Opposed to Proposed .BIZ Registry Agreement

["Dan C. Rinnert" <dcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sunday, August 27, 2006

To the ICANN Board of Directors:

As a domain name registrant and web site developer, I am opposed to 
the new .BIZ Registry Agreement as currently proposed.
First, I am opposed to the elimination of pricing controls.  I 
support free markets, but when a single registry has control over a 
specific gTLD, such as .BIZ, there is no free market.  Competition 
normally helps to regulate pricing, but here there is no competition. 
If you want a .BIZ domain, or want to keep one you already have, you 
have no other choice but Neulevel.biz.
There is no competition in the .BIZ name space, except by the choice 
of registrar.  But, when the .BIZ registry operator determines the 
base price of a domain on variable-by-domain pricing, your choices 
may be limited to a registrar charging $5,008.95 or a registrar 
charging $5,034.99, which is really little choice at all.
Businesses need to be able to be able to anticipate, as accurately as 
possible, and budget for their expenses in a quarter or year.  Price 
increases based on inflation, cost of living, etc. can, to some 
degree, be predicted and planned for.  However, if domain name 
renewals jump from $10 per year to $10,000 per year, that's an 
extraordinary price increase that can not easily be predicted.  Even 
the price of oil does not fluctuate to those degrees.
What incentive is there for a small business to build a web site, to 
develop compelling content, to create new innovative applications and 
so on, when they can lose their domain name when the registry decides 
that their domain name is more valuable than another?  The registry 
operators should not be in the business of valuating domain names! 
The registry operators do not promote the domain name, they do not 
add value to the domain name, they provide the same service for a 
standard domain name as they do for a "premium" domain name.  Why 
should they be entitled to any portion of the value that the domain 
name registrant created either by developing useful content or by 
simply choosing a valuable domain name that no one else thought to 
register?
If a registry operator wants to be in the domain name speculation 
business, then they should first drop out of the registry operation 
business.
Second, I am opposed to the traffic data provision.  The traffic data 
provision allows the registry operator to collect "traffic data 
regarding domain names or non-existent domain names for purposes such 
as, without limitation, ... promoting the sale of domain names...." 
This would seem to allow registry operators to calculate renewal 
rates based on traffic.  What other use would this data have for them?
If traffic data were to be used for such purposes, what would 
preclude a business from artificially driving up a competitor's web 
site traffic to raise their renewal rates?  They could send poor 
quality traffic.  And, even if the traffic does convert, a big 
business could afford a temporary drop in sales if it meant the 
possibility of driving a small competitor out of business.
Third, I am opposed to presumptive renewal.  Renewal needs to be 
explicit.  It is also troubling that, as mentioned in GoDaddy.com's 
comments, the new agreements omit provisions that the registry be 
able to provide a "substantial service to the Internet community" and 
that they are "qualified to operate the Registry TLD during the 
renewal term."  Under the current .COM registry agreement (section 
25.B (b) and (c)), the registry operator is considered in breach of 
the agreement if they fail to meet those qualifications.  The 
proposed .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG agreements as currently written do not 
contain those provisions.  This would seem to indicate that, even if 
the registry operator failed to meet those conditions, their 
agreement would still be renewed for another term.
The aforementioned provisions fail to live up to ICANN's mission 
statement to "promoting competition" and "to achieving broad 
representation of global Internet communities."  These provisions do 
not promote competition, but instead allow for big businesses to 
dominate the .BIZ domain space, as small businesses may find they can 
no longer afford to renew their "premium" domain names.  These 
provisions fail to achieve "broad representation of global Internet 
communities."  Small businesses in poorer countries or in countries 
with devalued currency will also no longer afford to renew their 
"premium" domain names.
The proposed .BIZ registry agreement as currently written should not 
be approved.
Regards,

Dan C. Rinnert