ICANN eyes more price hikes as it predicts dismal year for industry

The domain industry may not be set to shrink, but it’s not set to grow either, according to predictions in ICANN’s newest draft budget, published this week.

The Org’s bean-counters have also confirmed that the recently announced fee increases for registries, registrars and registrants may become a “repeatable” occurence.

ICANN says its budget for fiscal 2026, which starts next July, sees funding and expenditure both at $142 million, down $3 million on its adopted 2025 budget.

It’s predicting a pretty flat domain industry for FY26, with no growth in transactions from legacy gTLDs (mainly .com) and 1% growth from new gTLDs. Legacy would stay at $83.1 million and new would grow to $12 million.

ICANN reckons it will lose 17 contracted gTLD registries by the end of FY26, going from 1,109 to 1,092. It reckons it will accredit just three new registrars over the same period.

The estimates are all mid-points. ICANN has also given high and low estimates that vary from transactions growing by 9% or shrinking by as much as 14%.

The financial predictions are also probably going to get revised, as they don’t include the impact of ICANN’s planned fee increases, which have not yet been given final approval.

The Org said in October that it plans to raise the per-transaction fee for registrars, which buyers usually added on at the check-out, from $0.18 to $0.20.

The registry transaction fee will go up from $0.25 to $0.258. Fixed fees for registries and registrars will also go up.

The draft budget calls the increases “equitable, contractually efficient, pragmatic, and repeatable”.

“Inflationary increases can continue at ICANN’s discretion as contemplated by the Base gTLD Registry Agreement,” suggesting they could become an annual inflation-linked event.

The budget us currently open for public comment.

Meet the six people battling to join ICANN’s board

Candidates from Verisign, Amazon, GoDaddy, Identity Digital, Tucows, and DotAsia have put themselves forward to become the domain name industry’s next pick for the ICANN board of directors.

The GNSO Contracted Parties House — registrars and registries — are currently holding an election to pick the next occupant of board seat 13, which will be vacated by term-limited incumbent Becky Burr next year.

These elections are usually pretty secretive — not even the names of the nominees are published — but this time around I am able to name all six candidates and five of them have kindly provided DI with their candidate statements, bringing candidates’ views to a public audience for the first time.

The candidates, in alphabetical order, are:

• James Bladel, VP of government and industry affairs at GoDaddy
• Edmon Chung, CEO of DotAsia
• Greg DiBiase, senior corporate counsel at Amazon
• Keith Drazek, VP of policy and government relations at Verisign
• Reg Levy, associate general counsel at Tucows
• Jonathan Robinson, director of Identity Digital subsidiary Internet Computer Bureau

While most of the candidates work for companies that operate as both registries and registrars, each only officially votes in one of the two CPH Stakeholder Groups, as indicated by “RySG” or “RrSG”, below.

Four of the candidates come from the North America region, while Chung is from the Asia-Pacific region and Robinson is European. Burr, who they would replace, is North American.

All of the candidates have been involved with ICANN for well over a decade, some since almost its foundation. Four are former or current chairs of the GNSO Council. One up until a few weeks ago served on the ICANN board for a single term in a different capacity.

Some of the candidates’ statements focus on issues at ICANN they would like to fix, improve, or build on, while others focus more on the candidate’s personal qualities and qualifications.

James Bladel, GoDaddy, RrSG

Bladel is an ICANN veteran with 20 years of experience on various policy-making working groups and committees, including a stint as chair of the GNSO Council. He’s also sat on the boards of the .uk and .me registries.

His candidate statement lists three shortcomings he sees in ICANN’s current trajectory that he believes he could help correct.

He says ICANN “faces a crisis of credibility” due to its failure “to make timely progress on key policy initiatives” and has “fallen into endless discussions and efforts to mitigate unknown risks”.

He gives the Next Round of new gTLDs and Whois policy as examples of where ICANN has moved too slowly to implement policies.

“ICANN must stop telling the world why its role is important and start showing clear examples of multistakeholder successes,” Bladel states, warning that governments will get involved if ICANN can not prove its worth.

He adds that while he does not believe blockchain-based naming systems are viable alternatives to the DNS, ICANN should be paying more attention to how they could be complementary and looking into why there appears to be demand for them.

Bladel provided his statement (pdf).

Edmon Chung, DotAsia, RySG

Chung is a 25-year ICANN vet and has just completed a three-year term on the board, as a Nominating Committee appointee, where he regularly fielded questions related to internationalized domain names, which is one of his specialties.

Chung said he would champion efforts such as Universal Acceptance Day and the new Applicant Support Program, both of which are intended to promote the newer TLDs, particularly those in non-Latin scripts.

As CEO of DotKids, he led the only new gTLD application in the 2012 application round to qualify for the ASP.

“I believe with another term on the board, I can contribute substance to shaping the discussions on [conflicts of interest], board agility and the business of TLDs,” Chung wrote.

Chung provided his statement (pdf).

Greg DiBiase, Amazon, RrSG

Current GNSO Council chair DiBiase claims credit for helping steer the community through its negotiations with the board over new gTLD policy recommendations, which if not exactly fractious have certainly been convoluted, over the last couple years.

He says he would focus on “improving communication” between board and CPH through informal channels with the contracted parties, building on Burr’s work.

He says he would attempt to plug gaps in processes, such as the uncertainty about the board’s power to change its mind on community recommendations it has already adopted.

The board’s attitude to risk is also a concern.

“Many in the ICANN Community view ICANN Org as extremely risk-averse and willing to reject community-made policy recommendations if they increase the probability of ICANN being sued,” DiBiase wrote.

“Whether true or not, I believe ICANN should focus on bigger-picture risks, like harm to credibility… and not just specific risks like lawsuits or IRPs,” he wrote.

DiBiase has headed Amazon Registrar’s legal team for eight years and previously worked in compliance for the Endurance group of registrars (now Newfold Digital).

He provided his statement (pdf).

Keith Drazek, Verisign, RySG

Drazek has been involved with ICANN for over 20 years, according to the bio published by current employer Verisign, the company for which he has been working since 2010. Prior to Verisign, he held a similar policy relations role at Neustar.

He has been GNSO Council chair, a member of the ccNSO Council representing North America, and chair of the RySG, among other roles in important policy working groups.

Drazek has not yet responded to my inquiries and I do not have his candidate statement. I will update this article should I receive it.

Reg Levy, Tucows, RrSG

Levy presents the fact that she is not following the typical path to the board — via, for example, sitting in the GNSO Council chair or on the Nominating Committee — as a strength.

She says she would be “a strong voice for the Community” on the board, which she said has shown a “worrying trend of the Board ignoring the Community and ignoring the role of the GNSO Council”.

Levy is the only candidate to take aim at ICANN’s finances in her statement, with criticisms of how its budget has ballooned beyond the scope of most non-profits over the last couple of decades, of its costly deals with long-incumbent vendors, and of its “shocking” and “disingenuous” executive compensation practices.

Levy says that she would probably be the youngest person on the current board, which could help with “ushering in a generational shift”. As the only female candidate, who would replace a female director, she notes that she’s the only chance of maintaining the current gender balance on the board.

Tucows published Levy’s statement (pdf) on its web site a couple weeks ago.

Jonathan Robinson, Identity Digital, RySG

Robinson’s statement focuses on his extensive industry experience, which dates back to when he founded the UK-based registrar NetBenefit back in 1997, and his long-time participation in the ICANN community.

His only current paid role in the industry is as the director of Internet Computer Bureau, the .io registry and Identity Digital subsidiary.

But Robinson’s key selling point appears to be that he would quit the ICB gig should he be elected, likely freeing him up to be able to engage in board discussions about new gTLD policy and other issues affecting the domain name industry.

ICANN directors are expected to recuse themselves from discussions on issues for which they have conflicts of interest. Burr does not currently recuse herself from such votes because, while she was originally elected while working for Neustar, she no longer has ties to the industry.

Robinson provided his statement (pdf).

*

The candidates have already faced at least one round of interrogation by their voters, including at a closed-door session at ICANN 81 last month.

I’m told the first round of voting takes place this Wednesday, December 18, with a second round likely given the number of candidates. The current timetable published on the GNSO web site appears to be out of date.

The winner of the election will take over from Burr at ICANN’s 2025 Annual General Meeting next October in Muscat.

ICANN lawyers want to keep their clients secret

IP lawyers in the ICANN community have come out swinging against proposed rules that would require them to come clean about who they work for, rules that are supported by registrars and governments.

A proposed policy that would force lawyers to disclose the identities of their clients when they participate in policy-making would violate their clients’ human rights, according to the Intellectual Property Constituency.

The criticisms came in response to an ICANN public comment period on a draft Community Participant Code of Conduct Concerning Statements of Interest, which opened in October and closed this week.

The draft would close a loophole that allows ICANN policy makers to keep their potential conflicts of interest secret when “professional ethical obligations” prevent them from disclosing this information.

“When disclosure cannot be made, the participant must not participate in ICANN processes on that issue,” the draft states.

The changes are keenly supported by the Registrar Stakeholder Group as a whole and by GoDaddy and Tucows in particular. As far as the registrars are concerned, the main problem with the draft is the somewhat vague enforcement mechanisms.

GoDaddy, for example, said in its comments:

We recognize that there may be situations in which a party is unable to disclose their client(s), and in those rare cases, GoDaddy agrees with ICANN’s conclusion that the participant forfeits the ability to participate in associated processes.

It added, echoing the RrSG as a whole, that more clarity is needed on enforcement, where the buck seems to stop with the chair of the working group where the disclosure infraction is alleged to have taken place, with no escalation.

On the opposing side are the IPC, the Business Constituency, and the International Trademark Association, which all filed comments criticizing the proposed changes. The IPC said:

The often-argued response of having attorneys not participate if they fail to uphold their ethical duty to their clients effectively vitiates the human right of representation by counsel and is not for the public benefit. ICANN has agreed to uphold human rights and therefore counsel cannot be compelled to disclose client identity.

Two of the concerns from lawyers is that the policy could require their clients to divulge trade secrets, such as whether they intend to apply for a new gTLD in the forthcoming application round.

Perhaps anticipating the Governmental Advisory Committee’s expected support for the policy changes, which was no secret, the IPC also raises the specter of the policy being broad enough to apply to the governments themselves: should they all be compelled to reveal the names of all the lobbyists who knock on their doors?

This forcing of transparency of national interest would significantly inhibit GAC members from fulfilling their role. Imagine a GAC member from one country filing an SOI saying that their government was being lobbied by numerous parties to gain favor in the New gTLD Rounds?

The GAC’s response to the public comment period was in fact cautiously supportive of the rule changes, saying:

Prima facie, the proposal referring to Statements of Interests seems to be in the right direction, and to fulfil the expectations expressed by the GAC. At the same time, the GAC looks forward to the reactions from ICANN org to the views expressed during the public comment period

Like the registrars, the GAC is looking for more clarity on enforcement mechanisms.

The public comments will by summarized for publication mid-December and the ICANN board could take action on the proposals next year.

Facebook cybersquatter asks ICANN to overturn UDRP ruling

A registrant who lost a slam-dunk cybersquatting complaint to Facebook owner Meta has asked ICANN to overturn the ruling, accusing WIPO of of breaching the UDRP rules by not publishing its decision fast enough.

The registrant apparently registered meta-platforms-inc.com earlier this year out of “frustration”, and in a state of some distress, after her social media accounts were closed by Meta. Meta’s full name is Meta Platforms Inc.

The registrant then asked Meta, when contacted by its lawyers, for financial compensation in exchange for the domain, according to WIPO’s findings (pdf).

It’s pretty much a clear-cut case of cybersquatting under the UDRP, and Meta prevailed. The domain was transferred to its ownership.

But the registrant has now complained to ICANN, using its Request for Reconsideration accountability procedure, saying WIPO broke its rules and behaved “fraudulently”.

The RfR is somewhat confusingly written, but the main thrust appears to be based on a misunderstanding of the UDRP rules, which require panels to submit their rulings to WIPO within 14 days of the complaint being submitted.

The registrant takes this to mean that the decisions also need to be published online within 14 days, which doesn’t appear to be the case. She wants the decision overturned on this basis.

Regardless of the merits, the RfR has zero chance of success. UDRP losers have tried and failed to invoke the Reconsideration policy to have their decisions reversed in the past.

Most notably, in 2022 Indian Covid-19 vaccine maker Zydus Lifesciences got miffed about the Reverse Domain Name Hijacking ruling it was given and filed two RfRs with ICANN.

The first was dismissed because RfR is used to challenge ICANN’s decisions and WIPO is not ICANN. In the second case, the Ombuds made a rare intervention to confirm that ICANN has no responsibility for UDRP rulings.

ICANN confirms two bans on new gTLD gaming

ICANN’s board of directors has just voted to approve two bans on practices in the new gTLD program that could be considered “gaming”.

It’s banned applicants for the same string from privately paying each other to drop out of contention, such as via private auctions, and has banned singular and plural versions of the same string from coexisting.

The plurals ban means that if, for example, one company applies for .podcast and another applies for .podcasts, they will go into the same contention set and only one will ultimately go live.

It also means that you can’t apply for the single/plural equivalent of an already-existing gTLD. So if you were planning to apply for, oh I dunno, .farms for example, you’re out of luck.

The move should mean that lazy applicants won’t be able to rely on piggybacking on the marketing spend of their plural/singular rivals, or on purely defensive registrations. I will also reduce end-user confusion.

The ban on private contention resolution means that contention sets will largely be resolved via an ICANN-run “auction of last resort”, in which ICANN gets all the money.

In the 2012 application round, private resolution was encouraged, and some companies made tens of millions of dollars from their rivals by losing auctions and withdrawing their applications.

Both bans had been encouraged by ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee and received the unanimous support of the board (excluding conflict-related abstentions) at the Org’s AGM in Turkiye this afternoon.

Will Donald Trump be .io’s white knight?

US President-Elect Donald Trump’s incoming administration is reportedly looking into torpedoing a deal between the UK and Mauritius that raises serious questions about the future of the .io ccTLD.

According to The Independent, Trump wants to veto the deal that would see the UK cede sovereignty over most of the Chagos islands, currently known as the British Indian Ocean Territory, and is seeking legal advice from the Pentagon.

The largest of the islands, Diego Garcia, is home to a secretive US-UK military base used to support US actions in the Middle East. Native Chagossians were forcibly removed from the territory to allow its construction in the early 1970s.

The proposed UK-Mauritius treaty would allow the base to continue to exist for at least 99 years, but critics of the deal reportedly worry that Mauritius taking over the rest of BIOT would encourage Chinese espionage.

Since the treaty was announced, questions have been raised about the .io ccTLD, which is assigned to BIOT and commercialized globally by Identity Digital via a UK shell company.

ICANN confirmed in writing today that if the International Standards Organization removes IO from its list of territories, “a five-year time window will commence during which time usage of the domain will need to be phased out”.

But there are other considerations that have received fewer column inches. Head of the IANA function, which looks after the root zone, Kim Davies added:

Country-code top-level domains are operated for the benefit of the country or territory they represent. Managers of these domains must maintain an operational nexus with that country to ensure they have appropriate local accountability mechanisms for how the domain name is operated. Should this jurisdictional change take effect, changes may be required to ensure proper accountability to the new country.

In other words, there’s a scenario in which .io disappears and a scenario in which Identity Digital and Mauritius have to come to some kind of arrangement. Both would cost the registry money, but the latter seems like it would be less costly for registrants.

But if a new Trump administration decides to ignore international law and somehow persuades the UK to withdraw from the deal, the status quo for .io could persist.

The UK-Mauritius treaty has not yet been ratified. It’s expected to be debated by the UK parliament, where the new Labour government certainly has the votes to get it passed, early next year.

Two-horse race for open ICANN board seat

A Brit and a Canadian have been put forward to fill the seat on the ICANN board of directors that unexpectedly became vacant last month.

The ccNSO-appointed seat 12 was left empty with the abrupt resignation of Katrina Sataki in September.

Now, the ccNSO says two candidates will face election — Byron Holland, CEO of Canadian ccTLD registry CIRA, and Nick Wenban-Smith, general counsel of .uk registry Nominet.

The election is not expected to take place until next February, following due diligence and a ccNSO community Q&A with the candidates.

Sataki is European, so a Wenban-Smith win would keep the geographic mix on the board unchanged. A Holland win would tilt the balance towards North America.

Both candidates are men, so the result will not go towards balancing the gender mix. After ICANN 81 next month, there will be one additional woman on the board, but this gain will be reversed when the CEO changes in December.

Chinese say internet not ready for single-letter gTLDs

Several major Chinese tech organizations have urged ICANN not to lift its ban on single-character gTLDs, saying the risk of confusion is too great.

Allowing single-character gTLDs in Han script was the most objected-to part of the draft Applicant Guidebook in ICANN’s just-closed public comment period, with the objections all coming from China.

Han script is used in Chinese, Japanese and Korean languages. A single character can convey the same semantic impact as a whole multi-character word in European languages.

But the commenters warned that a single character can have multiple meanings, increasing the risk of confusion.

Rui Zhong of the Internet Society of China said for example that the Han character “新” can mean “new” but is also the abbreviation for the Chinese province of Xinjiang and the nation of Singapore.

Lang Wang of CNNIC warned: “the similarities in pronunciation, form, and meaning of Han script single-character gTLD could lead to the risks of phishing, homophone attacks, intellectual property disputes, etc”.

It seems the issue may be a bit more complex than visually identical words having multiple definitions in other languages, with multiple commenters saying that single-character words do not reflect the reality of modern Chinese usage.

Unloved INTA slams ICANN over new gTLDs

The new gTLD program is an existential threat to ICANN if it continues to ignore the concerns of IP interests, according to the International Trademark Association.

Trademark owners are becoming disillusioned with the ICANN process and “instead have opted to pursue more balanced outcomes through regulators, legislatures, and courts”, INTA said in comments on draft new gTLD program rules yesterday.

INTA warned that there has been “a decline in interest in the work of ICANN as otherwise engaged members have determined that there is very little return on the thousands of hours of time that they have devoted to ICANN’s continuous improvement”. It said:

The ICANN Board, Org and review team members would do well to consider the consequences of continuing to ignore the input of non-contracted parties especially when it comes to addressing ongoing harms within the domain name system. At a time when governments are vying to assume more policy oversight over the DNS, ICANN is well positioned to double down on the multistakeholder model by giving serious consideration and adjusting proposed policies in a balanced manner.

ICANN’s refusal to take on board the IP lobby’s suggestions when it added new DNS abuse requirements to its registry and registrar contracts earlier this year seems to be at the root of the outburst.

INTA said that it is “opposed to new [gTLD application] rounds” until “substantial reforms are made to ICANN’s approach to domain abuse and contract compliance”.

The comments were by far the angriest filed in response to the ICANN public comment period, just closed, that sought input on several draft sections of the new gTLD program’s Applicant Guidebook.

Pre-rant, INTA substantively said that the AGB needs to give brand owners and potential dot-brand applicants more clarity on when subsequent application rounds will launch.

Currently, ICANN expects the Next Round’s first wave to kick off in the second quarter of 2026, but subsequent application windows are subject to a checklist of triggering events that on the face of it is a little confusing.

Threats of government intervention undermining the legitimacy of the ICANN multistakeholder model are of course far from new. I’ve been writing about them for 20 years or more.

But the latest INTA threat may ring a little hollow given that ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee also filed comments on exactly the same issues, so we know exactly what governments think: they’re totally cool with how the AGB is being drafted, and just seem happy to be involved.

Some Guy wants to take over .com and .net

Some Guy has noticed that domain name prices keep going up and has offered to take over the .com and .net registries from Verisign.

The Some Guy recently filed a formal Request for Reconsideration with ICANN, asking it to overturn its recent decision to renew Verisign’s .com contract and award it to him instead. The RfR reads:

I seek to become a registry operator committed to making .COM domains more affordable and accessible to students, startups, and developers. The decision to renew Verisign’s contract hinders competition, limiting opportunities for more innovative registry operators like Asxit LLC to contribute to the digital ecosystem.

The request is accompanied by a 25-page, ChatGPT-odored analysis of why Asxit LLC would be a better .com registry than Verisign, which concludes:

The introduction of Asxit LLC as a .COM registry operator would bring significant improvements in pricing, innovation, support, and accessibility compared to Verisign’s current management. By focusing on affordable and flexible solutions, Asxit LLC aims to create a more inclusive and competitive environment for all users. This change would enhance the value of the .COM domain and support the growth of a diverse and innovative digital community.

In August, Some Guy with the same last name, who said he is a student at Liberty University in Virginia, said Asxit LLC should take over .net as well.

They’re not the funniest or craziest submissions ICANN has received over the years, but they might be worth a chuckle if you’re clock-watching on a Friday afternoon.

The sad part is of course that ICANN is now duty-bound to commit legal and board resources preparing a response to this request before throwing it out entirely.