discuss Are expired domain auctions ethically inappropriate?

[keywordrichdomains]

I was wondering whether this expired domain auction is ethically sound? Because, every expired domain is a creative asset of the first person who registered it with a lot of ambition and optimism. Ethically, she/he is the original creator of that name, who actually got the creative right (copyrights?) on that name like any other creative assets in the literary/entertainment industry. Most investors or entrepreneurs leave their domain name without renewing it that when big difficulties in their life! But, others try to take advantage of their creatives in their difficult time, even without donating any of the money from the auction to the original creator! Do you not consider this to be an unethical business practice? In addition, I am confused about the rights of registrants who benefit from such unethical business practices because they do not own expired names legally.

Moreover, in my observation, many investors tend to ignore the original creators' market advertisements or auctions, even if they are affordable and cheap. But the same group of investors will compete to acquire those expired domains at a higher price from auction platforms! I was wondering whether domain investors have a mindset that they wouldn't help their fellow investors, but they are willing to give money to registrants?

I would like to hear your thoughts on that. I appreciate your response in advance.

 

[karmaco]

In addition, I am confused about the rights of registrants who benefit from such unethical business practices because they do not own expired names legally.


First of all who told you the first registrant owns a domain forever ? They don’t unless they pay their renewals.

A domain name is basically on perpetual rent. When a registrant drops it, there is nothing illegal or unethical about buying the domain on the drop or at expired auction.

If you believe what you have posted domaining is not for you. Rights are only extended to people who pay their renewals.

 

[lock]

Unethical businesses or if don't pay their way are terminated. Ethical businesses are welcome to invest in the defunct name.

 

[lovely4ever]

Moreover, in my observation, many investors tend to ignore the original creators' market advertisements or auctions, even if they are affordable and cheap. But the same group of investors will compete to acquire those expired domains at a higher price from auction platforms! I was wondering whether domain investors have a mindset that they wouldn't help their fellow investors, but they are willing to give money to registrants?

Your second abservation always confused me too !!
I didnt understand the mindest of invertors going on war at auction platforms to buy high expensive domains and ignore lots of affordable cheaper domains in the market !!!
It is a traders psychological behaviors i saw it mostly in domains business field only !

If their intent not to help benefiting other felow investors , Then they are really sick minded !!

.

 

[zomainhacks]

There's nothing on earth you can own forever, even our own bodies (unfortunately).

Moreover, if you don't let assets (any asset) switching hands they will end up being underutilized.
On the other end, there's a very strong evidence that assets used in the most efficient way implies more wealth for all.

Is wasting economic resources ethical?

 

[keywordrichdomains]

In addition, I am confused about the rights of registrants who benefit from such unethical business practices because they do not own expired names legally.


First of all who told you the first registrant owns a domain forever ? They don’t unless they pay their renewals.

A domain name is basically on perpetual rent. When a registrant drops it, there is nothing illegal or unethical about buying the domain on the drop or at expired auction.

If you believe what you have posted domaining is not for you. Rights are only extended to people who pay their renewals.

I think you misunderstood my wording here. What I wanted to say here is about the rights of the auction platform that receive the entire amount based on the expired domain name. Are they temporarily getting ownership of the expired domain names?

I have just raised the subject of discussion with which I have long confused with without personally blaming anyone in the industry by keeping all the digital etiquette. But unfortunately, people vote against the point of debate? Wondering why it is?

 

[keywordrichdomains]

There's nothing on earth you can own forever, even our own bodies (unfortunately).

Moreover, if you don't let assets (any asset) switching hands they will end up being underutilized.
On the other end, there's a very strong evidence that assets used in the most efficient way implies more wealth for all.

Is wasting economic resources ethical?

Thank you so much.

The real point here is something else. Please understand this scenario.

A person named Mathew registered MiracleDreamWorld.com domain name for his business in 2000 or for the purpose of selling on the secondary domain market. He created this name after much research and creative thinking. He keeps this domain name alive till 2021. But he was not able to renew it for personal reasons due to the impact of a pandemic. The domain was dropped. As this domain has got a lot of backlinks and SEO scores, understanding the higher demand of the domain, the registrar of the domain put up for public auction. The domain fetched $58888 in the auction and the registrar is pleased to keep the whole amount without giving a single penny to the original creator of the domain, Mathew, even though he has spent a lot of money keeping the domain name for the past 11 years and increasing SEO ranking scores. The important thing here is that the value of the domain is increased solely because it has kept it alive for so many years and spent quite a bit to create the SEO score. In this case, do you think the registrar dealing with ethical business? Or, how does the Registrar have the right to auction it for their personal monetary benefit, since the expired domain is a public good?

Hope, I made that clear by explaining this scenario. Thank you.

Note: The domain name MiracleDreamWorld.com is available to register. If someone registers it and sells it for $50,000, please send me a donation

 

[HotKey]

There is big business in domain purgatory. Depending on desirability, just as with the domains being in our hands during the lease term, the auction houses are an integral part of the life-death-rebirth process of them. They have capabilities to catch these domains and direct them to where we, as future holders, are enabling this process.

The domain are not public goods. I see you point about the amount of work that may have gone into a name thus enriching it's value when it does expire, but I don't see what this has to do with ethics. If an owner doesn't deem a domain worthwhile to renew, so be it. Let the next man have at it.

But the same group of investors will compete to acquire those expired domains at a higher price from auction platforms! I was wondering whether domain investors have a mindset that they wouldn't help their fellow investors, but they are willing to give money to registrants?

Great observation, I think this has to do with the amount of attention an expired domain can receive versus what it had during active role in development or on a 3rd party marketplace.

BTW, investors are registrants, we are all part of the cycle.

 

[AEProgram]

If it drops and someone registers it is it more ethical?

If the person who had it got it himself from an expired auction, is it now ethical because the chain was broken from that first person, unless they also got it at auction?

I believe in capitalism 100%

 

[keywordrichdomains]

If it drops and someone registers it is it more ethical?

If the person who had it got it himself from an expired auction, is it now ethical because the chain was broken from that first person, unless they also got it at auction?

I believe in capitalism 100%

I really appreciate your valuable thought!

There's nothing wrong in believing in capitalism.

Capitalism can only make these types of investment markets possible!

The thing is that if the creative destruction process (innovation) in capitalism occurs frequently, then the welfare reaches all, and all will equally benefit. Otherwise, the end result will be a monopoly and failure of the market.

For example, from my understanding of the earlier discussions and the threads of NP analysis, I would say that the secondary domain market was operating in an oligopolistic market structure until Dan’s intervention. Investors had less voice during the period as they do not have other options. But, after Dan's interventions, the real reform began in the secondary domain industry and even the top brass adjusted their operation to the same level as Dan's market reform policies. The same thing happened with Alter, albeit a short-lived concept!

I have about 7,000 names in my portfolio, but until the date I couldn't have a single inbound sale through Dan's platform, even if 90% of the domains were pointing to their landing page. But, still I like their service because they are the real change factor in the secondary domain industry what we currently enjoy in terms of reformed policies!

Personally, I think the same type of reform is needed in the expired domains market to make this industry more sustainable. What I believe is that a new type of business ethics must be developed in the domain industry in order to protect the interests of investors to make their investment sustainable and productive.

The expired domain auction market is huge to my knowledge, but the overall financial benefits of such a market are currently being appreciated by domain registration companies. It's not an ideal condition for the responsible capitalist mode of production.

In my opinion, if the registration company makes huge profits on expired domain auctions, they should split a percentage with at least the last registrant of that domain name. Or, expired domain auctions should not be permitted at the registrar level. It would lead to a perfect competitive market structure, which is good for everyone. This would also make a capitalist style of profit accumulation more beautiful and sustainable! Keep in mind that such a royalty system exists in other creative markets.

I don't know how to develop a possible formula for such royalty sharing in the industry, but it is possible if we put our thoughts together for a creative destruction process in the current secondary domain industry!

 

[anunt]

What’s unethical is GoDaddy auctioning names that they don’t even own yet.

I just won the godaddy auction for the domain name Money123 . com for $2900.

I paid for the name.

2 days later…today
I get an email from GoDaddy saying
We are issuing you a refund…wtf

That’s all they said…no other explanation.

If the previous registrant renewed the domain, why is GoDaddy selling something they don’t even own yet?

That is unethical bs.

 

[AEProgram]

What’s unethical is GoDaddy auctioning names that they don’t even own yet.

I just won the godaddy auction for the domain name Money123.com for $2900.

I paid for the name.

2 days later…today
I get an email from GoDaddy saying
We are issuing you a refund…wtf

That’s all they said…no other explanation.

If the previous registrant renewed the domain, why is GoDaddy selling something they don’t even own yet?

That is unethical bs.

Sorry, I made them a way bigger offer than your 2900 cheap offer and they gave me the name.

Obviously I am joking, it looks like the name was being transferred as the auction was happening?

This happens on gd, namesilo and other markets.

 

[biggie]

I think you misunderstood my wording here. What I wanted to say here is about the rights of the auction platform that receive the entire amount based on the expired domain name. Are they temporarily getting ownership of the expired domain names?

I have just raised the subject of discussion with which I have long confused with without personally blaming anyone in the industry by keeping all the digital etiquette. But unfortunately, people vote against the point of debate? Wondering why it is?

Hi

basically, from the stages of registered to deleted, the registrar holds the domain.

if, you could take a time machine back to days before api and drop catching, then THAT's when registrars just "let" the domains drop to the available pool.

however..... when smart folks started creating scripts to catch premium drops, then services sprouted up like snapcheck, snapnames, clubdrop, etc to catch these names.

then... the registrars said, hey, why don't we just hold the names and auction them off to the highest bidder, that way it would be "fair" to all.

some of them did just that and others partnered with existing drop catchers to form "alliances".
like how netsol names are caught by namejet and snapnames and "dropcatch.com" tries to snatch from everywhere.

that "auction" idea carried over to the "new extensions", where registrars/registries held back premium names for higher registration fee.

and since there is nobody saying you can't do that or stopping what's going on... then we just have to deal with it or not be part of the game.

ya feel me -


imo...

 

[likemike]

As they say in domaining Stuff Happens!

 

[keywordrichdomains]

Hi

basically, from the stages of registered to deleted, the registrar holds the domain.

if, you could take a time machine back to days before api and drop catching, then THAT's when registrars just "let" the domains drop to the available pool.

however..... when smart folks started creating scripts to catch premium drops, then services sprouted up like snapcheck, snapnames, clubdrop, etc to catch these names.

then... the registrars said, hey, why don't we just hold the names and auction them off to the highest bidder, that way it would be "fair" to all.

some of them did just that and others partnered with existing drop catchers to form "alliances".
like how netsol names are caught by namejet and snapnames and "dropcatch.com" tries to snatch from everywhere.

that "auction" idea carried over to the "new extensions", where registrars/registries held back premium names for higher registration fee.

and since there is nobody saying you can't do that or stopping what's going on... then we just have to deal with it or not be part of the game.

ya feel me -


imo...

Really valuable input. Thank you so much.

I assume that the secondary market in domain names will soon be subject to major regulation and that the existing market structure will be transformed into a new system both in terms of technology and regulatory measures.

 

[karmaco]

Really valuable input. Thank you so much.

I assume that the secondary market in domain names will soon be subject to major regulation and that the existing market structure will be transformed into a new system both in terms of technology and regulatory measures.

Why do you think anything is going to change? GoDaddy in large part owns this rodeo and they aren’t letting anything get in the way of their profit. There is zero reason to change what allready works whether you like it or not.

 

[zomainhacks]

Thank you so much.

The real point here is something else. Please understand this scenario.

A person named Mathew registered MiracleDreamWorld.com domain name for his business in 2000 or for the purpose of selling on the secondary domain market. He created this name after much research and creative thinking. He keeps this domain name alive till 2021. But he was not able to renew it for personal reasons due to the impact of a pandemic. The domain was dropped. As this domain has got a lot of backlinks and SEO scores, understanding the higher demand of the domain, the registrar of the domain put up for public auction. The domain fetched $58888 in the auction and the registrar is pleased to keep the whole amount without giving a single penny to the original creator of the domain, Mathew, even though he has spent a lot of money keeping the domain name for the past 11 years and increasing SEO ranking scores. The important thing here is that the value of the domain is increased solely because it has kept it alive for so many years and spent quite a bit to create the SEO score. In this case, do you think the registrar dealing with ethical business? Or, how does the Registrar have the right to auction it for their personal monetary benefit, since the expired domain is a public good?

Hope, I made that clear by explaining this scenario. Thank you.

Note: The domain name MiracleDreamWorld.com is available to register. If someone registers it and sells it for $50,000, please send me a donation

Well, in this scenario there is a domain that has much value and a man that let it drop (no matter for what reason), the registrar making the auction is the enabler of the change of hands (without the expiry process and the auction nothing would have happened most probably) .

Does the registrar make the auction for egoistic interests? For sure. But it's how the market works, this is what make stuff being produced, asset to flow and people to thirve.

Now the issue might be why not sharing part of the auction profit with the expired domains' customers?
Actually, that's an option that registrars can make (if I'm not wrong there are some that have this feature) and customers are all free to choose where to hold their names.
If registrars are not doing so is becouse probably customers prefer cheaper renewals and/or other services instead of this "fair" auction process scheme.

So I think it's ethical becouse it's the result of free agreements among free individuals and most probably it works in this way becouse so it maximizes market participants profits.

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

Moreover, in my observation, many investors tend to ignore the original creators' market advertisements or auctions, even if they are affordable and cheap. But the same group of investors will compete to acquire those expired domains at a higher price from auction platforms!

Thanks for being frank about this concern. You wonder how many domain investors end up paying as much or even more for a domain from the registrar's expired domain auction, compared to the original owner's price?
Yes, it's a free market, but the registrars have great power and responsibility. Do they provide ample support for the domain owner to sell their domain while they own it? Do they make those sales a priority, or instead put the focus on selling their newly-owned expired domains?
What if there were regulations stating that the registrar is obligated to provide a portion of proceeds from the expired domains to the previous owner? Would we see a higher sale rates for actual, current owners of the domain, before they expire?
Thanks for bringing these concerns to our attention.

 

[keywordrichdomains]

Thanks for being frank about this concern. You wonder how many domain investors end up paying as much or even more for a domain from the registrar's expired domain auction, compared to the original owner's price?
Yes, it's a free market, but the registrars have great power and responsibility. Do they provide ample support for the domain owner to sell their domain while they own it? Do they make those sales a priority, or instead put the focus on selling their newly-owned expired domains?
What if there were regulations stating that the registrar is obligated to provide a portion of proceeds from the expired domains to the previous owner? Would we see a higher sale rates for actual, current owners of the domain, before they expire?
Thanks for bringing these concerns to our attention.

Thank you. The questions you brought up really add value to this discussion! We need these types of questions to make this industry sustainable and beneficial for all investors. The current state of the industry must be changed from a mere speculation to a creative industry. In my observations, many new investors in this sector are emerging anticipating windfall gains. This attitude should be changed. The current industry should undergo structural and conceptual change with the support of the collective intelligence of all players in the industry, from the registry to investors!

 

[lovely4ever]

I was wondering whether this expired domain auction is ethically sound? Because, every expired domain is a creative asset of the first person who registered it with a lot of ambition and optimism. Ethically, she/he is the original creator of that name, who actually got the creative right (copyrights?) on that name like any other creative assets in the literary/entertainment industry. Most investors or entrepreneurs leave their domain name without renewing it that when big difficulties in their life! But, others try to take advantage of their creatives in their difficult time, even without donating any of the money from the auction to the original creator! Do you not consider this to be an unethical business practice? In addition, I am confused about the rights of registrants who benefit from such unethical business practices because they do not own expired names legally.

If you want to surrender or at least convince your self you can look at this expired domains as ( unclaimed luggage ) !!
in many countries the government do auctions for the thousands of unclaimed luggage found in airports/borders and this luggage passed the grace period of waiting the original owner to take it back .

During the auctions the highest bidder will win certain or bulk of bags or boxes or whatever ( assets ).
the revenue generated from this auctions wil be going to the government fund , to be used for public services or projects or donations .

Domain Registrants are acting like governments by doing auctions for expired domains ( unclaimed luggage ) but they generate the revenue as ( profit ) for them .


.

 

[NYJimbo]

I would like to hear your thoughts on that. I appreciate your response in advance.

LOL. Too much hand wringing about nothing. No, its not unethical.

 

[cooljub]

then... the registrars said, hey, why don't we just hold the names and auction them off to the highest bidder, that way it would be "fair" to all.

.. and even more "fair" to the registrars.

 

[biggie]

Actually, that's an option that registrars can make (if I'm not wrong there are some that have this feature) and customers are all free to choose where to hold their names.

Hi

i've mentioned this before
yes, fabulous.com has this option
a few names i've dropped over the years have sold at namejet and i received a % of those sales.

imo....

 

[keywordrichdomains]

Hi

i've mentioned this before
yes, fabulous.com has this option
a few names i've dropped over the years have sold at namejet and i received a % of those sales.

imo....

I think they do a greedy business. They charge a disproportionately high price for domain names. Looks like their price on the .COM is $29.95. How many registers can afford such a pricing method from an investment perspective? Besides, I don't understand the logic of paying more to enjoy normal rights!

Nearly every government in the world is now vigilant in the case of unproductive investment practices in digital asset markets and their speculation. If well understood, the global economy China has already begun to regulate such non-productive speculative markets. Its peer group economy India is also developing regulatory policies in this line. European economies also frame various policies to regulate digital investment markets. ICANN is also undergoing policy changes. Also, to my knowledge, domain registrars do not have a legal right to function as an investment market platform. Unethical business practices can only go until their consumers are ignorant about their rights and privileges, not forever! If domain investment markets and domain registrars do not undergo a transformation from pure speculation to creative and productive structure, I am not much optimistic with respect to its existence and future growth. Many innocent investors think that everything will go as it is for hundred years!

 

[hawkeye]

Most investors or entrepreneurs leave their domain name without renewing it that when big difficulties in their life! But, others try to take advantage of their creatives in their difficult time, even without donating any of the money from the auction to the original creator! Do you not consider this to be an unethical business practice?....

Isn't this the same scenario when someone can no longer afford to pay their mortgage on a home they've had for years and put money into remodeling etc., yet it goes into foreclosure due to lack of payments? Or not pay their car payments and the car is repossed? Should the new owner/investor or the lien holder, be expected to 'donate' some money to the original homeowner...just because?? Should that be considered an 'unethical business practice' also? Bottom line, if you don't pay your 'renewal' or 'mortgage' or 'loan payments' it is not the responsibility of anyone (investors, lien holders etc.) to compensate the non paying 'owner/creative' for their financial shortcomings. jmo.