I can only assume somebody was asleep on the job when this scheme was approved, because the outcome is in direct contradiction to ICANN’s mission statement:

> Its enduring mission is to ensure the stable, secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems.

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-icann

Arbitrary termination of service is not stability.

Enabling name hijacking is not security.

The answer cannot be a rival name scheme based on decentralization or crypto or whatever. Those are never going to help normal non-wizard users. The answer has to be to make the regulators do their job.