Open Letter: ICANN .COM Price Increases
This letter was submitted to ICANN in response to their proposal to allow Verisign to significantly increase the wholesale cost of purchasing a .COM domain name.
To Whom It May Concern
I am both a customer of the .COM domain system and a seller as a wholesaler through my Hosting Business.
The .COM domain name enjoys a de facto "default" status that encourages most new domain names to flow through to the .COM registrar, even after the introduction of the new gTLDs and country-specific TLDs. In the same way that the .ORG domain name should be managed and reserved for the enrichment of public organisations, .COM domain name should be made freely available to all people at a relatively cheap price. As we see an ever increasing amount of entrepreneurship, we see a massive decrease in the cost of compute; if anything we should see the wholesale prices for domain names lower. This should be done to make the internet more free and open, and encourage everyone to get domain names. I love domain names, and for me I would love it if domain names proliferated to the same extent as email addresses.
I make a note of ICANN's vision which is "To be a champion of the single, open, and globally interoperable Internet". I do not see how increasing the price of Domain Names, which will only increase the operating costs of small business and individuals and not affect incumbent players in all markets (which the price increase will not even be noticeable). This action is completely in opposition of this vision. Please also refer to one of ICANN's Strategic Goals: "Sustain and improve openness, inclusivity, accountability, and transparency". How are you making the system more inclusive if the cost of a .COM domain name is about eight times more than what one third of the world's population makes per day? If anything, ICANN should be focusing on reducing the wholesale .COM domain price to make it more open and available.
I wholeheartedly disagree with this move to make obtaining .COM domains harder. ICANN should reconsider this decision.
Regards,
Adam Hammond