Domain held hostage by a registrar. Need your advice.

[4pm]

I am interested in a domain that's being held hostage by one of well-known registrars.

This is a family name .com
I want it for personal/business use (it is MY family name), excluding resale or parking

Domain is registered in the name of that registrar
They are fully accredited ICANN .com registrar, a Canadian company

Currently they are using the name to offer "personalized email addresses" for $35 a year
They also own numerous personal name domains being used in the same manner
The names are not for sale - if you email them you will get an automated reply with a politely phrased "not for sale" clause

This article revitalized my interest in the matter:
- do registrars have a legal right under ICANN Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) to own any domains not used for the purposes of Registrar Services

Register.com hit by breach notice over 62,232 domains
Source: DomainIncite.com


Additional info:

The registrar has no trademarks associated with the name
There are a couple of live TMs in financial/insurance sector
It's not a super popular name but gets 3 mln google results and dozens of businesses using it in their names and domains

I own my firstname+familyname.com
I understand that my chances to get the ownership are next to none but i am not happy about current use either seeing them selling email addresses on the domain
Domain is 15 years old with 2 drops



I would basically like to know two simple things:

- is this in a full compliance with ICANN RAA for a registrar to own/use a name in such a manner?
- is there anything that could be done to free the name up and make it avail for registration/auction/etc



Would appreciate every educated opinion or legal advice

Thanks in advance



*

 

[4pm]

any thoughts?

thanks

 

[Name Trader]

I don't know enough about the ICANN RAA 2009 and they've now introduced RAA 2013, which should be in universal use by most registers by end 2014 to answer your question. But why the reluctance on using your firstname+lastname.com?

 

[Kate]

We are clearly talking about Tucows

The old RAA:

3.7.9 Registrar shall abide by any ICANN adopted specifications or policies prohibiting or restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registrars.

The new RAA:

3.7.9 Registrar shall abide by any Consensus Policy prohibiting or
restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registrars.

What it means: registrars shall abide by policies governing warehousing/speculation when and if such policies are ever approved.
Currently there are none, so there is nothing that forbids registrars from being domainers/end users.
You see, there is no difference between 'then' and now.

I don't think that Icann has the will to change anything about it, because they are part of the game. They run the casino after all.
But it's a tricky issue, imo the problem is not that registrars speculate (like the banks), but that there can be conflicts of interest and no clear rules regulating the business.

 

[NPer]

A few of my domains were held hostage by a tiny registrar. Their details appeared in whois instead of mine.

I let two drop, but the one I was planning to transfer at the time, they sent a ransom note demanding $20. I was already so pissed with their crap service throughout the previous year, and just wanted to get away from them that I paid them off... and they let my baby free.

Hope you get your domain back.

 

[Dave_Z]

Hope you get your domain back.

It appears the OP wants a domain name he never had, though, rather than unintentionally letting it lapse and taken by Tucows.

It's indeed a tricky issue, as sdsinc said, because there are different and competing interests involved.

 

[4pm]

It appears the OP wants a domain name he never had, though, rather than unintentionally letting it lapse and taken by Tucows.

Exactly.

I never owned the name. It's owned by a registrar.
And by its nature (trademarks etc) and usage (selling email addresses) it can not be considered as held for the purposes of Registrar Services.

I am not sure if that's completely in compliance with RAA for registrars to own arbitrary domains of their choice. If that was the case they would probably own all premium dropped domains.


From ICANN's "breach notice" to Registrar.com:

Please be advised that as of 11 September 2013, Register.com, Inc. (“Register.com”) is in breach of its Registrar Accreditation Agreement (“RAA”) with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”) dated 28 September 2009.

These breaches result from:
.....

3. Register.com’s failure to enter into registration agreements with Registered Name Holders of domain names as required by Section 3.7.7 of the RAA, or alternatively, explain how the domains are used for the purposes of Registrar Services, as defined by Section 1.11 of the RAA.

Source: TheDomains.com article




*

 

[Chris Wright]

What it means: registrars shall abide by policies governing warehousing/speculation when and if such policies are ever approved.
Currently there are none, so there is nothing that forbids registrars from being domainers/end users.

If that was the case they would probably own all premium dropped domains.

The sad truth is that registrars own massive HUGE piles of premiums.