Important for Domainers (including pussy.org, prime .coms). .tv-style pricing coming? - GoFuckYourself.com

GeorgeK · 08-22-2006, 08:58 PM

Vint Cerf/ICANN confirm my interpretation of .biz/info/org proposed contracts -- tiered/differential domain pricing would not be forbidden

Hi folks,

I apologize in advance for the long post --- if you own domains, though, it's very important. It could even mean adult domains like pussy.org are removed from .org, and other extensions could be affected too (and ultimately .com), through introduction of .tv style tiered pricing (i.e. just like the net-neutrality debate, but instead of for bandwidth, this would be for domains).

I finally got the "official" word from Vint Cerf of ICANN, "on the record", who confirmed that my interpretation is correct, that differential/tiered pricing on a domain-by-domain basis would not be forbidden under the .biz/info/org proposed contracts. This means that the registries could charge $100,000/yr for sex.biz, $25,000/yr for movies.org, etc. if they wanted to -- it would not be forbidden the way the proposed contracts are currently written. This would represent a powerful pricing weapon for registries, and a fundamental shift in possible domain name pricing, that could lead them to emulate .tv-style price schedules.

One can read the proposed contracts at:

http://www.icann.org/announcements/a...-2-28jul06.htm

Vint said it would be "suicide" for a registry to do it, because there'd be the 6-month notice period to raise prices and the ability for registrants to renew for up to 10 years at "old prices", that supposedly "protects" registrants. Personally, as a business, my time horizon is a lot longer than 10 years. I wonder if Vint felt introducing "SiteFinder" was suicide, too....history has shown registries will do whatever they can get away with, in order to maximize profits long-term and short-term.

I don't think Vint understands the business at all, to think that a lag of 10 years will deter a profit-maximizing registry, esp. VeriSign should it try to match this contractual precedent in .com (and history shows VeriSign will always try to get "more", especially if "another registry" is able to do something -- they used that tactic in .com renegotiations, saying various terms were already in the .net contract, for instance).

Just to show one possible future, if PIR feels pressure or has a desire to clean up porn from .org, it could announce that pussy.org (check its Alexa ranking) will have its renewal price be $1 billion/yr. If it takes 10 years to do it, many would wait, and it would not be considered "suicide" for PIR. Who will stand against that as "we're protecting the internet and children from porn", PIR might argue? Leaving this temptation in the contract will likely become a slippery slope, in my opinion, leading to profit-maximizing behaviour by registries to emulate .tv. Acting in the interests of their shareholders, registries are *compelled* to maximize profits.

It can be used as a political weapon, too. If a registry disagreed with the views or content of a website for which they were the registry, they could raise the renewal price to $100 billion/yr. 10 years later, that website would not exist at that address, and nothing in the contracts would forbid this pricing behaviour. More likely, it would be used for profit maximization (if Google.com is a $100 billion company, "certainly they are benefiting from their domain name, and can afford our $1 billion/yr renewal fee" one might say -- see the net neutrality debate and tiered pricing for websites that phone and cable companies are pushing....). How far away is tiered domain name pricing??

ICANN would be opening up a Pandora's Box through this contractual loophole, to not forbid .tv style pricing. The mistake would not be able to be corrected, as the contracts explicitly say that Consensus Policies do not apply to pricing issues. Since presumptive renewal exists in these new deals, the contracts are essentially going to live with ICANN forever, if approved.

If this pricing power eventually got extended to .com, nothing would prevent the renewal fee for Yahoo.com, GoDaddy.com, Google.com, Tucows.com, Business.com, Sex.com or any other domain in a registry with similar terms to reach $1 billion per year, or any other price that VeriSign or other registry operators wanted to maximize its profits (net-neutrality debate is similar, for bandwidth pricing to websites). You can imagine my VeriSignSucks.com won't last longer than 10 years, if VeriSign had the power to raise the renewal fee to $1 billion/year.

I believe that it is very important that this loophole be closed, in order to not create the precedent that VeriSign could later exploit for .com, and to protect registrants of .biz/org/info. If it is "suicide", as Vint suggested, then surely a registry that would supposedly never use the power would agree to remove the temptation by adding an appropriate term to the contract. A registry not willing to add that term....well, you know what they might be tempted to do later. If your business horizon is the next quarter, this won't impact you. If it's beyond 10 years, it could impact you. Can you live with that uncertainty??

Feel free to spread the word on the mailing lists or media, and contact Vint (vint AT google.com) or John Jeffrey (jeffrey AT icann.org) or other ICANN staffers if you want to confirm things and voice your concerns. Time is of the essence, as the public comment period ends next Monday. Registrants DO NOT know what is coming (the public comment board is almost empty), as it's the summer holidays! (typical ICANN tactic, introduce 500+ page contracts for public comment when everyone is on holiday)

Public comments can be sent using the addresses at:

http://www.icann.org/announcements/a...-2-28jul06.htm

(be sure to send to all 3 email addresses for all 3 contracts, and also click the link in the email ICANN will send you to authenticate your email address, otherwise your comment doesn't get received)

There are a lot of other reasons to be opposed to the proposed contracts, such as the presumptive renewal, the ability to sell traffic data, the removal of price caps, etc. I will be writing a longer document soon, but wanted to give everyone a heads-up, so that you can take appropriate action on your own now, and corroborate things independently with Vint Cerf, John Jeffrey or other ICANN people.

These are fundamentally flawed contracts, and should not be approved by ICANN. The precedents these contracts would create are ominous, even worse then the .com proposed settlement agreement (that the DoC has yet to approve). Why is ICANN even renegotiating these registry agreements, when the existing terms don't expire for several years in some cases, and the GNSO PDP process for registry services is ongoing??

Sincerely,

George

JD · 08-22-2006, 09:03 PM

well that sucks....

GeorgeK · 08-22-2006, 09:40 PM

I hope those who are against this will speak up, and send to the official comments board. This would be a dangerous precedent, that would potentially threaten your business.

gideongallery · 08-22-2006, 11:01 PM

clarify isn't this a per registra right not based on who manages the primary name server.

unlike the .tv where the prices are set by one provider (monopoly) every register would be allowed to set their own prices while domain owners could transfer their domain to another registra. In otherwords competitions acts as a counter measure to having the same effect as .tv

if network solutions decided to announce that pussy.org was going to $1million/year then godaddy could steal that business by allowing the domain to be registered at normal cost.

MetaMan · 08-22-2006, 11:06 PM

fuck i am playing poker and trying to read at the same time.

XPays · 08-22-2006, 11:27 PM

they need to preserve their aggressive tasting rather than abuse their customers like you point out would be possible. enough is never enough...

on the other hand, the lawsuits would be stacked up and i doubt the proposal is viable. also, there are those who believe that certain extensions got smart when they lowered pricing so keep us posted.

GeorgeK · 08-22-2006, 11:47 PM

The top domain owner on the planet, Frank Schilling of NameAdministration has posted comments too:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00005.html

If it might affect his business, are you going to gamble that your business won't be affected?

Gideon: This is the price that the registries would charge to the registrars, which would then be passed along to the domain owners.

To be more clear, PIR, that operates the .org registry, could produce a price list for domain renewals in the form:

pussy.org -- $1 million/year
sex.org -- $1 million/yr
casino.org -- $250,000/yr
movies.org -- $100,000/yr
microsoft.org -- $2 million/yr
google.org -- $5 million/yr
gghhghg.org -- $5/yr
abc.org -- $20,000/yr
republicans.org -- $200,000/yr
democrats.org -- $10,000/yr
shop.org -- $50,000/yr

etc. A scheme like the above, to registrars (keeping equal treatment between registry and registrar, which is required by the contract) would mean the costs for registrars changes, and they could then add their own markup to the pricelist provided by the registry.

This would obviously be a dramatic shift in the market. Vint Cerf called it "suicidal". But, registries are very shrewd, and if there's nothing to stop them from maximizing profits by doing the above, it would make sense for them to do it.

scottybuzz · 08-23-2006, 12:37 AM

dam , that sucks

free4porn · 08-23-2006, 01:03 AM

they better not!

madawgz · 08-23-2006, 01:05 AM

wtf? ucool might loose pussy.org? :\

SomeCreep · 08-23-2006, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeorgeK

The top domain owner on the planet, Frank Schilling of NameAdministration has posted comments too:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00005.html

If it might affect his business, are you going to gamble that your business won't be affected?

Gideon: This is the price that the registries would charge to the registrars, which would then be passed along to the domain owners.

To be more clear, PIR, that operates the .org registry, could produce a price list for domain renewals in the form:

pussy.org -- $1 million/year
sex.org -- $1 million/yr
casino.org -- $250,000/yr
movies.org -- $100,000/yr
microsoft.org -- $2 million/yr
google.org -- $5 million/yr
gghhghg.org -- $5/yr
abc.org -- $20,000/yr
republicans.org -- $200,000/yr
democrats.org -- $10,000/yr
shop.org -- $50,000/yr

etc. A scheme like the above, to registrars (keeping equal treatment between registry and registrar, which is required by the contract) would mean the costs for registrars changes, and they could then add their own markup to the pricelist provided by the registry.

This would obviously be a dramatic shift in the market. Vint Cerf called it "suicidal". But, registries are very shrewd, and if there's nothing to stop them from maximizing profits by doing the above, it would make sense for them to do it.

Relax, wont happen.

And although Name Admin Inc. is a player, he is far from the top domain owner in the world.

GeorgeK · 08-23-2006, 05:28 AM

Companies that intend to lower prices don't waste time renegotiating a contract in order to gain terms that remove price caps. Registries are shrewd, and will raise domain prices to what the market will bear if it leads to greater profits.

BlackCrayon · 08-23-2006, 05:56 AM

makes no sense to me. they assume just because you have a certain name it must be making x amount of dollars? are we supposed to give them our earnings so they can see what an appropriate amount is to charge? lol. i've never bought anything besides .net or .com which doesn't seem to be effected but the whole idea is ridiculous in my opinion.

GeorgeK · 08-23-2006, 06:12 AM

Go visit any domain name sales site and you'll quickly realize some domains are worth a lot more than others. Shrewd people can figure out a value, without knowing your actual earnings.

I don't need to see the income statement of AOL to know that Games.com is extremely valuable. Or that tv.com is very valuable to CNET.

If VeriSign can set a price schedule for .tv, they can certainly set one for a good .com, if it got to that point (these contracts are for .biz/info/org, but could create the dangerous precedent).

GeorgeK · 08-23-2006, 06:13 AM

Oh, and for public companies, the income statement and balance sheet are public info (SEC filings, etc.). So, you can see exactly how much Google is making, and try to charge them accordingly.

If ISPs are able to charge tiered pricing for bandwidth to websites (i.e. the net-neutrality debate), it isn't a huge leap to get to domain tiers.

DaddyHalbucks · 08-23-2006, 06:26 AM

It is scary, but it will never happen.

It will offend too many powerful people/ organizations.

BlackCrayon · 08-23-2006, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeorgeK

Go visit any domain name sales site and you'll quickly realize some domains are worth a lot more than others. Shrewd people can figure out a value, without knowing your actual earnings.

and a lot of domains are sold for much more than they really are worth.

Quote:

I don't need to see the income statement of AOL to know that Games.com is extremely valuable. Or that tv.com is very valuable to CNET.

If VeriSign can set a price schedule for .tv, they can certainly set one for a good .com, if it got to that point (these contracts are for .biz/info/org, but could create the dangerous precedent).

i don't keep up on all the domain stuff so i don't know the whole thing with the .tv but i'd like to see who and how they come up with these numbers. they just pick it out of the sky? based on traffic? keyword searches or what.

didn't sex.com win a court case that basically said domains are real estate and owed by the person who pays for them, not like rental properties were the registry owns and can charge what they see fit?

seems like the registries just want something for nothing. google.com would be worthless without the people who created it. same goes for any domain name. sure people type in games.com, tv.com, etc but without people who know how to develop it to make a profit, its worthless.

GeorgeK · 08-23-2006, 06:38 AM

You don't need to develop domains or do hard work to make money. Read:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06121/686566-28.stm

or other articles.

BlackCrayon · 08-23-2006, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeorgeK

You don't need to develop domains or do hard work to make money. Read:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06121/686566-28.stm

or other articles.

well yes. perhaps i shouldn't of included generic names. though there are only so many of those. but my example of google.com still stands. either way, this won't effect me personally since i'll never be able to afford such valuable names but i doubt big business will allow such a huge chunk to be taken from them for basically nothing without a fight.

polish_aristocrat · 08-23-2006, 10:06 AM

interesting....

MetaMan · 08-23-2006, 10:38 AM

i do not see this happening the amount of lawsuits that would come from this would be immense.

i just finished up the new pussy.org and i have a feeling that no one is going to touch it over Johns dead body.l

Gunni · 08-23-2006, 10:46 AM

coldn't you just move your domain to another registry that doesn't have crazy newal rate, then if those ones would decide to up the price for your particular domain then you just move it again?

GeorgeK · 08-23-2006, 10:27 PM

Gunni: Most established website operators are not going to change domain names, especially if they have a prime .com. That's how the registry's can exert monopoly pricing power, due to that inertia. See:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/.../msg02797.html

Quote:

This would be classic monopolist behavior; the monopolist charges competitive rates in the area in which it has competition (i.e. new registrations) and adopts monopolistic pricing in the area in which it has locked in customers (i.e., renewals).

minusonebit · 08-23-2006, 10:53 PM

If they push this through, I will stop using domains all together.

GeorgeK · 08-26-2006, 03:49 AM

Just a quick followup, one can read additional comments/coverage at:

Slashdot: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/25/0611209

NSI's official comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00022.html

GoDaddy's comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00058.html

Add your comments by going to: http://www.icann.org/announcements/a...-2-28jul06.htm

Theo · 08-26-2006, 04:13 AM

this is coming exactly a week after us commerce dept renewed their agreement with icann

GeorgeK · 08-26-2006, 04:16 AM

Soul_Rebel: That "renewal" was misunderstood by most. See:

http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl...54&mode=nested

Theo · 08-26-2006, 04:27 AM

thanks man, it's more clear now. Any idea how easy or hard is for greedy Sclavos to do the same before their current agreement for .com expires?

Nicolas · 08-26-2006, 05:10 AM

Will never happen.

GeorgeK · 08-26-2006, 05:12 AM

Well, there'd be a bigger outcry if it was done for .com, that's for sure. But, they'd certainly point out the precedent in other registries, if they tried to get it in .com.

Most folks don't realize that it was .biz who had tested wildcarding similar to SiteFinder months before VeriSign did it.

http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl.../05/19/1253205

It's almost like these baby registries are "farm teams" for VeriSign, to test out ideas to see if anyone notices, and then try to do it for .com. Until I spilled the beans (after 3 weeks of back and forth emails with Vint Cerf of ICANN, who, to his credit, finally did give me what I was looking for), hardly anyone noticed the issue -- only like 3 or 4 comments on the comment archive to that point (and most were quoting preliminary stuff I had written on the GA list of ICANN).

It's typical ICANN behaviour to do this sort of thing, not publicize very dramatic changes, until after the fact when it's too late to do anything. The "bottom up, consensus driven process" are simply words to them -- their actions are nearly always top down, dictatorial and by fiat.

Manowar · 08-26-2006, 05:20 AM

is it ok to put that post (credited to you) on http://www.businessvoyeur.com/ ?

we need to spread this info the whole webmaster community

Doctor Dre · 08-26-2006, 05:50 AM

They are opening the door to something new and kicking capitalism on the way out... They assume competition will do the job, but look at the oil industry right now. If the registars work together they can make a nice chunk of change.

GeorgeK · 08-26-2006, 06:33 AM

Sure thing, Manowar.

spacedog · 08-26-2006, 01:30 PM

Is this proposal for only adult names?
Is it only for one word names?

I have names like

gaysexmovies.info
hotasianbabes.info
hotlatinababes.info
virgincunt.org
teeniepanties.info
prettyschoolgirls.info
69khz.info
k8y.org
antiqueweapons.org
h8r.org
gothfetish.info

so, if they passed this, what kind of renewals would I possibly face?

spacedog · 08-26-2006, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

Is this proposal for only adult names?
Is it only for one word names?

I have names like

gaysexmovies.info
hotasianbabes.info
hotlatinababes.info
virgincunt.org
teeniepanties.info
prettyschoolgirls.info
69khz.info
k8y.org
antiqueweapons.org
h8r.org
gothfetish.info

so, if they passed this, what kind of renewals would I possibly face?

bump for an answer..

GeorgeK · 08-27-2006, 07:02 AM

SpaceDog: They could arbitrarily be set by the registry operators, on any basis whatsoever. E.g. if the registries wanted to eliminate porn from .org, .biz, .info, they could make the renewal fee be $1 billion/yr. They'd have to give 6 month notice, though, and you could renew up to 10 years in advance at the old prices.

Bossman · 08-27-2006, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornopete

where do I signup to protest, or do people not do that now in days?

You can e-mail your protest to icann using the e-mails you will find on this page : icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-28jul06.htm

It only takes a few seconds/minutes, doesn´t cost anything, and your voice will be heard by those who are going to rule on this!

DirkG · 08-27-2006, 10:11 AM

Thats it, I am going back to ip addresses.
If you want me you can reach me 126.0.0.1

Ron Bennett · 08-27-2006, 10:57 AM

I tend to agree with GeorgeK's sentiments ... regardless of what happens with the other registries, if such a pricing scheme was attempted with .com, there would be an outcry like never seen before in the domain name realm; scads of lawsuits by both small and large entities alike.

On a related note, such pricing proposals, if ever inacted, would be done at the registry level, not the registrar level - changing registrars would be of no consequence; this is what makes such proposals so scary - there's no competition and no alternative other to pay whatever; in effect, legal extortion.

Anyways, again as GeorgeK points out, Sitefinder is a prime example of how stuff that flys in other registries won't be tolerated in .com.

In the short term, such variable pricing proposals, even if they go nowhere, make .COM domains even more valuable ... people, in particular business, dislike uncertainty ... with .biz, .info, etc the perception will increasingly be that it's a real crapshoot the future costs of owning such domains ... while with .com, one can be quite confident that such a pricing scheme will likely never happen, and thus makes .com domains even more sought; valuable.

Ron

mikeyddddd · 08-27-2006, 11:11 AM

My comments have been posted with the title "Price Controls Needed on Registry Services" at:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld-agreement/
http://forum.icann.org/lists/info-tld-agreement/
http://forum.icann.org/lists/org-tld-agreement/

Tiered pricing should not be allowed on domain names.

A great deal of a domain's value is created by the owner's development of the domain's brand. The domain's owner should not be penalized for being successful by paying a higher price for renewal.

mikeet · 08-27-2006, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeorgeK

if the registries wanted to eliminate porn from .org, .biz, .info, they could make the renewal fee be $1 billion/yr.

WTF....are you kidding me, $1 billion. Thats totally and utterly ridiculas

GeorgeK · 08-27-2006, 09:31 PM

There is at least 1 supporter of the proposed .biz/info/org contracts....Chuck Gomes of VeriSign!! See:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00106.html

Quote:

Ensuring the continued security and stability of its infrastructure is
critical to the continued growth of the Internet. That is why VeriSign
supports the proposed new registry agreement for .biz. The agreement
closely mirrors the model registry agreements that ICANN has already
used or proposed for .com, .info, .mobi, .net, and .org.

These agreements strike the important balance between protecting
Internet users and providing registry operators with the incentives and
flexibility to continue to invest in the Internet infrastructure. They
also create a level playing field for all the registries.

He posted similar comments for .info and .org.

It would not surprise me if VeriSign is salivating at the prospect of these contracts being approved, so that it creates a precedent for future .com/net renegotiations. Don't be naive and think that this is only about .biz/info/org -- like a chess match, you need to think several moves ahead.

polish_aristocrat · 09-08-2006, 09:54 AM

update???

GeorgeK · 09-09-2006, 10:13 AM

polish_aristocrat: See here:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=653732

(accidentally started a new thread, sorry; hit the "New Topic" button, instead of "Post Reply", grrrr)

GeorgeK · 09-11-2006, 01:01 PM

ICANN has posted a draft summary of the public comments relating to the proposed .biz/info/org contracts:

http://www.icann.org/announcements/a...-1-11sep06.htm

In addition, they noted "Staff reported during the Board meeting that negotiations with the registries are already underway regarding clarification of the issues surrounding differential pricing."

08-22-2006, 08:58 PM	#1
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Important for Domainers (including pussy.org, prime .coms). .tv-style pricing coming? Vint Cerf/ICANN confirm my interpretation of .biz/info/org proposed contracts -- tiered/differential domain pricing would not be forbidden Hi folks, I apologize in advance for the long post --- if you own domains, though, it's very important. It could even mean adult domains like pussy.org are removed from .org, and other extensions could be affected too (and ultimately .com), through introduction of .tv style tiered pricing (i.e. just like the net-neutrality debate, but instead of for bandwidth, this would be for domains). I finally got the "official" word from Vint Cerf of ICANN, "on the record", who confirmed that my interpretation is correct, that differential/tiered pricing on a domain-by-domain basis would not be forbidden under the .biz/info/org proposed contracts. This means that the registries could charge $100,000/yr for sex.biz, $25,000/yr for movies.org, etc. if they wanted to -- it would not be forbidden the way the proposed contracts are currently written. This would represent a powerful pricing weapon for registries, and a fundamental shift in possible domain name pricing, that could lead them to emulate .tv-style price schedules. One can read the proposed contracts at: http://www.icann.org/announcements/a...-2-28jul06.htm Vint said it would be "suicide" for a registry to do it, because there'd be the 6-month notice period to raise prices and the ability for registrants to renew for up to 10 years at "old prices", that supposedly "protects" registrants. Personally, as a business, my time horizon is a lot longer than 10 years. I wonder if Vint felt introducing "SiteFinder" was suicide, too....history has shown registries will do whatever they can get away with, in order to maximize profits long-term and short-term. I don't think Vint understands the business at all, to think that a lag of 10 years will deter a profit-maximizing registry, esp. VeriSign should it try to match this contractual precedent in .com (and history shows VeriSign will always try to get "more", especially if "another registry" is able to do something -- they used that tactic in .com renegotiations, saying various terms were already in the .net contract, for instance). Just to show one possible future, if PIR feels pressure or has a desire to clean up porn from .org, it could announce that pussy.org (check its Alexa ranking) will have its renewal price be $1 billion/yr. If it takes 10 years to do it, many would wait, and it would not be considered "suicide" for PIR. Who will stand against that as "we're protecting the internet and children from porn", PIR might argue? Leaving this temptation in the contract will likely become a slippery slope, in my opinion, leading to profit-maximizing behaviour by registries to emulate .tv. Acting in the interests of their shareholders, registries are compelled to maximize profits. It can be used as a political weapon, too. If a registry disagreed with the views or content of a website for which they were the registry, they could raise the renewal price to $100 billion/yr. 10 years later, that website would not exist at that address, and nothing in the contracts would forbid this pricing behaviour. More likely, it would be used for profit maximization (if Google.com is a $100 billion company, "certainly they are benefiting from their domain name, and can afford our $1 billion/yr renewal fee" one might say -- see the net neutrality debate and tiered pricing for websites that phone and cable companies are pushing....). How far away is tiered domain name pricing?? ICANN would be opening up a Pandora's Box through this contractual loophole, to not forbid .tv style pricing. The mistake would not be able to be corrected, as the contracts explicitly say that Consensus Policies do not apply to pricing issues. Since presumptive renewal exists in these new deals, the contracts are essentially going to live with ICANN forever, if approved. If this pricing power eventually got extended to .com, nothing would prevent the renewal fee for Yahoo.com, GoDaddy.com, Google.com, Tucows.com, Business.com, Sex.com or any other domain in a registry with similar terms to reach $1 billion per year, or any other price that VeriSign or other registry operators wanted to maximize its profits (net-neutrality debate is similar, for bandwidth pricing to websites). You can imagine my VeriSignSucks.com won't last longer than 10 years, if VeriSign had the power to raise the renewal fee to $1 billion/year. I believe that it is very important that this loophole be closed, in order to not create the precedent that VeriSign could later exploit for .com, and to protect registrants of .biz/org/info. If it is "suicide", as Vint suggested, then surely a registry that would supposedly never use the power would agree to remove the temptation by adding an appropriate term to the contract. A registry not willing to add that term....well, you know what they might be tempted to do later. If your business horizon is the next quarter, this won't impact you. If it's beyond 10 years, it could impact you. Can you live with that uncertainty?? Feel free to spread the word on the mailing lists or media, and contact Vint (vint AT google.com) or John Jeffrey (jeffrey AT icann.org) or other ICANN staffers if you want to confirm things and voice your concerns. Time is of the essence, as the public comment period ends next Monday. Registrants DO NOT know what is coming (the public comment board is almost empty), as it's the summer holidays! (typical ICANN tactic, introduce 500+ page contracts for public comment when everyone is on holiday) Public comments can be sent using the addresses at: http://www.icann.org/announcements/a...-2-28jul06.htm (be sure to send to all 3 email addresses for all 3 contracts, and also click the link in the email ICANN will send you to authenticate your email address, otherwise your comment doesn't get received) There are a lot of other reasons to be opposed to the proposed contracts, such as the presumptive renewal, the ability to sell traffic data, the removal of price caps, etc. I will be writing a longer document soon, but wanted to give everyone a heads-up, so that you can take appropriate action on your own now, and corroborate things independently with Vint Cerf, John Jeffrey or other ICANN people. These are fundamentally flawed contracts, and should not be approved by ICANN. The precedents these contracts would create are ominous, even worse then the .com proposed settlement agreement (that the DoC has yet to approve). Why is ICANN even renegotiating these registry agreements, when the existing terms don't expire for several years in some cases, and the GNSO PDP process for registry services is ongoing?? Sincerely, George __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-22-2006, 09:40 PM	#3
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	I hope those who are against this will speak up, and send to the official comments board. This would be a dangerous precedent, that would potentially threaten your business. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-22-2006, 11:01 PM	#4
gideongallery Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 7,082	clarify isn't this a per registra right not based on who manages the primary name server. unlike the .tv where the prices are set by one provider (monopoly) every register would be allowed to set their own prices while domain owners could transfer their domain to another registra. In otherwords competitions acts as a counter measure to having the same effect as .tv if network solutions decided to announce that pussy.org was going to $1million/year then godaddy could steal that business by allowing the domain to be registered at normal cost. __________________ “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

08-22-2006, 11:27 PM	#6
XPays Team Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Inside the most accurately counting and reporting affiliate system in the world at XPays.com Posts: 13,002	they need to preserve their aggressive tasting rather than abuse their customers like you point out would be possible. enough is never enough... on the other hand, the lawsuits would be stacked up and i doubt the proposal is viable. also, there are those who believe that certain extensions got smart when they lowered pricing so keep us posted. __________________ InterNext Expo Domain Auction Live Now thru Feb 5 HuntingMoon GFY Domains Marketplace is LIVE XPays always pays! Top Site: * RealJasmine.com * + HotelHeiress® with The Paris Hilton Sex Video Insert the HotelHeiress® HD FEED into your members areas XPin.com Opening for Pin Partners Soonish Mainstream Offers For Emailers and DomainersNONADULT.COM Like Us!

08-22-2006, 11:47 PM	#7
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	The top domain owner on the planet, Frank Schilling of NameAdministration has posted comments too: http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00005.html If it might affect his business, are you going to gamble that your business won't be affected? Gideon: This is the price that the registries would charge to the registrars, which would then be passed along to the domain owners. To be more clear, PIR, that operates the .org registry, could produce a price list for domain renewals in the form: pussy.org -- $1 million/year sex.org -- $1 million/yr casino.org -- $250,000/yr movies.org -- $100,000/yr microsoft.org -- $2 million/yr google.org -- $5 million/yr gghhghg.org -- $5/yr abc.org -- $20,000/yr republicans.org -- $200,000/yr democrats.org -- $10,000/yr shop.org -- $50,000/yr etc. A scheme like the above, to registrars (keeping equal treatment between registry and registrar, which is required by the contract) would mean the costs for registrars changes, and they could then add their own markup to the pricelist provided by the registry. This would obviously be a dramatic shift in the market. Vint Cerf called it "suicidal". But, registries are very shrewd, and if there's nothing to stop them from maximizing profits by doing the above, it would make sense for them to do it. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-22-2006, 09:03 PM	#2
JD Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 22,651	well that sucks....

08-22-2006, 11:06 PM	#5
MetaMan I AM WEB 2.0 Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 28,682	fuck i am playing poker and trying to read at the same time.

08-23-2006, 12:37 AM	#8
scottybuzz Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2006 Location: NY Posts: 14,800	dam , that sucks __________________ $$$$$ MAKE HUGE MONEY IN CAMS - CLICK HERE $$$$$

08-23-2006, 01:03 AM	#9
free4porn Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,654	they better not! __________________ Switch To Fling Now! I'm on 1:201 paid signups sending little traffic! Make $$$ Free Porn

08-23-2006, 01:05 AM	#10
madawgz 8.8.8.8 Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Noordermarkt Posts: 30,509	wtf? ucool might loose pussy.org? :\ __________________ TAEMDLRMSKRJIXMRLSMRJ.

08-23-2006, 05:28 AM	#12
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Companies that intend to lower prices don't waste time renegotiating a contract in order to gain terms that remove price caps. Registries are shrewd, and will raise domain prices to what the market will bear if it leads to greater profits. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-23-2006, 05:56 AM	#13
BlackCrayon Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Ottawa Posts: 19,631	makes no sense to me. they assume just because you have a certain name it must be making x amount of dollars? are we supposed to give them our earnings so they can see what an appropriate amount is to charge? lol. i've never bought anything besides .net or .com which doesn't seem to be effected but the whole idea is ridiculous in my opinion. __________________ you don't know you're wearing a leash if you sit by the peg all day..

08-23-2006, 06:12 AM	#14
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Go visit any domain name sales site and you'll quickly realize some domains are worth a lot more than others. Shrewd people can figure out a value, without knowing your actual earnings. I don't need to see the income statement of AOL to know that Games.com is extremely valuable. Or that tv.com is very valuable to CNET. If VeriSign can set a price schedule for .tv, they can certainly set one for a good .com, if it got to that point (these contracts are for .biz/info/org, but could create the dangerous precedent). __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-23-2006, 06:13 AM	#15
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Oh, and for public companies, the income statement and balance sheet are public info (SEC filings, etc.). So, you can see exactly how much Google is making, and try to charge them accordingly. If ISPs are able to charge tiered pricing for bandwidth to websites (i.e. the net-neutrality debate), it isn't a huge leap to get to domain tiers. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-23-2006, 06:26 AM	#16
DaddyHalbucks A freakin' legend! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Las Vegas, Nevada USA Posts: 18,975	It is scary, but it will never happen. It will offend too many powerful people/ organizations. __________________ Boner Money

08-23-2006, 06:38 AM	#18
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	You don't need to develop domains or do hard work to make money. Read: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06121/686566-28.stm or other articles. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-23-2006, 10:06 AM	#20
polish_aristocrat Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 40,377	interesting.... __________________ I don't use ICQ anymore.

08-23-2006, 10:38 AM	#21
MetaMan I AM WEB 2.0 Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 28,682	i do not see this happening the amount of lawsuits that would come from this would be immense. i just finished up the new pussy.org and i have a feeling that no one is going to touch it over Johns dead body.l

08-23-2006, 10:46 AM	#22
Gunni Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Barcelona Posts: 2,385	coldn't you just move your domain to another registry that doesn't have crazy newal rate, then if those ones would decide to up the price for your particular domain then you just move it again?

08-23-2006, 10:53 PM	#24
minusonebit So Fucking Banned Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: [email protected] Posts: 7,391	If they push this through, I will stop using domains all together.

08-26-2006, 03:49 AM	#25
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Just a quick followup, one can read additional comments/coverage at: Slashdot: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/25/0611209 NSI's official comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00022.html GoDaddy's comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld.../msg00058.html Add your comments by going to: http://www.icann.org/announcements/a...-2-28jul06.htm __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-26-2006, 04:13 AM	#26
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	this is coming exactly a week after us commerce dept renewed their agreement with icann

08-26-2006, 04:16 AM	#27
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Soul_Rebel: That "renewal" was misunderstood by most. See: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl...54&mode=nested __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-26-2006, 04:27 AM	#28
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	thanks man, it's more clear now. Any idea how easy or hard is for greedy Sclavos to do the same before their current agreement for .com expires?

08-26-2006, 05:10 AM	#29
Nicolas Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1,497	Will never happen. __________________ Buy Clicked Traffic Cheap Hosting - Adult Script Depot - TGP CMS

08-26-2006, 05:12 AM	#30
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Well, there'd be a bigger outcry if it was done for .com, that's for sure. But, they'd certainly point out the precedent in other registries, if they tried to get it in .com. Most folks don't realize that it was .biz who had tested wildcarding similar to SiteFinder months before VeriSign did it. http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl.../05/19/1253205 It's almost like these baby registries are "farm teams" for VeriSign, to test out ideas to see if anyone notices, and then try to do it for .com. Until I spilled the beans (after 3 weeks of back and forth emails with Vint Cerf of ICANN, who, to his credit, finally did give me what I was looking for), hardly anyone noticed the issue -- only like 3 or 4 comments on the comment archive to that point (and most were quoting preliminary stuff I had written on the GA list of ICANN). It's typical ICANN behaviour to do this sort of thing, not publicize very dramatic changes, until after the fact when it's too late to do anything. The "bottom up, consensus driven process" are simply words to them -- their actions are nearly always top down, dictatorial and by fiat. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-26-2006, 05:20 AM	#31
Manowar jellyfish Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 71,528	is it ok to put that post (credited to you) on http://www.businessvoyeur.com/ ? we need to spread this info the whole webmaster community

08-26-2006, 06:33 AM	#33
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	Sure thing, Manowar. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-26-2006, 01:30 PM	#34
spacedog Yes that IS me. Bitch. Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 14,149	Is this proposal for only adult names? Is it only for one word names? I have names like gaysexmovies.info hotasianbabes.info hotlatinababes.info virgincunt.org teeniepanties.info prettyschoolgirls.info 69khz.info k8y.org antiqueweapons.org h8r.org gothfetish.info so, if they passed this, what kind of renewals would I possibly face?

08-27-2006, 07:02 AM	#36
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	SpaceDog: They could arbitrarily be set by the registry operators, on any basis whatsoever. E.g. if the registries wanted to eliminate porn from .org, .biz, .info, they could make the renewal fee be $1 billion/yr. They'd have to give 6 month notice, though, and you could renew up to 10 years in advance at the old prices. __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com

08-27-2006, 10:11 AM	#38
DirkG Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Eugene, OR Posts: 289	Thats it, I am going back to ip addresses. If you want me you can reach me 126.0.0.1 __________________ Trade traffic with Totally4free TGP HERE aptgp III - If you aren't using it, you haven't seen it. DOWNLOAD NOW

08-27-2006, 10:57 AM	#39
Ron Bennett Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,653	I tend to agree with GeorgeK's sentiments ... regardless of what happens with the other registries, if such a pricing scheme was attempted with .com, there would be an outcry like never seen before in the domain name realm; scads of lawsuits by both small and large entities alike. On a related note, such pricing proposals, if ever inacted, would be done at the registry level, not the registrar level - changing registrars would be of no consequence; this is what makes such proposals so scary - there's no competition and no alternative other to pay whatever; in effect, legal extortion. Anyways, again as GeorgeK points out, Sitefinder is a prime example of how stuff that flys in other registries won't be tolerated in .com. In the short term, such variable pricing proposals, even if they go nowhere, make .COM domains even more valuable ... people, in particular business, dislike uncertainty ... with .biz, .info, etc the perception will increasingly be that it's a real crapshoot the future costs of owning such domains ... while with .com, one can be quite confident that such a pricing scheme will likely never happen, and thus makes .com domains even more sought; valuable. Ron __________________ Domagon - Website Management and Domain Name Sales

08-27-2006, 11:11 AM	#40
mikeyddddd Viva la vulva! Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: you can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself Posts: 16,557	My comments have been posted with the title "Price Controls Needed on Registry Services" at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld-agreement/ http://forum.icann.org/lists/info-tld-agreement/ http://forum.icann.org/lists/org-tld-agreement/ Tiered pricing should not be allowed on domain names. A great deal of a domain's value is created by the owner's development of the domain's brand. The domain's owner should not be penalized for being successful by paying a higher price for renewal. __________________ AdultStarProfits AmbyaCash AnilosCash AzianiGold ColdHardCash FlashTheMoney IdolBucks MediumPimpin NSCash Nubiles PussyCash ScoreCash Sextronix SpunkyCash TubeTitans Twistys

09-08-2006, 09:54 AM	#43
polish_aristocrat Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 40,377	update??? __________________ I don't use ICQ anymore.

09-09-2006, 10:13 AM	#44
GeorgeK Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 423	polish_aristocrat: See here: http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=653732 (accidentally started a new thread, sorry; hit the "New Topic" button, instead of "Post Reply", grrrr) __________________ I buy good domain names. Send lists to George (at) LOFFS.com