[Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20] I oppose the amendment

Jason Leschnik jason at leschnik.me
Tue Feb 11 09:55:41 UTC 2020

I'm opposed to the amendment.

* Verisign in 2010 has demonstrated that it cannot handle security breaches
of scale and covered up wrong doings during that period
* Verisign in this agreement comes out extremely well off with possibly
$1bn to be made
* I cannot see Verisign putting 100% of these $1bn profits into their
efforts to improve the system (unless they can explicitly prove with
financials they will be doing so) so why should domain owners foot this
* If there is a payment from Verisign -> ICANN, I believe companies should
have the chance to bid if the contract is open to such changes, hold a
proper open RFP
* Are there any clauses in this agreement which stipulate non-performance
from verisign and what penalties they will face if propose mechanisms are
not in place?
* If .com continue to rise I'll take my business to one of the other gTLDs

This all doesn't sit well with me, to me it sounds like benefit
shareholders and members of ICANN over those users of the dot coms. Another
example of extraction wealth from users to companies.

It all seems a little _under the table_.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20/attachments/20200211/b379f596/attachment.html>

More information about the Comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20 mailing list