ICANN CEO Responds to Concerns About New gTLDs
Earlier this month, Republicans Lamar Smith and Howard Coble Beckstrom wrote a letter asking him to clarify plans for new TLDs and the ending of the whole project ICANN agreement.
In the letter, the congressmen wrote that they were concerned that the expansion of new TLDs could cause “serious negative consequences” for U.S. businesses and consumers.
He also raised the question of the absence of price caps for new TLDs could lead to companies having to pay higher prices for domain registrations and renewals.
Beckstrom, who was appointed in June, addressed these points in your letter, defending the plan for new TLDs with the argument that “competition” in the domain market would be negatively affected if the launch is delayed of new domains.
He writes, “Basically, asking for a delay in the entry of new gTLDs only serves to perpetuate the prevailing market conditions: the concentration on some existing records, with shorter chains available generic and the trade in value the current market, holding portfolios based on the value of current. com names.
The letter also addresses the Joint Project Agreement, which ends Sept. 30. Many have speculated that ICANN and the U.S. government extend the agreement without setting a definite expiration date.
With the planned gTLDs, ICANN is to make a significant impact of a sum of money from cargo operators gTLDs rates new records over six figures, prompting a backlash from certain groups and individuals.
One group, the Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse, wrote a letter requesting a full audit of the government of ICANN. CDNA, which represents companies that own brands, said that ICANN lacks transparency and is more interested in obtaining a gain from cooperating with the community for the general benefit of all.
The group also said the plan for the deployment of new gTLDs was “misconceived” and that expands the size of the Internet exponentially without first performing sound cost / benefit and safety and risk analysis to determine convenience between them and the threat to Internet users. “