CLS is coming ?

[JMJ]

Where did you hear this?

It's in their renewal agreement. If I locate the actual link I'll repost

 

[Ed30]

I thought registration costs would fall, not double!

 

[JMJ]

I thought registration costs would fall, not double!

http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/com-registry-agreement-22sep05.pdf

Plus a double in ICANN fees. To make things even more interesting the fees aren't cost based or do they have to be approved.

I just sent this over to ICANN as a response. Others should do the same but ofcourse in your own words and own concerns.

Removed Not Renewed

Verisign has shown over the years and continues to show that it has no other objective but to increase it's bottom line and bend the rules.

1. From the WLS proposal which was an attemt to monopolize the expired domain market and the only reason it was put to rest is the more profitable proposal CLS which is full of flaws.

2. It's Sitefinder "service' which was nothing but an attemt to profit from the millions of misguided people and at the expense of the advertisers who would have been paying for it.

3. The looking the other way with its hand out while 1 million plus domains a day are being registered "tasted" for traffic and dumped.

4. Allowing registrars to bend the rules on the redemption period.

5. Allowing registrars to allow names not to be deleted and keeping those names in the previous owners name while that registrar profits from its traffic.

6. The proposed settlement for which they get to do all of the above and charge more for it without answering to anyone including you (ICANN).

 

[actnow]

Icann has agreed that Verisign can increase the fee registrars pay ($ 6.00 today)
by 7% a year until their contract expires in 2012. That would take it to $ 9.00 .

Plus, Icann has their own hand out. The tax goes from $ 0.25 (today) to $ 0.37 (Jan, 06)
to $ 0.45 (next July) to $ 0.50. Plus, they can increase that number anytime
they want. The tax they levy only needs to be agreed upon by Icann themselves.

Plus, the registrars need to put their markup on the prices.

Therefore, expect prices to go up 15-20% or more over the next 18 months.

But, all of this is peanuts compared to the money Verisign will make from SiteFinder.

 

[katherine]

I guess it's high time for the domainers to set up their own lobbies in order to have a voice in this game %+|

 

[actnow]

You do have a lobby group working for you. That is what Schwartz was working on.

Duke is now on the Board of the assn, maybe he will talk about it sometime in the future.

 

[JMJ]

Getting pretty heated on the comments board over at ICANN. It would seem by alot of comments if ICANN follows through they will have more legal problems than they ever had before. Surprised to see some former associates of each side being opposed.

Sarah Yanoski
Platinum VIP Account Representative
Network Solutions, LLC
http://forum.icann.org/lists/settlement-comments/msg00083.html

Craig Tan
NameSecure.com (Owned by Network Solutions)
http://forum.icann.org/lists/settlement-comments/msg00070.html


Karl Auerbach
Former (and only) Elected member
of the ICANN Board of Directors for North America
http://forum.icann.org/lists/settlement-comments/msg00084.html

Along with countless of other registry operators.

 

[Whois-Search]

I can see ICANN becoming a department in the UN

Just like WLS became CLS lol

Have you noticed Enom has also put a "tax" box on its checkout form lol

 

[JMJ]

I can see ICANN becoming a department in the UN

Just like WLS became CLS lol

Have you noticed Enom has also put a "tax" box on its checkout form lol

If ICANN did become part of the UN .50 a domain would be chump change to their budget needs. I can see it now. $100 laptops and networks for everyone all on the burden of domain owners..lol

 

[actnow]

The only two things that will stop this from being approved is

1. A number of major publications talking about how this will effect U.S. citizens and businesses. And, how a major corporation will profit substantially because of a quassi-gov't organization (created by the U.S. gov't) granted the corporation an monopolistic control of the internet.

2. U.S. Congress requesting more information from the U.S. Dept of Commerce about this contract.

 

[JMJ]

The only two things that will stop this from being approved is

1. A number of major publications talking about how this will effect U.S. citizens and businesses. And, how a major corporation will profit substantially because of a quassi-gov't organization (created by the U.S. gov't) granted the corporation an monopolistic control of the internet.

I'll start making calls and tipping them off on Monday. :-D

 

[Whois-Search]

actnow your right.

Enom seems to have gone to $6.70 with 0.25 tax keeping $6.95 :

http://www.whois-search.com/images/taxbox.jpg

But will they go $6.45 ? 0.50 tax

 

[JMJ]

http://icann.org/presentations/gnso-proposal-deleting-names-MdP-06apr05.pdf

http://www.icann.org/meetings/mardelplata/captioning-gnso-forum-06apr05.htm

I've been reading through the dialog of the meeting and it's quite amusing on how they steer around the questions. It appears that not only are they trying to eliminate the drop catching services but they might aswell be trying to take out the brokers aswell because you will be able to add your name to the service while it's in active phase.

 

[damitssam]

I dont get this... I actually kind of like this. Hey, I am cheapling and I never use pool anymore. This seems like a bargain deal for people like me who dont want to pay $22 on enom who want to "catch" rough gems (so to speak). Cheaper for me = me happy

 

[dvdrip]

Who said that this is going to be cheaper than $22?

 

[JMJ]

The reason you are able to get those rough gems is because you know how and when to get them. If this is implemented EVERYONE in the world will know how and where to get them. If you don't like the auctions now you damn sure won't like bidding against the world. You might even be bidding against the owner of the name who gets a cut of the proceeds.

 

[Togoodhlth]

I dont get this... I actually kind of like this. Hey, I am cheapling and I never use pool anymore. This seems like a bargain deal for people like me who dont want to pay $22 on enom who want to "catch" rough gems (so to speak). Cheaper for me = me happy

Cheaper? It will be more expensive due to a number of factors one of which is increased competition. Plus the base price will be increased.
Since domain holders will also be able to list their active names with the service it will have a huge effect on sedo/afternic.

 

[damitssam]

Cheaper? It will be more expensive due to a number of factors one of which is increased competition. Plus the base price will be increased.
Since domain holders will also be able to list their active names with the service it will have a huge effect on sedo/afternic.

If there was any competition for my names, someone would have at least paid $22 for enom to snatch it up. In this case, a mere dollar would help me secure my name from those damn registrars who pick up just about every single name to scan for traffic.

 

[JMJ]

If there was any competition for my names, someone would have at least paid $22 for enom to snatch it up. In this case, a mere dollar would help me secure my name from those damn registrars who pick up just about every single name to scan for traffic.

99%+ of the world doesn't know when, how, and where to backorder a domain so you can very well bet that when they do it will be done. Also consider that the owner, current registrar, aswell as Verisign get a cut of that bid price. What are the odds that someone associated with one of the recieving ends will be bidding in that process?

In addition don't you think that if this does get approved Verisign will allow the entire world to have a keyword notification service? Do you think they will allow others to see what names are being bid on so others can see what is and isn't wanted?

If you read the transcripts from the meeting they have stated they are going to make sure everyone knows all of this all in the name of public service. Or would that be shareholder interest?