People and businesses in the U.S. that paid to renew a .com domain since September 4, 2022 may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Verisign and ICANN used the .com Registry Agreement to keep .com prices above competitive levels. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Verisign and ICANN have not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
A proposed antitrust class action filed September 4, 2026 accuses Verisign, Inc., the company that runs the .com registry, and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the California nonprofit that oversees it, of keeping the price of .com domain names above what a competitive market would charge. The case is Kessler v. Verisign, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-09960, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and it is assigned to Judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr. Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP filed it.The case is at the complaint stage. The court docket shows summonses issued and a waiver of service, and neither Verisign nor ICANN had filed a response to the complaint as of October 19, 2026. OpenClassActions.com found no public statement from either about the suit.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What Does the Lawsuit Allege?
Every .com registration and renewal runs through a single database, the .com registry, which Verisign operates under a contract with ICANN. According to the complaint, Verisign charges registrars such as GoDaddy and Namecheap an annual wholesale fee for each .com registration and renewal, currently $10.26, and registrars pass that fee through to the people and businesses that own the domains.The complaint alleges that the .com Registry Agreement removed the protections that once kept that price in check. It says Verisign’s first agreement, in 2001, capped the wholesale price at $6.00 and allowed the contract to be put out for competitive bidding, but that later versions gave Verisign a presumptive right to renew and let it raise prices. A 2020 amendment, the complaint says, allowed increases of up to 7% in four of every six years, and ICANN approved it despite more than 9,000 public comments, nearly all opposed. The complaint also alleges that Verisign agreed around that time to pay ICANN an additional $20 million.
According to the complaint, the wholesale price has risen from $7.85 in 2021 to $10.26, an increase of more than 30%, and ICANN renewed the agreement in November 2024 through 2030 without competitive bidding, allowing up to four more 7% increases. The complaint says Verisign has announced the next one, to $10.97 per domain effective November 1, 2026, and projects about $13.44 by 2030 if every permitted increase is taken. It estimates Verisign’s cost at about $3.09 per domain and says comparable registries around the world charge about $2 to $8, with most between $5 and $6.
Who Is Covered?
The complaint proposes two classes. The nationwide class covers all persons or entities in the U.S. that paid for the renewal of one or more .com domain registrations from September 4, 2022 to the present. A California class covers those who paid for a .com renewal while living in California during the same period.Both classes exclude Verisign and ICANN and their officers, directors, employees and affiliates; all ICANN-accredited domain name registrars; federal, state and local government entities; and the judges and jurors assigned to the case. Domains registered for the first time, rather than renewed, are not part of the class definitions. The classes are proposed only, and the court can narrow or reject them.
What Laws Does It Rely On?
The complaint brings eight claims. For the nationwide class, it alleges that the .com Registry Agreement is an unreasonable restraint of trade under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, that Verisign monopolized the .com registry services market under Section 2, and that Verisign and ICANN conspired to monopolize it. For the California class, it brings claims under the Cartwright Act, California’s Unfair Competition Law and related state laws, along with unjust enrichment.The nationwide class seeks an injunction barring Verisign and ICANN from enforcing the contract provisions that prevent ICANN from setting or limiting the wholesale price of .com registry services. The California class seeks damages, trebled where the law allows, along with restitution and disgorgement. The complaint says the plaintiff seeks damages of more than $5 million.
What Happens Next?
Verisign and ICANN are expected to respond to the complaint, which in antitrust cases is often a motion to dismiss. The court would then decide whether the claims can proceed. If they do, the case would move to discovery and, later, a motion to certify the proposed classes. Nothing can be claimed unless the case ends in a settlement or judgment that creates a payment process, and OpenClassActions.com will update this page as the case develops.Questions
Does the Verisign lawsuit cover people who bought a .com domain through GoDaddy or Namecheap?
The proposed classes are defined by who paid for a .com renewal, not by which registrar sold it. The complaint says every .com registration and renewal runs through the Verisign registry and that registrars pass the wholesale fee through to customers. Registrars accredited by ICANN are themselves excluded from the classes. No class has been certified.
Why does the lawsuit seek money only for Californians?
The federal antitrust claims are brought for a nationwide class that seeks an injunction, which would change the .com contract terms going forward. Money damages are sought for a California class under California antitrust, unfair competition, unjust enrichment and consumer protection laws. The complaint does not explain the choice; the classes can change as the case proceeds.
Is ICANN accused of the same thing as Verisign?
Not entirely. Verisign alone is accused of monopolizing the .com registry services market. ICANN is named with Verisign on the claims that the .com Registry Agreement unreasonably restrains trade and that the two conspired to monopolize the market, and the complaint alleges ICANN shares in the monopoly profits. These are allegations; neither has filed a response in court.
What would change for domain owners if the plaintiff wins?
The complaint asks the court to bar Verisign and ICANN from enforcing the contract provisions that prevent ICANN from setting or limiting the wholesale price of .com registry services, and asks for damages, trebled where state law allows, for the California class. Any change would depend on the court’s rulings or a settlement.
Sources
- Class Action Complaint, Kessler v. Verisign, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-09960 (C.D. Cal. filed Sept. 4, 2026) — complaint PDF
- Court docket — CourtListener
- ICANN — .com Registry Agreement
- PYMNTS — Verisign, ICANN Face Antitrust Lawsuit Over .com Domain Pricing
