6 ms·

Yikes. F This. "ICANN made this deal much more valuable by removing all price controls on .org." Just thinking of all the Non Profits who have .Org and are go

• turc1656 7y ago
  Doubt it. Looks like a done deal. I think either the government or a collective of citizens would have to sue on antitrust grounds, which seems reasonable considering they control the entire .org TLD. But other than that, don't see much of a way. And considering it was controlled entirely by a single entity before, nothing has really changed except the structure of the entity (profit vs non-profit). Technically speaking, I don't think there is a requirement to prove consumer harm from antitrust activity, but I could be wrong. Which would, in theory, make such a case easier to win. Someone who knows a lot more than me on this once told me that requirement was left out of the antitrust laws because it was difficult to prove and there doesn't actually need to be harm to the consumer for their to be harm in general (meaning at least to other competitors). For example, a company can subsidize losses in one line of business with profits from another and keep prices reasonable/competitive in both areas while simultaneously stifling competition in the line of business that's losing money. Consumers still receive a good price but the harm is to the competition, which will cause company bankruptcies down the line and have longer term consequences. It also creates a barrier to entry for any prospective competitors. I think this was the real-world scenario that was used to leave out a requirement of proof of consumer harm. In fact, I also believe they don't even have to technically succeed they just need to merely attempt to monopolize something to be guilty of a felony. But again, since it's just changing hands from one entity to another, that might not fly.
  • SimbaOnSteroids 7y ago
    Imagine if they raise prices exponentially for organizations they don't like, imagine if like the aclu or eef can't renew their .org because those organizations run counter to their interests.
    • turc1656 7y ago
      That's an apocalyptic scenario and not one likely to survive legal challenge. But if something like that were to happen, then I'd say that there is still a workaround. I forget the name of the browser extension but there is definitely something that exists that circumvents domain blocking by storing the domain to IP list. I believe this is/was used mostly in the UK to get around their governmental laws blocking certain sites so if you had a link to www.blockedsite.com/article it would take www.blockedsite.com and replace with the known IP address and route you there directly instead.
      • aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA 7y ago
        > not one likely to survive legal challenge Can you elaborate?
        • turc1656 7y ago
          I mean if they really did that there would likely be numerous paths to successfully sue the private equity company now controlling the .org TLD. Basic consumer protection laws require, for example, that buyers of like kind be charged the same price. I think that law applies to physical goods and commodities, but there is an argument to be made that domain registration is not as much of a service as it is a commodity loaning program. Another avenue could potentially be predatory pricing and price gouging laws. IANAL but I'm sure there are many, many things they could cite in a civil suit to stop such blatant ripoff schemes. In fact, I think if they did gouge them so obviously and in such a targeted fashion, it would probably be a great case for getting them torn apart under antitrust law since there is literally nowhere else you can register a .org TLD.
          • my123 7y ago
            They could maybe add a mandatory arbitration agreement for future domain renewals? And then do this.
    • Smoosh 7y ago
      One could only hope that ICANN is one of the organisations so targeted.
• falcolas 7y ago
  I don't think this will be the non-profits who will see the biggest impact for this. Any move against them will result in pure ill will towards the new owners. Instead, it will be the Amazons and Googles. The ones who are big enough, with big enough wallets to want to prevent typo squatting. Of course, with Google owning a number of TLDs, perhaps it's not that inequitable... /s
• einpoklum 7y ago
  Yes, there is. Legislation on the national level, or an international treaty + ratification. And yes, that would trample on the "sanctity" of private property somewhat.
  • icebraining 7y ago
    TLDs aren't private property, they're a concession by ICANN.