Changes

The dropping of the aforementioned litigation between Verisign and ICANN cleared the way for the renewal of the [[.com]] registry agreement from 2005 through 2012.<ref>[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/25/verisign_icann_deal/ Verisign ICANN deal], TheRegister.co.uk. Puhed 25 October 2005.</ref> The agreement and its appendices can be viewed via the ICANN site [http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/com here].

The dropping of the aforementioned litigation between Verisign and ICANN cleared the way for the renewal of the [[.com]] registry agreement from 2005 through 2012.<ref>[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/25/verisign_icann_deal/ Verisign ICANN deal], TheRegister.co.uk. Puhed 25 October 2005.</ref> The agreement and its appendices can be viewed via the ICANN site [http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/com here].

In March 2012, [[ICANN]] posted a proposal for Verisign's proposed renewal of the 2006 .com registry agreement between the two parties.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27mar12-en.htm .com Registry Agreement Renewal], ICANN.org.</ref> Three months later, in June 2012, the [[ICANN Board]] went against community suggestions to approve Verisign's .com registry agreement for an additional seven years after its expiration on November 30th, 2012. Verisign will also be allowed to increase its registry fee by 7% in four out of the next seven years.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/9610-icann-gives-verisigns-com-contract-the-nod ICANN gives Verisign’s .com contract the nod], DomainIncite.com. Published 25 June 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.</ref> The new policy will result in Verisign paying ICANN a $0.25 fee for every .com registration, renewal, or transfer, instead of the lump sums it paid previously,<ref>[http://domainincite.com/9845-icann-to-get-8-million-more-from-new-com-deal ICANN to get $8 million more from new .com deal], DomainIncite.com. Published 27 July 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.</ref> potentially netting ICANN an additional $8 million in revenue annually.<ref name="verisign2">[http://domainincite.com/10865-breaking-us-probing-verisign-price-hikes-com-contract-extended US probing Verisign price hikes, .com contract may be extended], DomainIncite.com. Published 25 October 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.</ref> The original board resolutions can be viewed [http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-23jun12-en.htm#2 here].

In March 2012, [[ICANN]] posted a proposal for Verisign's proposed renewal of the 2006 .com registry agreement between the two parties.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27mar12-en.htm .com Registry Agreement Renewal], ICANN.org.</ref> Three months later, in June 2012, the [[ICANN Board]] went against community suggestions to approve Verisign's .com registry agreement for an additional seven years after its expiration on November 30th, 2012. According to the ICANN decision, Verisign would've also been allowed to increase its registry fee by 7% in four out of the next seven years,<ref>[http://domainincite.com/9610-icann-gives-verisigns-com-contract-the-nod ICANN gives Verisign’s .com contract the nod], DomainIncite.com. Published 25 June 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.</ref> but this decision was changed by the [[DOC|Department of Commerce]]. Nonetheless, the new policy will result in Verisign paying ICANN a $0.25 fee for every .com registration, renewal, or transfer, instead of the lump sums it paid previously,<ref>[http://domainincite.com/9845-icann-to-get-8-million-more-from-new-com-deal ICANN to get $8 million more from new .com deal], DomainIncite.com. Published 27 July 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.</ref> potentially netting ICANN an additional $8 million in revenue annually.<ref name="verisign2">[http://domainincite.com/10865-breaking-us-probing-verisign-price-hikes-com-contract-extended US probing Verisign price hikes, .com contract may be extended], DomainIncite.com. Published 25 October 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2012.</ref> The original board resolutions can be viewed [http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-23jun12-en.htm#2 here].

In August 2012, three of [[ICANN]]'s Constituencies ([[ALAC]], [[GNSO]] [[Business Constituency]], [[GNSO]] [[Intellectual Property Constituency]]) sent a letter to ICANN complaining that the organization held its renewal talks with Verisign behind closed doors and the result is that there are no [[Whois|Thick Whois]] requirements for the .com TLD.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2012/08/21/constituencies-blast-icanns-closed-door-verisign-com-contract-renewal/ Constituencies Blast ICANNs Closed Door Verisign Com Contract Renewal, DomainNameWire.com]</ref> The decision could not move forward without approval from the [[DOC|Department of Commerce]],<ref name="verisign2"></ref> which Verisign received on November 29th, 2012.<ref name="verisign3">[https://investor.verisign.com/releaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=724216 Verisign Announces US Department of Commerce Approval of Newly Revised .com Registry Agreement], Verisign.com. Published 30 November 2012.</ref>

In August 2012, three of [[ICANN]]'s Constituencies ([[ALAC]], [[GNSO]] [[Business Constituency]], [[GNSO]] [[Intellectual Property Constituency]]) sent a letter to ICANN complaining that the organization held its renewal talks with Verisign behind closed doors and the result is that there are no [[Whois|Thick Whois]] requirements for the .com TLD.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2012/08/21/constituencies-blast-icanns-closed-door-verisign-com-contract-renewal/ Constituencies Blast ICANNs Closed Door Verisign Com Contract Renewal, DomainNameWire.com]</ref> The decision could not move forward without approval from the [[DOC|Department of Commerce]],<ref name="verisign2"></ref> which Verisign received on November 29th, 2012.<ref name="verisign3">[https://investor.verisign.com/releaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=724216 Verisign Announces US Department of Commerce Approval of Newly Revised .com Registry Agreement], Verisign.com. Published 30 November 2012.</ref>