GeorgeK - 10:55 pm on Nov 11, 2008 (gmt 0)

cmedia: It should be something like:

"I oppose the removal of price controls on new gTLDs, as these terms could then be incorporated into existing gTLDs like .com under their equal treatment clauses."

In your own words, of course. The .com contract isn't being directly negotiated right now -- it's the new gTLD draft contracts. But what's insidious is the implication on existing gTLDs should those new gTLDs contracts go through unamended, because .com/net/org etc. could then be modified. That's what's sneaky about all this.

Last time, it was about .biz/info/org, and those had several million registrants who were up in arms. But, these new gTLDs have no registrants, so few people are watching. The few people who are watching are either:

1) people who want to acquire a new gTLD on the cheap, with the most favourable rules possible; this group won't oppose unrestricted pricing, since they want to maximize their own profits;

2) people like me that watch ICANN like a hawk (as we do a lot of internet commerce)

Unfortunately, there aren't many people in group #2 !

[edited by: GeorgeK at 10:56 pm (utc) on Nov. 11, 2008]