GoDaddy Blocking Emails?

[BostonDomainer]

Does anyone know when Godaddy stopped forwarding emails from domains that are under privacy? I just checked my portfolio and it seems that there is a new setting requirement and the option to receive emails sent to @domainproxy was disabled on all my domains over 1k there and you now have to manually (1 by 1 as no bulk option) enable the option to forward emails from an interested party using domainproxy to your main email address. I wonder how many offers were not received because of this as, with privacy, I used to always receive email offers, I decided to check and noticed this major change. Did Godaddy issue any press release or email info on this as this seems rather problematic on several points. Let me know if I'm missing something and if someone can bring some clarity on this @Joe Styler @James Iles

thanks

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

Now I can see why there are fervent fans for Dynadot. They have done a great job with privacy off. So, hopefully GoDaddy can emulate the Dynadot standard.

 

[dirk]

I'm only seeing the link to GoDaddy, there:

Show attachment 235039

Basically they're forcing you to pay about $70 to go through their brokers to reach out to a domain owner who explicitly stated it's ok to show their contact details.

Especially for those in the EU, you have to explicitly give them permission to show your details (they get redacted by default due to GDPR).

You don't give them permission to get a middleman/broker involved, you give them permission to disclose your contact info in whois.

It's ridiculous.

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

Basically they're forcing you to pay about $70 to go through their brokers to reach out to a domain owner who explicitly stated it's ok to show their contact details.

Well, it certainly is a possibility. A registrar that also has a large brokerage department needs to be mindful of the potential conflicts of interest here.

Even if the intent here is not to force potential buyers to their brokerage, the point is that that may be the result. To me, what's even more disturbing is that this change happened without alerting me. Did anyone receive any notice that their "privacy off" policy now included this email address blocking? When did this change happen?

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

As an update, my email blocking issue still has not been resolved. My email still remains blocked with privacy off.

Has anyone had success getting this fixed on their GoDaddy account?

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

The email contact information for admin/tech/billing is still not showing up with the GoDaddy-registered domains, even with privacy off. Is there any time frame for fixing this problem that appears to be affecting muliptle customers?

@James Iles

 

[MasterOfMyDomains]

It will be fixed in 60 days James said

Apologies for the delay @BostonDomainer. I know how important the Domains by Proxy feature is to domain investors, and with that in mind, I can say that the email forwarding feature is slated to be enabled by default for new registrations in the next 60 days, which includes bulk functionality. Domains in the interim will likely need to be manually adjusted.

That was Jan 5th though
https://www.namepros.com/threads/godaddy-blocking-emails.1291876/#post-8805435

Or is forwarding working and not showing whois only.
I have no domains at daddy so not sure

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

It is still not allowing direct display of the email contact field, and instead referring to a GoDaddy link.
Your suggestion about putting the email in the second line of the mailing address is getting tempting. But really, they can simply fix it show it shows ALL the correcdt contact information, including the email directly. Other registrars do it, and they can too.

Again, I'll emphasize that this was the case with multiple different customers, when I checked whois. And they may likely be oblivious to the fact that their email information is being blocked on the admin/tech/billing fields directly. GoDaddy is requiring additional steps to be contacted, going through their servers apparently.

When will this be fixed, @James Iles?

 

[Bob Hawkes]

I use quite a few registrars, and upon reflection, have only got messages through the privacy server for a few, far less than one would suspect. So the practice of filtering may be common in the industry.

Virtually all of my names do have a lander, so it is not I fear missing contacts re sales. It just seems strange so few emails of any kind come through.

-Bob

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

I use quite a few registrars, and upon reflection, have only got messages through the privacy server for a few, far less than one would suspect. So the practice of filtering may be common in the industry

Well, if anything that is supposedly an advantage of having privacy off, where at least, in the past, the email was readily visible for contact purposes.

After reading your post, I did check to see with Dynadot if they actually forwarded emails even with privacy on. Within a minute, the email did arrive in the other account.

With Godaddy, even with privacy off, there is this curiosity of requiring the requester to submit their email in order to send the registrant an email. I did test that one as well, and it did indeed forward my email within minutes.

The good news is that the question has been submitted to Godaddy and ICANN, to have the registrant email readily visible up front. GoDaddy has, I understand, up to 15 days to respond or otherwise face certain penalties. So, we'll see whether there is an answer to the overall transparency for registrant contact email addresses up front.

 

[jberryhill]

The good news is that the question has been submitted to Godaddy and ICANN, to have the registrant email readily visible up front. GoDaddy has, I understand, up to 15 days to respond or otherwise face certain penalties. So, we'll see whether there is an answer to the overall transparency for registrant contact email addresses up front.

The bad news is that you are among several people in this thread who haven't bothered to check what ICANN actually requires.

In response to concerns about GDPR back in 2018, ICANN instituted the "Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data"

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gtld-registration-data-specs-en

2.5. In responses to domain name queries, in the value of the "Email" field of every contact (e.g., Registrant, Admin, Tech):

2.5.1. Registrar MUST provide an email address or a web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact, but MUST NOT identify the contact email address or the contact itself.

2.5.1.1. The email address and the URL to the web form MUST provide functionality to forward communications received to the email address of the applicable contact.

2.5.1.2. Registrar MAY implement commercially reasonable safeguards to filter out spam and other form of abusive communications.

2.5.1.3. It MUST NOT be feasible to extract or derive the email address of the contact from the email address and the URL to the web form provided to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact.

I would suggest reading the entire specification to grasp the additional rules around consent to publish additional information.

But I'm puzzled by the several commentators in this thread who believe there is something to complain to ICANN about here.

We should all launch complaints to icann. There should never be a scenario where registrars block emails intended for registrants.

GoDaddy is compliant with the relevant ICANN specification.

What's kind of amazing to me is that if you have a domain name, and you are upset that "nobody can get in touch with me", then wtf are you doing with that domain name?

Anyone looking to buy a domain name is going to type it into the address bar and see what, if anything, is going on there at some point. If you can't figure out a way to have them contact you as a result of typing the domain name into the address bar and seeing what's there, then this might not be a good area in which to waste your time.

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

Thanks for the insights.
You mentioned the temporary specifications of the GDPR back in 2018.

If one lives in the USA, is the GDPR applicable?

Having one's email presented with privacy off doesn't seem to be an issue with at least 2 major registrars for US customers.

So is this more of an issue for residents in the EU? Can't registrants in the US still have a choice of how all their contact information is displayed in Whois, when privacy off? And can they have that regardless of how it's presented in the address bar?

 

[Keith]

If you can't figure out a way to have them contact you as a result of typing the domain name into the address bar and seeing what's there, then this might not be a good area in which to waste your time.

I can figure out my end of the equation as it pertains to contact info being available. What do I do as a buyer?

Over the last year I’ve used the contact form under Whois info probably 50 times. There hasn’t been a single response. Today I used the form to contact myself as a test and it worked. There was a pop up however which is new and it said they’ve made recent changes blah blah blah.

Maybe it was bad luck those 50 times this past year but I’m not convinced of that.

 

[jberryhill]

Maybe it was bad luck those 50 times this past year but I’m not convinced of that.

Heh. The beauty of it is that the registrar can filter spam.

One definition of spam is unsolicited commercial email. That’s what a purchase offer is.

 

[Keith]

One definition of spam is unsolicited commercial email. That’s what a purchase offer is.

Interest in buying the domain is the first option they provide. Weird thing to then go and filter out certain requests.

Reason for contact: *
Interest in buying this domain name
Domain name or content is being used in malware, or for spam or abuse
Domain name or content is infringing on a trademark or violating local laws or regulations
Research or other purpose

 

[jberryhill]

Weird thing to then go and filter out certain requests.

It's also a weird thing to provide a service for free when you are also charging $69 for it otherwise.

 

[Keith]

It's also a weird thing to provide a service for free when you are also charging $69 for it otherwise.

Those 2 things aren’t remotely the same.

$69 is for Godaddy to act as a broker on your behalf. The free point of contact is eliminating Godaddy from the equation and it’s obvious why they would manipulate that.

 

[dirk]

It's also a weird thing to provide a service for free when you are also charging $69 for it otherwise.

It's also a weird thing to provide a service for $69 when you are required by ICANN to provide it for free (bar the brokering part, obviously).

 

[Sutruk]

2.5.1. Registrar MUST provide an email address or a web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact, but MUST NOT identify the contact email address or the contact itself.

GoDaddy is compliant with the relevant ICANN specification.

With all my respect John, Godaddy is NOT compliant with the relevant ICANN specification, at least with the 2.5.1 specification.

Godaddy, at this moment, does NOT provide any email address nor web form to facilitate email communication in their WHOIS database result.

They just show, in the "email" field, a link to the same WHOIS webpage that you are looking at:
Registrant Email: Select Contact Domain Holder link at https://www.godaddy.com/whois/results.aspx?domain=mydomain.com

Then, at the very bottom of the same page, in a tiny link, they have the link to "contact domain holder" that follows to a page where you can choose the "Reason to contact" with a few options to choose, but with NO web form to communicate.

Every registrar out there, if they don't directly show a "masked" email address in the Whois data, at least they do follow to a real web form, where you can really contact and ask whatever you want to the domain owner.
But not in Godaddy case.

But what they don't forget is to make it clear to make you pay $69.99 to hire a broker so you can communicate with the domain owner.

 

[jberryhill]

that follows to a page where you can choose the "Reason to contact" with a few options to choose, but with NO web form to communicate.

That page is on the web. It is a form. It allows you to communicate. Ostensibly, the domain registrant is sent an email when you use it.

The fact that it does not allow you to type out a detailed message or do anything beyond select a few canned choices does not somehow disqualify it from being a "web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact".

To the extent that you would like the form to have other features, that's simply a matter of your own opinion as to what features a "web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact" should have.

But, I can guarantee you, ICANN is not going to go to the mat with GoDaddy on whether that form, in particular, does or does not satisfy the condition of being a "web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact". It is virtually certain that the IP people have already beaten on their door with complaints they are unable to attach copies of trademark records, court filings, and other things that they would like to be able to send to domain registrants as well. It is also a certainty that their complaints to ICANN were very well argued.

Being able to type in your contact information and select options for communicating in a message to be sent to the registrant of the domain name is most certainly a "web form". It's not much of one, but that's a question of degree, not kind.

 

[dirk]

That page is on the web. It is a form. It allows you to communicate. Ostensibly, the domain registrant is sent an email when you use it.

The fact that it does not allow you to type out a detailed message or do anything beyond select a few canned choices does not somehow disqualify it from being a "web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact".

To the extent that you would like the form to have other features, that's simply a matter of your own opinion as to what features a "web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact" should have.

But, I can guarantee you, ICANN is not going to go to the mat with GoDaddy on whether that form, in particular, does or does not satisfy the condition of being a "web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact". It is virtually certain that the IP people have already beaten on their door with complaints they are unable to attach copies of trademark records, court filings, and other things that they would like to be able to send to domain registrants as well. It is also a certainty that their complaints to ICANN were very well argued.

Being able to type in your contact information and select options for communicating in a message to be sent to the registrant of the domain name is most certainly a "web form". It's not much of one, but that's a question of degree, not kind.

Neglecting the fact that GoDaddy seems to be actively filtering what does and what does not get delivered/filtered.

It's on Icann I suppose. I'm sure GD covered their base... legally. I know for sure they're not acting in the registrant's best interest.

It is what it is, like always... pick your registrar wisely.