<div dir="auto"><div>Note: I slipped the "not" from my sentence.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif">*so that the new contract not be retroactive, </span><span style="font-family:sans-serif">in order to the current .ORG registrants not be affected. </span><br><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 15:37 Nadira Alaraj <<a href="mailto:nadira.araj@gmail.com">nadira.araj@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">Dear Kathy and all</div>Thank you for the through investigations on this matter.<div dir="auto">I was wondering if there is a way, so that the new contract to be retroactive, in order to the current .ORG registrants be affected. By any increase in case the community couldn't bring the cap increase down.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Another issue I didn't read in many of the comments that not all .ORG registrants are NGOs hence there are some registrants who might take advance of the current status.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div>These are my 2 naive thoughts,<div dir="auto">Best wishes,</div><div dir="auto">Nadira <br><div dir="auto"><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 02:21 Kathy Kleiman <kathy@dnrc.tech> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <span>Hi Milton,
      Amr and All,</span>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Unfortunately,
        I read the contract differently
        and fear that the current 10 million .ORG registrants face a
        difficult (and
        expensive) future. To Milton's excellent question, <i>What,
          exactly, are
          those “protections for existing registrants”?</i>, the answer
        is <i>"not much."</i> Here's
        the pricing
        provisions of the .ORG proposed agreement (and I’ve been
        checking with domain
        name attorneys all afternoon): </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>2.10(a)
        Registries provide
        registrars with a 30 day notice of price increases
        (registrations).<span>  </span></span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>2.10(b)
        “With respect to renewal of
        domain name registrants” Registry will provide registrars with
        “advance written
        notice of any price increase, and “</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Registry Operator
        shall offer registrars the
        option to obtain domain name registration renewals at the
        current price (i.e.,
        the price in place prior to any noticed increase) for periods of
        one (1) to ten
        (10) years at the discretion of the registrar, but no greater
        than ten (10)
        years.” </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><b><i><span>But the
            option to allow renewal for 1 to 10 years is at the option
            of the registrar.
            There’s nothing that requires the registrar to notify
            registrants that the price
            of their .ORG domain names will be going (possibly
            dramatically) and that the
            time to renew is now. This is something that is being
            written about a lot, but
            I don’t see it in the contract. (Some registrars may let
            their registrants know
            early; others may not.) There is absolutely no requirement
            of notice to the
            registrant of a price increase for renewals – for .ORG (or
            any other registry
            which has signed this agreement). </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Cambria",serif"><span> </span></span></i></b><b><i><span></span></i></b></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>2.10(c) “In
        addition, Registry
        Operator must have uniform pricing for renewals of domain name
        registrations (“Renewal
        Pricing”). For the purposes of determining Renewal Pricing, the
        price for each
        domain registration renewal must be identical to the price of
        all other domain
        name registration renewals at the time of such renewal” <span> </span>with some vague additional
        language about not
        wanting to allow abusive and discriminatory renewal pricing. </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><b><i><span>Thus, PIR’s job is to charge
            all registrars the same price for
            new registrations and renewals – whatever that price is and
            however much PIR
            wants to charge. This is no guidance about abusive and
            discriminatory renewal
            pricing, no definitions and no clear limitations. </span></i></b></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Overall, I
        think Akriti Bopanna’s
        comment for The Centre for Internet and Society, India, today is
        right on point:</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><b><span>“Removal
          of Price Caps</span></b></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>“ICANN’s decision to remove price
        caps in the .org agreement
        will only intensify the unfettered power given to Registries
        with the
        presumption of renewal. The</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>organization has long heard
        accusations of engaging in
        closed door decision making</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>and with such a move that pushes
        for the rights of
        registries over registrars, such</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>concerns are only growing. As it
        is, .org can raise its
        prices by 10% every year which is</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>unduly generous in itself.5 Giving
        PIR a limitless ability
        to increase prices would be</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>doing grave injustice to domain
        owners who have bought such
        domains under the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>assumption of price caps. This is
        in contrast to the new
        gTLDS where there is more of</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>a burden on such owners to keep up
        with the actions of
        private owners. Legacy</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>gTLDS, unlike the new ones, were
        not created and sold to
        private entities but handed</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>over to entities like PIR to
        maintain them in public
        interest.</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>“Being one of the first TLD’s to be
        introduced, a multitude
        of significant websites and</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>therein, initiatives, have their
        home on the .org domain. As
        pointed out in the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>community discussions several
        times, these domains are used
        by NGO’s, nonprofit</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>trade associations, individual
        member associations as well
        as tax-exempt charities.6</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>ICANN’s justification for proposing
        these steps is to align
        legacy gTLD agreements with those of the other newer gTLDS but
        as argued by the
        Internet Commerce</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Association;</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>“They have completely different
        characteristics, history,
        and ownership</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>structure. It is not acceptable for
        ICANN to ignore these
        differences and to</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>propose that they be treated the
        same.7</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>“Given the longevity of these
        domains on .org, they have put
        in substantial investment</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>in maintaining their online
        presence and cultivating their
        identity and brand. They</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>are entitled to protection from
        arbitrary pricing and having
        the same financial rules</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>as when they originally bought
        their domains. If such caps
        are removed then many of</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>these domain owners can find it too
        expensive to maintain
        their sites, especially with</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>no guarantee of future price
        stability as well. A look at
        the mailing lists is enough to</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>see how small organizations are
        actively pleading with ICANN
        to not go ahead with</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>this because it will increase their
        operational costs.8</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>“None of this is to say that PIR
        would, in fact, go ahead
        and increase the prices</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>exorbitantly or at all, however
        leaving that option to them
        does not bode well for any</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>party save them. Further, no clear
        reasoning has been
        provided for such a step like</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>the need for any additional funds
        to maintain the domain and
        in absence of any</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>exceptionally necessary situation,
        the price cap should
        continue to exist. Given that</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>PIR is a not-for-profit
        organization, the rationale to
        remove caps seems even less</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>unclear than it would be, for say,
        Verisign. Allowing the
        removals could very well be</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>opening Pandora’s box with other
        Registries then demanding
        removals too. Registries</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>own all the extensions to their
        domain and lack of a price
        ceiling only enriches the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>revenue of, ultimately, the one
        owner leading to a bigger
        monopolistic situation than</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>already is currently prevalent.</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Needless to
        say, I support NCSG’s comment too!</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Best,
        Kathy </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>----------------------------</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Proposed
        2019 .ORG Registry
        Agreement</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>2.10
        Pricing for Registry Services.</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>(a) With
        respect to initial domain
        name registrations, Registry Operator</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>shall
        provide each ICANN accredited
        registrar that has executed the Registry-Registrar</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Agreement
        for the TLD advance
        written notice of any price increase (including as a result</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>of the
        elimination of any refunds,
        rebates, discounts, product tying or other programs</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>which had
        the effect of reducing the
        price charged to registrars, unless such refunds,</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>rebates,
        discounts, product tying or
        other programs are of a limited duration that is clearly</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>and
        conspicuously disclosed to the
        registrar when offered) of no less than thirty (30)</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>calendar
        days. Registry Operator
        shall offer registrars the option to obtain initial domain</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>name
        registrations for periods of
        one (1) to ten (10) years at the discretion of the registrar,</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>but no
        greater than ten (10) years.</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>(b) With
        respect to renewal of
        domain name registrations, Registry</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Operator
        shall provide each ICANN
        accredited registrar that has executed the Registry-</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Registrar
        Agreement for the TLD
        advance written notice of any price increase (including as</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>a result of
        the elimination of any
        refunds, rebates, discounts, product tying, Qualified</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Marketing
        Programs or other programs
        which had the effect of reducing the price charged</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>to
        registrars) of no less than one
        hundred eighty (180) calendar days. Notwithstanding the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>foregoing
        sentence, with respect to
        renewal of domain name registrations: (i) Registry</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Operator
        need only provide thirty
        (30) calendar days notice of any price increase if the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>resulting
        price is less than or
        equal to (A) for the period beginning on the Effective Date</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>and ending
        twelve (12) months
        following the Effective Date, the initial price charged for</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>registrations
        in the TLD, or (B) for
        subsequent periods, a price for which Registry Operator</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>provided a
        notice pursuant to the
        first sentence of this Section 2.10(b) within the twelve</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>(12) month
        period preceding the
        effective date of the proposed price increase; and (ii)</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Registry
        Operator need not provide
        notice of any price increase for the imposition of the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Variable
        Registry-Level Fee set
        forth in Section 6.3. Registry Operator shall offer registrars</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>the option
        to obtain domain name
        registration renewals at the current price (i.e., the price in
        place prior to
        any noticed increase) for periods of one (1) to ten (10) years
        at the
        discretion of the registrar, but no greater than ten (10) years.</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>(c) In
        addition, Registry Operator
        must have uniform pricing for renewals</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>of domain
        name registrations
        (“Renewal Pricing”). For the purposes of determining</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Renewal
        Pricing, the price for each
        domain registration renewal must be identical to the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>price of
        all other domain name
        registration renewals in place at the time of such renewal,</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>and such
        price must take into
        account universal application of any refunds, rebates,</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>discounts,
        product tying or other
        programs in place at the time of renewal. The foregoing</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>requirements
        of this Section 2.10(c)
        shall not apply for (i) purposes of determining</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Renewal
        Pricing if the registrar has
        provided Registry Operator with documentation that</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>demonstrates
        that the applicable
        registrant expressly agreed in its registration agreement</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>with
        registrar to higher Renewal
        Pricing at the time of the initial registration of the domain</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>name
        following clear and conspicuous
        disclosure of such Renewal Pricing to such</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>registrant,
        and (ii) discounted
        Renewal Pricing pursuant to a Qualified Marketing Program</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>(as defined
        below). The parties
        acknowledge that the purpose of this Section 2.10(c) is to</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>prohibit
        abusive and/or
        discriminatory Renewal Pricing practices imposed by Registry</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Operator
        without the written consent
        of the applicable registrant at the time of the initial</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>registration
        of the domain and this
        Section 2.10(c) will be interpreted broadly to prohibit</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>such
        practices. For purposes of this
        Section 2.10(c), a “Qualified Marketing Program” is a</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>marketing
        program pursuant to which
        Registry Operator offers discounted Renewal</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Pricing,
        provided that each of the
        following criteria is satisfied: (i) the program and related</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>discounts
        are offered for a period
        of time not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) calendar</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>days (with
        consecutive substantially
        similar programs aggregated for purposes of</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>determining
        the number of calendar
        days of the program), (ii) all ICANN accredited</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>registrars
        are provided the same
        opportunity to qualify for such discounted Renewal</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>Pricing;
        and (iii) the intent or
        effect of the program is not to exclude any particular</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>class(es)
        of registrations (e.g.,
        registrations held by large corporations) or increase the</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>renewal
        price of any particular
        class(es) of registrations. Nothing in this Section 2.10(c)</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>shall limit
        Registry Operator’s
        obligations pursuant to Section 2.10(b).</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span> </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>(d)
        Registry Operator shall provide
        public query-based DNS lookup</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span>service for
        the TLD (that is,
        operate the Registry TLD zone servers) at its sole expense.</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>-------------</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Here’s
        PIR’s current pricing
        language, from its 2013 agreement:</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Section
        7.3. Pricing for Domain Name
        Registrations and Registry Services. </span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>7.3(a)
        Pricing. From the Effective
        Date through 31 December 2013, the price to ICANN-accredited
        registrars for new
        and renewal domain name registrations and for transferring a
        domain name
        registration from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another,
        shall not exceed a
        total fee of US$8.25 (the "Maximum Service Fee"). Commencing on
        1
        January 2014, the Maximum Service Fee charged during a calendar
        year for each
        annual increment of a new and renewal domain name registration
        and for
        transferring a domain name registration from one
        ICANN-accredited registrar to
        another, may not exceed the Maximum Service Fee during the
        preceding calendar
        year multiplied by 1.10. The same Service Fee shall be charged
        to all
        ICANN-accredited registrars for new and renewal domain name
        registrations.
        Volume discounts and marketing support and incentive programs
        may be made if
        the same opportunities to qualify for those discounts and
        marketing support and
        incentive programs is available to all ICANN-accredited
        registrars.</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span> 7.3(b)
        Adjustments to Pricing for
        Domain Name Registrations. Registry Operator shall provide no
        less than six
        months prior notice in advance of any price increase for domain
        name
        registrations and shall continue to offer domain name
        registrations for periods
        of up to ten years.<span>  </span>Registry
        Operator is
        not required to give notice of the imposition of the Variable
        Registry-Level
        Fee set forth in Section 7.2(c).</span></p>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>----------------------------<br>
      </span></p>
    
    <blockquote type="cite">
      
      Hi Milton,
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>If my understanding of Section 2.10 of the Registry
        Agreement is correct, registrars can continue to renew existing
        registrations without an increase in price following an increase
        in pricing of new registrations by the Registry Operator (RO)
        for a period of up to 10 years. Additionally, ROs are required
        to have uniform pricing for registration renewals. This would
        mean that all renewal prices would remain unchanged, unless they
        all change across all registrars simultaneously.</div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>The protections for existing registrants referred to
        are detailed in 2.10c of the Registry Agreement. The protection
        is basically that registrants have to agree to renewal prices
        higher than that of the original registration at the time of the
        initial registration. It can’t be forced upon them at a later
        date. This is meant as a provision to <i>“<span style="font-family:Cambria,serif;font-size:16px;text-indent:96px">prohibit abusive and/or
            discriminatory Renewal Pricing practices imposed by Registry
            Operator without the written consent of the applicable
            registrant at the time of the initial registration of the
            domain</span>“</i>.</div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>Thanks.</div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>Amr </div>
      <div>
        <div><br>
          <blockquote type="cite">
            <div>On Apr 25, 2019, at 9:30 PM, Mueller, Milton L
              <<a href="mailto:milton@GATECH.EDU" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">milton@GATECH.EDU</a>> wrote:</div>
            <br class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-interchange-newline">
            <div>
              <div class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941WordSection1" style="font-family:TrebuchetMS;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I agree with the letter’s discussion of URS
                    and other RPMs. I agree with Amr that we may need to
                    moderate the language about “unilateral ICANN
                    action” however because PIR may indeed have gone
                    along with this.<span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span><u></u><u></u></span></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">On the issue of price caps, I think we need
                    some factual clarification. If Amr is right and the
                    potential price increases only apply to new
                    registrants, then there is much less of an issue.
                    The proposed renewal says “</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(51,51,51);background-color:white;background-position:initial initial;background-repeat:initial initial">Protections for existing
                    registrants will remain in place, in line with the
                    base registry agreement.“</span><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">What, exactly, are those “protections for
                    existing registrants”?<u></u><u></u></span></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">MM<u></u><u></u></span></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></div>
                <div>
                  <div style="border-style:solid none none;border-top-width:1pt;border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
                    <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span>NCSG-Discuss
                        <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>><span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Amr
                        Elsadr<br>
                        <b>Sent:</b><span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span>Thursday,
                        April 25, 2019 10:33 AM<br>
                        <b>To:</b><span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" style="color:purple;text-decoration:underline" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
                        <b>Subject:</b><span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re:
                        [Urgent] [Public Comment] Proposed Renewal of
                        .org Registry Agreement<u></u><u></u></span></div>
                  </div>
                </div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Hi,<u></u><u></u></div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Thanks for sharing this, Rafik. Speaking
                    for myself, I very much agree with the comment on
                    adding the new gTLD Rights Protection Mechanisms
                    (RPMs) to the PIR contract for .org at this time. As
                    the draft comment rightly points out, these RPMs
                    will not actually be Consensus Policies until after
                    the ICANN Board adopts the recommendations of the
                    Review of all RPMs in all gTLDs PDP Working Group,
                    and should not apply to any of the legacy gTLDs,
                    including .org. However to characterize the decision
                    to do so as a unilateral ICANN decision is something
                    I’m not sure of. I presume that PIR negotiated this
                    with ICANN before the public comment period began? I
                    might be wrong, as I’m making an assumption here.<u></u><u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">To be clear, the RPMs that would be
                    applicable here (if I’m not mistaken) are the
                    Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) and the Trademark
                    Claims RPM (part of the Trademark Clearing House),
                    but not the Sunrise Registrations RPM, obviously,
                    since .org has been around for a while.<u></u><u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Substantively, I don’t believe the URS will
                    be much of an issue, since it is largely deemed to
                    be an unappealing mechanism for use by Trademark
                    holders, as the stats and anecdotal evidence that
                    has been shared to date indicate. The impact of
                    Trademark Claims, on the other hand, might be very
                    different, and prior to it being reviewed by the
                    RPMs PDP, and adopted as an ICANN policy, I don’t
                    believe adding it to the .org contract in a renewal
                    is a good move.<u></u><u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">On the second issue, where the draft
                    comment disagrees with removing price caps for .org
                    registrations, I’m pretty sure I don’t agree with
                    the rationale or conclusion. I don’t believe PIR’s
                    status as a non-profit entity justifies this. IMO,
                    it imposes unreasonable obligations on PIR that
                    other Registry Operators are not subject to, so
                    effectively penalizing PIR for its status, and its
                    continued mission to<span class="m_-3215450327228791716m_2074479673144817941Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>“support
                      many excellent causes”</i>, as pointed out in the
                    draft.<u></u><u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Furthermore, there is little to no evidence
                    that I can see (at least in the draft) that
                    registrants of .org domain names will be negatively
                    impacted by removal of the price cap. My
                    understanding is that this will mainly impact new
                    registrations, not existing ones, but this isn’t
                    addressed at all.<u></u><u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">To me, PIR needs to set its own price
                    taking in to consideration their own consumer base.
                    If they make bad decisions that drive their
                    customers away, I don’t believe this will negatively
                    impact registrants as much as it would PIR itself,
                    especially considering that there are over a
                    thousand gTLDs for registrants to migrate to, should
                    they choose to do so.<u></u><u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Thanks.<u></u><u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u> <u></u></div>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Amr<u></u></o</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>