Link to the public comments page for context:
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/org-renewal-2019-03-18-en

Staff report:
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/report-comments-org-renewal-03jun19-en.pdf

I'm deeply concerned by this action and I see it being discussed on the
ALAC global ML (which I was unfortunately not subscribed to until I went
looking during the drafting of this email).

Reading the staff report, and some of the comments on the PDP, it's
pretty clear that there was very large "against" sentiment regards to
price caps on .org. The report also failed to consider the fact that
because .org is a legacy domain and the cost of migrating can be
exceedingly high that anyone with said domains can essentially be said
to be locked in. .org also historically has been the home of
not-for-profits and similar organizations which makes this even more
glaring.

While I can understand ICANN orgs desire to standardize the registrar
agreements, I'm not certain how this action falls in line with the
bylaws. To quote: "Removing the price cap provisions in the .org
Registry Agreement is consistent with the Core Values of ICANN org as
enumerated in the Bylaws approved by the ICANN community. These values
guide ICANN org to introduce and promote competition in the registration
of domain names and, where feasible and appropriate, depend upon market
mechanisms to promote and sustain a competitive environment in the DNS
market."

.org is a single TLD, and people that are using it are not going to be
inclined to move due to the extremely high costs involved in changing an
organizations domain in general let alone to a new TLD.

Beyond the issue of price-caps, there's also the issue bring URS and
PICDIP into .org when these mechanisms were meant for new gTLD and not
.org that dates back to essentially the inception of modern DNS (the EFF
comment sums up these points fairly well:
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-org-renewal-18mar19/2019q2/003200.html)

Michael


On 7/1/19 5:51 PM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> This article is a must-read. While it is hardly a secret that ICANN is
> unaccountable and captured by industry, this decision is shocking even
> by the low standards we hold ICANN to:
> 
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/07/01/org_domain_icann/
> 
> The price caps have been taken off .org domains, meaning that more than
> 10 million largely non-profit organizations will end up paying more for
> their online presence each year ...
> 
> Over 3,300 comments – a huge number given that ICANN's public comment
> periods rarely attract more than 50 – were sent and were overwhelmingly
> against the price caps being removed. One study noted that over 98 per
> cent of comments were explicitly opposed to the change. Just six
> supported lifting the caps, all from industry lobbyists. ...
> 
> The fact that ICANN signed a new contract with such far-reaching
> consequences despite having carried out no economic analysis, despite
> thousands of comments opposing the change, and then did so without an
> explanation, or public discussion, or a Board resolution, is indicative
> of an organization that can, and does, act in its own interests and with
> impunity, despite the fact its oversees a vast public resource and
> claims to be acting in the public interest.