Submissions for this Proceeding

Submission Summary:

I think it is a terrible idea to let governments of the world transfer or abort an international domain name like .NET

Submission Summary:

This proposed agreement would allow any government in the world to cancel, redirect or transfer to their control applicable domain names. This is an outrageous and dangerous proposal that must be stopped. This control should go through a due legal process and not controlled by ICANN or Verisign.

Submission Summary:

ICANN should be destroyed.

Submission Summary:

I am against the proposal of allowing the government to seize any domain with .net TLD, especially when Verisign has "unlimited and sole discretion" over it.

Submission Summary:

I am against this "REDLINE" proposal. PLZ STOP this amendment . #FREEDOMOFINTERNET

Submission Summary:

Section 2.7 ii clause 4 (page 148) seems unworkable without some sort of arbitration agreement or vetting process.

For example, what process is followed when the government of the Russian Federation demands that a domain owned by a Ukrainian national be transferred into their control? Are you really going to blindly follow all requests issued by governments?

Submission Summary:

I have read news articles indicating that you intend to "allow any government in the world to cancel, redirect, or transfer to their control applicable domain names."

This is absolutely unacceptable. This proposal is a threat to free speech, due process, the rule of law, human rights, and any number of other rights that must be preserved and to which the Internet is uniquely positioned to either protect or destroy.

I...

Submission Summary:

I am writing to express my deep concern over the recent agreement with Verisign regarding the .net domain registry. In particular, I am troubled by the provision that allows governments to seize .net domains in certain circumstances.

Submission Summary:

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the proposed renewal of the registry agreement for .NET by ICANN and Verisign. The proposal contains a dangerous provision that could allow any government in the world to seize domain names, without due process or any legal protections for the registrants. This is a significant threat to the internet and free speech, and it must be stopped.

The proposal allows Verisign to deny, cancel, re...

Submission Summary:

Appendix 8, paragraph 2.7(b)(i) and 2.7(b)(ii) need to be reconsidered - allowing governments so much power in the running or takeover of any domain name is entirely contrary to the principles of domain ownership and the tenets of a free and open internet

Submission Summary:

The Web and, more broadly, the Internet, is not destined to be built in this way, according to a political mentality but, rather, towards a continuity of the free mentality, while governing, of course, certain points.

Submission Summary:

I am worried that "to ensure compliance with applicable law, government rules or regulations, or pursuant to any legal order or subpoena of any government, administrative or governmental authority, or court of competent jurisdiction" will allow any goverment even at the council level to take over a domain that they want to take over.

What is stopping china from getting control of Google or Facebook for instance?

Submission Summary:

The amendments to Section 2.7(b)(ii) and 2.7(b)(ii)(5) should be repealed in their entirety.

The adoption of these amendments will allow various unscrupulous government/law enforcement agencies to confiscate domain names without the necessary legal procedures. This cannot be allowed. The amendments must be rejected outright.

Submission Summary:

Allowing governments to take over a domain is a bad policy, ripe for abuse by dictators.

Submission Summary:

I am against the removal of due process in this proposal.

Submission Summary:

We at Androidacy oppose the changes regarding Verisign and unilateral government control in domain names.

Submission Summary:

The amendment, as it's written, is very problematic. Why would you allow **any government** to seize control of a domain name for **any reason**, especially when that includes bad actors as well who might want to take control of a site?

Apparently similar language was slipped into the .COM agreement 3 years ago, while we were still neck-deep in a pandemic. Bad timing to be seeking input on such a bad change.

Submission Summary:

I do not support seizure of domains without due process in a court that is based in the home country of the domain owner.

Submission Summary:

I generally oppose the proposed changes to Section 2.7 of Appendix 8 that were not mentioned in ICANN's summary of proposed changes. These changes would grant VeriSign unnecessary additional powers to suspend or transfer .net domains globally at the request of local jurisdictions or big business interests.