names of industry participants on the same page, in the same list.
But, in current situation, it might be better to forget about these preferences.

In addition, you might consider joining the ICANN RPM working group, its free and even if its only as a observer. It will open your eyes on the situation first hand to how the Trademark lawyers work. Observers dont need to disclose all details you might be concerned with. However to post, you need to provide more details.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/ic...ge-domain-owners-rights.1048344/#post-6420973
 
Impact
4,474
how the Trademark lawyers work

Interesting. So far I've seen them just abusing UDRP process...I also somewhat enjoyed "fighting" with them to save some of my domains, never attacked the *complainants' representatives* directly in my responses, but it was crystal clear that it were _they_ who submitted abusive nonsense complaints to win dictionary domains, and/or without valid TMs and the like... the listed Complainants were not necessary 100% aware of how their lawyers acted.

It would however make sense not to reform existing UDRP policy in any aspect. Unfortunately, this may also happen if the industry remains silent (or busy with other things that are less relevant today)
 
Last edited:
Impact
8,515
Interesting. So far I've seen them just abusing UDRP process...I also somewhat enjoyed "fighting" to save some of my domains, never attacked the *complainants' representatives* directly in my responses, but it was crystal clear that it were _they_ who submitted abusive nonsense complaints for dictionary domains, and/or without valid TMs and the like... the listed Complainants were not necessary 100% aware of how their lawyers acted.

It would however make sense not to reform existing UDRP policy in any aspect. Unfortunately, this may also happen if the industry remains silent (or busy with other things that are less relevant today)

I need to dig up some example RPM exchanges to post for everyone to see. Its quite abit of work to plow throw it all, then everyone can judge for themselves. That I believe is what George will be doing in his blog. Until you see how much work he has contributed, only then one can understand his contribution to the Domain Investor side of advocacy.

Did you listen to video yesterday on FreeSpeech.com that @GeorgeK posted? He cited how BCG.top registered in China and unrelated and another BCG.whatever were simply taken away via the URS as the Boston Consulting Group felt the fact they were entitled to those 3 letters. Stuff like that is ridiculous. Also the fact that URS should be in the language of registrant.
 
The YouTube video didn't capture the chat in the Zoom video. Here are some background links:

Questioniable URS decisions:

bcg.top -- http://www.adrforum.com/domaindecisions/1815095D.htm
BCG.app: http://www.adrforum.com/domaindecisions/1785973D.htm

List of Proposals to Change the URS (14 of them from me, out of 33)

https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/URS+Proposals
(click on the Individual member proposals tab, to see the ones proposed by individual members, rather than the subteam proposals that show up by default; ICANN's website is having technical problems at this time, so one might need to check back later)

Fear Mongering About New gTLDs before the US Senate (to justify the URS, etc.)

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-112shrg74251/html/CHRG-112shrg74251.htm
 
Name Worth