Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Provisions in the proposed .org renewal agreement that are materially different from the current .org registry agreement:
Approved Services (Exhibit A): Consistent with all new gTLDs and other "legacy" TLD registry agreement renewals, Exhibit A has been modified to include the following additional or modified approved services: Anti-Abuse, Searchable Whois, Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs), .org Single and Two-Character Phased Allocation Program, Bulk Transfer After Partial Portfolio Acquisition (BTAPPA), Registry Lock, and an implementation period of 270 calendar days to transition all systems to the requirements of the .org renewal agreement, which is consistent with other legacy TLD registry agreement renewals.
Pricing for Domain Name Registrations and Registry Services (Section 2.10 of the proposed renewal agreement): In alignment with the base registry agreement, the price cap provisions in the current .org agreement, which limited the price of registrations and allowable price increases for registrations, are removed from the .org renewal agreement. Protections for existing registrants will remain in place, in line with the base registry agreement. This change will not only allow the .org renewal agreement to better conform with the base registry agreement, but also takes into consideration the maturation of the domain name market andthe goal of treating the Registry Operator equitably with registry operators of new gTLDs and other legacy gTLDs utilizing the base registry agreement
joined:Nov 11, 2000
So, what's to come for those 10,000,000 entities that believed they were dealing with a non-profit registry that served the interests of non-profits?
In a statement released today, PIR, the operator of the .ORG domain name registry, did not rule out the possibility of substantial price hikes on .org domain names if its new proposed contract is approved by ICANN.
In response to the thousands of objections submitted to ICANN by individual registrants, charities, religious groups, community organizations, and some of the largest and most prestigious organizations in America, PIR asked its customers to “rest assured” that it will not raise prices “unreasonably” and claims that it has “no specific plans” to hike prices.
Conspicuously absent however, is any promise to its customers not to raise prices beyond its current 10% price hike cap. Clearly, PIR is keeping all of its options open, and even in the professed absence of “any specific plans”, it is apparent that PIR likely has general plans to raise prices beyond the current 10% price cap with no limit in sight. This is hardly surprising, for if PIR intended to limit price hikes to the generous currently permitted 10% per year, it would have had no need whatsoever to request the removal of all price caps in the new proposed contract, and accordingly PIR’s claim that it is “simply moving to the standard registry agreement” rings hollow. If PIR was truly committed to keeping prices “reasonably low”, it would have simply agreed to keep the current 10% annual cap on price increases.