(WEB HOST INDUSTRY REVIEW) — Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (www.icann.org) CEO Rod Beckstrom responded to concerns raised by members of the US House Judiciary Committee about the controversial new gTLDs via a detailed letter.
Earlier this month, Republicans Lamar Smith and Howard Coble wrote a letter to Beckstrom asking him to clarify the plans for the new TLDs and the expiration of ICANN’s Joint Project Agreement.
In the letter, the Congressmen wrote they were concerned that the expansion of the new TLDs could lead to “serious negative consequences” for US businesses and consumers.
They also raised the point that the absence of price caps for the new TLDs could potentially result in businesses having to pay premium prices for domain registrations and renewals.
Beckstrom, who was appointed in June, addressed these points in his letter, defending the plan for new TLDs by arguing that “competition” in the domain market would be negatively affected if the rollout of the new domains is delayed.
He writes, “In the end, calling for a delay in the entry of new gTLDs only serves to perpetuate existing market conditions: concentration within some existing registries, with most short generic strings unavailable, and those that trade on the value of the current marketplace, holding portfolios based upon the value of current .com names.”
The letter also addresses the Joint Project Agreement, which comes to an end on September 30th. Many have speculated that ICANN and the US government will extend the agreement without setting a definite expiration date.
With the planned gTLDs, ICANN stands to make a signficant amount of money from charging operators of the new gTLD registries fees upwards of six-figures, prompting a huge backlash from certain groups and individuals.
One group, the Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse, wrote a letter calling for a complete government audit of ICANN. CADNA, which represents business that own trademarks, argued that ICANN lacks transparency and is more interested in turning a profit than cooperating with the Internet community for the overall benefit of all.
The group also said the plan for the new gTLD rollout was “poorly conceived” and that it expands the size of the Internet exponentially without first performing a sound cost/benefit and security and risk analysis to determine both desirability among and risk to Internet users.”
No related posts.
