They may NOT have done it this time on "Tasted" / "Reserved" names ... But they sure as hell did it on EVERY unregistered .com/.net in 2003 ..... They wildcarded all unregistered names via their SiteSearch or whatever it was called - For those who don't remember. And the general fact they were trying to sell these domains to ANYONE who stumbled across the domain/page tells "Me" they were attempting to monetize the pages "IMO".
__________________ *****************************************
**** This area being returned back to Nature ****
*****************************************
Like many others on this forum, I also seem to have used Netsol for searches and another registrar for actual purchases. The reason I liked the Netsol search feature is that it allowed you to do a bulk search, instead of one name at a time.
If Godaddy (as an example) could implement the same type of bulk search, then Netsol's home page would grow cobwebs over it as far as I'm concerned, as I would never choose to go there again.
Try my bulk checker below which provides the ability to add a prefix and/or suffix on the fly and a search link for researching the name. You only need to load your list of domains once, then your list will be check 30 items per page reload.
I used their Whois many times when DomainTools' Whois was down, so it does happen for me where I check there and register elsewhere.
They say, "there is no such thing as bad press", but I wonder in this case if this will hurt them, or just get them branded more. I sure hope its the former.
NetSol calls this feature "customer protection" The domain name below gives the correct description for their actions, which also happens to be owned by NetSol.
we-steal-your-domain-ideas-and-sell-them-to-the-highest-bidder.com
Last edited by Stargazer : 01-12-2008 at 07:59 PM.
Let's see...Network Solutions let users register domain names for free without
any agreements (last I checked)...then charged $100...then lowered to $70...
then kept generating complaints of record changes via fax, redirecting domain
names to parking pages without their consent, allegedly stole domain names,
let hijacked domain names transfer to other registrars...got sued for sex.com
being given to Cohen without Kremen's consent...was acquired by VeriSign...
which sent unsolicited mailings that later got the FTC's attention...then later
launched SiteFinder...then took it thing down after ICANN sued......settled the
sex.com suit with Cohen...then Network Solutions made a limited free transfer
special which no other registrar did...was sold to Private Pivotal (which later
renamed themselves Nafaji Companies)...then Network Solutions renewed a
couple of Louisiana-based clients' domain names (at no cost to them) due to
Hurricane Katrina (bet some of you didn't know or forgot that)...their VP for
Policy heads the registrar constituency at ICANN...who presented the domain
tasting issue with Go Daddy exectuive Tim Ruiz at an ICANN meeting...stated
recently said why they're doing their current practice, which has turned off a
lot of people...and their CEO Chimp...err, Champ said they'll gladly stop this if
ICANN provides a solution to the domain front running and tasting problems.
I'm forgetting a thing or so, but that ought to show I know more than some of
you folks think I don't, right? Do I really need 10 years to know all that info I
got in my 4+ years of my previous registrar life?
LMK freely if I missed anything to add to my staple of knowledge and history.
And it had better be verifiable.
I'm fully aware many of you hate Network Solutions for whatever reason, and
it's fine. But many of you don't seem to recognize even a remote possibility of
their also being capable of doing something substantial, albeit they are not at
all immune to doing things others consider unethical.
If you folks believe they're doing something illegal, then you know who to tell
about it. But be ready to back it up, or you risk your own reputation.
I guess I'm the only one then. And since I did, I wonder how many other folks
might when people give their own interpretation, which might or might not be
in agreement with NetSol's and can potentially create inaccurate perceptions.
Oh well, I read an article that perception has been more widely accepted than
truth. Unfortunately even that can create unnecessary problems.
BTW, Moniker's site also lets you do bulk search. It's even more than Netsol's.
If you really can't trust any other registrar's, then consider finding or creating
a solution. Opportunities are abound.
Awareness about them will grow, that's for sure. Time will tell whether all of it
will be mostly good or bad.
However, my cracked crystal ball tells me they're not going away just because
of this.
Edit: I was recently made aware that one can now contact Network Solutions
and ask that they delete the domain name in question from their reservation
thingie, but to give it 24 hours average.
You don't need 10 years, but your previous comment made it seem like you were not paying attention and just jumped into the conversation with little knowledge of the subject.
With everything you just listed I can't understand how you would even begin hold them high an any regard.
You even mentioned a couple things they did I had totally forgotten about - I commend you on having listed those to show how rotten they are.
Yeah, they might be able to do something substantial, but if they are trying they sure are not showing it, and they are going about it wrong.
Illegal? I don't think anyone said they are doing guaranteed illegal, right now, but I would bet if it went to court it would be ruled that way, b/c of the TM issues involved. This is similar to the Geico/Google lawsuit. That's still in court, right? So, no point of reference there yet.
What I can tell you is that the judge ruled the $30 surcharge on domains was Illegal and forced them to drop it.
Here's one story to add: In 1995 they would not let us register religious/church domains without a document from the U.S. Gov't saying we were a religious entity. I forget the doc. name now. But, anyway, we had our lawyer threaten them and we then got our holy domains.
Here's Another : We had domains that were given "Domain Codes" for to reserve them past the "date due" deadlines, and when we went to pay for them after the date due, they had already auctioned them off. These are six figure domains - easy. Once again, here we were, we had to tape the conversations, and threaten lawsuits. They then had to go back to the winning bidders, convince them they made a big error, give them their money back, and return our domains to us. The ONLY reason we got those domains back was b/c they knew we had the money to sue. They knew this b/c of the amount of domains we had and how long we had those domains with them at $35 a year. That was a lot of mula we were giving them, so they knew we were well financed.
I can't understand why you are defending them? Why do you care that they are held in high regard?
Lets say you go to a resturant and order a hamburger and frys.
Your hamburger comes, the waitress drops it in front of you and walks away.
Then you look at the sandwich and the burger is hanging half off the buns, with the tomato and pickle not all the way inside and half on the plate, the frys with the order is layed next to the order of coleslaw on the small plate getting a little soggy.
Did the resturant cheat you? Not really, its the presentation that is sloppy. You can't really tell the owner they did not deliver. What can you do?.
You never go back because to you its all about giving you the best service and product they can. When a company does give great service you feel justified to return and to tell friends. When they throw product or service in your face, they are showing you they care nothing about you as a customer.
Bottom line, customers mean jack to this rip off place. If we don't tell others to boycott them, they will continue to give registrarrs a bad name.
One other thing I'll say is NetSol screwed up the presentation of this practice,
as goodkarmco said. But they did make some changes, and no less than their
own CEO said they'll end it if ICANN stops this.
In the meantime, just simply don't use their search service unless you're ready
to register the domain name on the spot with them. Then again, that applies
to just about any registrar or search service you're using.
Oh, and FYI: I moved my one remaining domain name away from NetSol since
I know there are far better and more affordable choices.
Up until recently, the domain we-fund-terrorism.com was registered by Network Solutions... The page said - "This website is currently under development and will be coming soon"
I'm hoping this incident will only bring more light to the "Tasting" problem myself.
The playing field for Average "Registrants" and Domainers has become very unlevel over the past few years ... and with more corporate types and people with Deep pockets jumping on board - It will only get worse. At the same time - It has made average sales prices increase nicely.
__________________ *****************************************
**** This area being returned back to Nature ****
*****************************************
Its my opinion the presentation is done in a shyster way. Its not illegal to tie up a domain. What is not right is they have no disclaimer.
To be a good registrarr and a good partner to domainers they should have had this disclaimer or something similar to this;
Note, when you do a "look up", or a "who is" thru our search your domain will be placed in a "hold" pattern. That "hold" will tie up the domain for four days. Besides yourself, any person who so wishes will be able to register the domain during that four day "hold period". The hold on the domain incurs a fee to you. We lock it down and we have a charge of $30.00 to register it during that lock down time of four days.
__________________ GOODKARMACO, "Tenisonline"
Last edited by goodkarmaco : 01-15-2008 at 02:39 PM.
Reason: misspell
Agreed. Not that many people might care, but at least ICANN will be reminded
yet again how much a lot of interested parties and vested interests want this
thing resolved ASAP.
Initially they didn't. They've made various changes since then, including that.
I noticed, though, it's rotating. Sometimes you'll see their notice about that in
their front page, sometimes you won't.
Moreover, I noticed they don't seem to be "reserving" any domain name that's
been queried on their availability search. The one I finally "got" yesterday isn't
showing any website whatsoever.
I confirm NetSol does it. Just checked the domain with them it was free in .com. I tried to register it with a different registrar and it was shown as registered. Then I used a simple whois and it shows that it was reserved by NetSol right after my checking. Never use NetSol to check availability of .com
I tried that too. But, there was something there saying "I" was the 'Reserved For" party and it was available to me only for the 4 day period.
I ran a few by GD in the same period. One was available, but I hemmed and hawed. Each day I rechecked, it was still there. I bought it on about the fifth day.
Like 'goodkarmaco' said, It's about the sevice presentation.
What the hell is their pr. for damage control?. NOTHING!
That is almost as bad as the lock up of names. Basically they are doing nothing about it, hoping the outrage will die down. Well that is poor management in my opinion.
For having that kind of response, I hope their profits fall straight to hell.
The domain industry will not support companies that abuse domainers.
