Domain industry out of control

[gemstar]

Domain industry out of control. Ever since the gov't gave netsol power to regulate the domain industry everything went to hell. Registrars made shell companies and registered domains for their own gain rather comply with the rules and not be part of conflict of interest. Somewhere the internet went from logical to mob style sorry to say but that is what happens when companies are given a license to print money such as when the gov't gave control of the domains to a private company.That is why we see all these threads. Such as I regged the name but the registrar did not give it to me because It was too valuable etc...
Tisk tisk...

I was bored sorry...:wave:

 

[-REECE-]

Get rid of ICANN and VeriSign, don't introduce any new domain extensions and assign control of major extensions to companies who are able to demonstrate satisfactory performance at the lowest cost per domain. Charge the major dropcatching players a massive fee for having additional registrars which will be used to subsidize the cost of domain ownership for everyone.

It's nice to dream

 

[cache]

people talk about this for many years, I doubt anything can be done to resolve the problem.

 

[Domagon]

The Network Solutions (NSI / Internic) days, over 10 years ago now, weren't any better. In many ways, it was even worse! Pricing was $50 per year (reduced to $35 later on due to a lawsuit) with a mandatory 2 year minimum term.

Plus, NSI, alone (excepting 1 chars which Postel decreed as reserved though a few, such as x.com, were grandfathered-in), decided what domains one were permitted to register, and in a dispute whether one got to keep or lose a domain; one could try suing NSI, and many did, but few ever succeeded.

IMHO, $9+/- domains, the ability to choose a registrar, an established dispute policy / effective recourse options, etc, beats the old days.

Ron

 

[gpmgroup]

There are moves within ICANN at the moment to try and relax the registry / registrar rules which prevent cross ownership. It seems a handful of players want to be able to deliver new gTLDs using the old .com model

 

[gazzip]

"Domain industry out of control"

Yup, sure looks that way - just hold on for the ride...Ye Ha cowboy ! :O



.

 

[mwzd]

In every business you have all sorts.

Granted though that registrars are increasingly becoming a source for their owners to pad their own portfolios, something that should be prevented but is easier said than done.

What should be done away with immediately are the sweetheart deals that registrars have with platforms to sell expiring domains. If they enter the normal drop cycle and are caught, that is fine, but if they straight away get sent to auction w/o going through the drop cycle - that is biased.

 

[floname]

I've recently discovered a drop engine (name nabber - from name/com) that lists the losing registrar.

I'm not entirely sure how the drop system works, but if you backorder a dropping domain through the losing registrar, do you have a better chance at getting it?

I use a major one, and sometimes it just flat out says that I can't backorder a particular domain. Is there something fishy about that? Like is it just not going to hit the drop cuz they don't have to allow it?

 

[DubDubDubDot]

Fixing problems depends entirely upon the US government taking an interest. Last month they called for a permanent relation between ICANN and the US (which would thankfully keep it out of the hands of the UN), and included desires such as abolishing private registrations internet wide like what was done for .us. ICANN is not going to tackle controversial issues on it's own.

 

[Domagon]

Speaking of the U.N. ... if they take over, things will get out of control from a regulatory standpoint. I can easily invision the U.N. forcing ICANN to restrict registrations / usage based on both U.N. conventions (treaties), as well as, the laws of one's home country; much higher registration costs.

Plus, complaints regarding offensive domains and/or content on them, even if legal would likely result in the odmains being suspended / deleted; lots of currently registered domains would likely be placed into reserve status leading to immediate loss of the domains and/or, more likely, couldn't transferred / non-renewable. I don't put that past the U.N.

And that's not even getting into the matter of geographical domains, which would likely too revert to reserve status; be restricted in usage / ownership.

To digress a bit, think of .US ccTLD regulations, which already restrict offensive domains, and has done retroactive suspensions (ie. I registered F*uckCensorship.US and it resolved, but then later, it along with many others, were later suspended) , etc ... now imagine .US ccTLD policy, along with various undesirable aspects of other ccTLD policies, applied to gTLDs .COM, .NET, .ORG, .INFO, etc too - that's what likely would happen if the U.N. ever took over authority of ICANN.

Bottom line is if the U.S. ever reliquishes control of ICANN to the U.N., the industry, as we know it today, will truly spiral out of control with tons of restrictions, and much higher costs of doing business.

Ron

Fixing problems depends entirely upon the US government taking an interest. Last month they called for a permanent relation between ICANN and the US (which would thankfully keep it out of the hands of the UN), and included desires such as abolishing private registrations internet wide like what was done for .us. ICANN is not going to tackle controversial issues on it's own.

 

[dotker]

Registrars made shell companies and registered domains for their own gain rather comply with the rules and not be part of conflict of interest. Somewhere the internet went from logical to mob style sorry to say but that is what happens when companies are given a license to print money such as when the gov't gave control of the domains to a private company.

this is what i really dont understand with this industry, they have all the advantage.

 

[simonj]

Such as I regged the name but the registrar did not give it to me because It was too valuable etc...
Tisk tisk...

That is outrageous if it's happening.... Although how valuable can a fresh reg be?

 

[RTM]

The Network Solutions (NSI / Internic) days, over 10 years ago now, weren't any better. In many ways, it was even worse! Pricing was $50 per year (reduced to $35 later on due to a lawsuit) with a mandatory 2 year minimum term.

IMHO, $9+/- domains, the ability to choose a registrar, an established dispute policy / effective recourse options, etc, beats the old days.

+1 on that. Lest we forget the days when we had to FAX in registrant info to Netsol/NSI ... yes, I remember the $70/2 year days.

I also remember pulling $9K in commissions in one day (a Sunday!) earning $25 per domain registration shortly after the length of domains were increased to 67 characters for gTLDs.

So, is having an oligopoly better than a monopoly?

Rob :imho:

 

[HuntingMoon]

the tasting fee changes seem to be putting things more in "control" from one angle at least

 

[deleted984054565403]

Glad I got out when I did.

 

[uliss]

The main problem: who control the industry?
Verisign? ICANN?
Verisgn monoplizes the most popular gTLD .com .net and popular ccTLD .tv and .cc.

 

[labrocca]

The past year or so imho ICANN has done a better job. The opening of extensions and tasting fees are both good moves. The new board seems to understand a few simple concepts that the internet wasn't built for profit.

 

[SiberForum]

I suppose that should be the way of the control this from the third party and non profit organization

 

[gpmgroup]

The past year or so imho ICANN has done a better job. The opening of extensions and tasting fees are both good moves. The new board seems to understand a few simple concepts that the internet wasn't built for profit.

Domain tasting occurred predominantly in .com and to some extent .net and it's a law of diminishing returns, which means most of the names which were suitable were already tasted and kept. If PPC revenues are falling some of those names may eventually be dropped.

The ICANN resolution did make Domain Kiting (Tasting over and over and never paying for a registration) more expensive.

With regards to new gTLDs a handful of people , some representing organizations which stand to benefit enormously from their introduction seem to be able to so totally dismiss the concerns of the world at large.

Worryingly ICANNs proposals for new GTLDs need a lot more work the current proposals from the GNSO are likely to far more damage than good to the namespace and the Internet as a whole.

 

[Kate]

I don't think that icann is doing such a good job:

• they help the verisign monopoly and they settle their business at the expense of registrants
• they flood the market with junk TLD
• they enforce their rules on the registrars only when it suits them
• they compromise the stability of the Internet by deciding hasty moves, the introduction of future gTLDs being one them
• their proposed IRT is another can of worms
• they like to avoid accountability
• as a rule they seem not to behave like they are a not for profit corporation