We oppose presumptive renewal in the .aero agreement (and all other gTLD agreements), as per the DOJ letter

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

We oppose the proposed .aero registry agreement as currently drafted,
as it proposes:

a) Section 4.1 has a 10-year term, which is much longer than other gTLD
contracts (4 or 5 years would be more appropriate)
b) Section 4.2 represents presumptive renewal

We oppose presumptive renewal on principle. The operation of all gTLD
registries should be available for public tender, with the contract
awarded to the lowest bidder, as per other government and business
contracts. At the end of the fixed term of the contract, another tender
would take place. This maximizes benefits to consumers, namely domain
registrants in the .aero namespace.

Our position is consistent with those of the US Department of Justice,
who wisely wrote:

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2008/ICANN_081218.pdf

"If ICANN is not prepared to act now to address the competition-related
issues identified in this letter, it should at a minimum postpone the
introduction of new gTLDs *****AND THE ADOPTION OF ADDITIONAL
PERPETUALLY RENEWING GTLD AGREEMENT**** until it receives and reviews
the study that the ICANN Board requested over two years ago." (page 9
of the PDF, emphasis added)

While we have no issues with the current .aero registry operator, and
indeed, they appear to have done an excellent job running their
sponsored gTLD, out of principle we must object to ICANN entering into
this contract until ALL of the concerns of the US government have been
addressed. In particular, we would like to see a standard universal
contract that would be used across all gTLDs, as per our comments in
the new gTLDs comments forum.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.leap.com/