<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Push Against &#8220;Variable Domain Pricing&#8221; Gets Media Attention</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/</link>
	<description>News and Views for the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 04:15:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Demand Media Wants to Introduce New Domain Names - The Domain Industry's News Source</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/comment-page-1/#comment-300436</link>
		<dc:creator>Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Demand Media Wants to Introduce New Domain Names - The Domain Industry's News Source</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:48:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3651#comment-300436</guid>
		<description>[...] opinion. Obviously it only cares because it hopes to introduce new TLDs. The company references the concern of many people that the &#8220;equal treatment&#8221; clause in registry contracts would allow VeriSign to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] opinion. Obviously it only cares because it hopes to introduce new TLDs. The company references the concern of many people that the &#8220;equal treatment&#8221; clause in registry contracts would allow VeriSign to [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M. Menius</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/comment-page-1/#comment-298214</link>
		<dc:creator>M. Menius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 01:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3651#comment-298214</guid>
		<description>There are many corporate level submissions being posted today at the ICANN forum most opposed to new TLD&#039;s or expressing grave concerns about serious negative impact. Microsoft, Time Warner, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, GoDaddy, American Bankers Association among many others. 

If ICANN persist in the face of so much expressed opposition, fireworks and huge public criticism are sure to follow. And lawsuits as well. 

Neustar (.BIZ registry) have stated that if ICANN allow unregulated pricing for the NEW tld&#039;s, then Neustar want price restrictions removed for their .BIZ namespace. This is the catastrophic tipping point that will destroy the internet and internet businesses. If one registry can negotiate ICANN concessions, then ALL OF THEM WILL. And domainers will be facing years of litigation to protect their names and internet businesses against massively inflated tiered-pricing costs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are many corporate level submissions being posted today at the ICANN forum most opposed to new TLD&#8217;s or expressing grave concerns about serious negative impact. Microsoft, Time Warner, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, GoDaddy, American Bankers Association among many others. </p>
<p>If ICANN persist in the face of so much expressed opposition, fireworks and huge public criticism are sure to follow. And lawsuits as well. </p>
<p>Neustar (.BIZ registry) have stated that if ICANN allow unregulated pricing for the NEW tld&#8217;s, then Neustar want price restrictions removed for their .BIZ namespace. This is the catastrophic tipping point that will destroy the internet and internet businesses. If one registry can negotiate ICANN concessions, then ALL OF THEM WILL. And domainers will be facing years of litigation to protect their names and internet businesses against massively inflated tiered-pricing costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M. Menius</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/comment-page-1/#comment-298182</link>
		<dc:creator>M. Menius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:27:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3651#comment-298182</guid>
		<description>The dissent seems to be hitting on key points while the comments of MarkMonitor are raising some very specific concerns about needed corporate protections (i.e. future stakeholders in any new gTLD). 

A new gTLD registry renewal fee is being questioned as unreasonably large and in need of the same cost restriction that individual domain registrants require for any one domain. Margie Milam (MarkMonitor) writes &quot;The proposed ICANN fees serve as a significant deterrent to corporations considering whether to apply for a new TLD for their brand.&quot; 

Some smaller companies who want their own TLD may need few second level registrations, but under the proposed agreement would have to shell out to ICANN an annual RECURRING FEE of $75,000. Yes, that sounds extraordinarily high!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The dissent seems to be hitting on key points while the comments of MarkMonitor are raising some very specific concerns about needed corporate protections (i.e. future stakeholders in any new gTLD). </p>
<p>A new gTLD registry renewal fee is being questioned as unreasonably large and in need of the same cost restriction that individual domain registrants require for any one domain. Margie Milam (MarkMonitor) writes &#8220;The proposed ICANN fees serve as a significant deterrent to corporations considering whether to apply for a new TLD for their brand.&#8221; </p>
<p>Some smaller companies who want their own TLD may need few second level registrations, but under the proposed agreement would have to shell out to ICANN an annual RECURRING FEE of $75,000. Yes, that sounds extraordinarily high!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/comment-page-1/#comment-298129</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:29:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3651#comment-298129</guid>
		<description>@ Adam - it is in the settlement.  However, the registry contracts include a provision that allows them to get provisions that other contracts have in them.  So if another contract has a provision for no pricing controls, they could potentially get that to supersede the guaranteed increases in the settlement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Adam &#8211; it is in the settlement.  However, the registry contracts include a provision that allows them to get provisions that other contracts have in them.  So if another contract has a provision for no pricing controls, they could potentially get that to supersede the guaranteed increases in the settlement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/comment-page-1/#comment-298107</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 18:59:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3651#comment-298107</guid>
		<description>didn&#039;t someone bring up the fact that verisigns pricing was tied to the ICANN v. Verisign settlement agreement. I would think you&#039;d have to unwind that agreement in order for variable pricing to even come in to play, no ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>didn&#8217;t someone bring up the fact that verisigns pricing was tied to the ICANN v. Verisign settlement agreement. I would think you&#8217;d have to unwind that agreement in order for variable pricing to even come in to play, no ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reece</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2008/12/15/push-against-variable-domain-pricing-gets-media-attention/comment-page-1/#comment-298099</link>
		<dc:creator>Reece</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 18:11:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=3651#comment-298099</guid>
		<description>Not surprising to see big companies taking notice -- it&#039;s going to affect them afterall if it does come about.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not surprising to see big companies taking notice &#8212; it&#8217;s going to affect them afterall if it does come about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

