Limit on Domain Regs by Icann

[mad409]

I assume this article is the real deal, wonder if it would be moving forward or would domainers have to give up domain names?

http://domaingang.com/domain-news/icann-considers-limitation-domain-registrations-100-per-person/

 

[forge]

It is (purportedly) satire and definitely NOT real.

Plus DG would have a "100% Real" icon at the end of the article if it were... remotely true.

 

[mad409]

I never know if they're telling the truth?

 

[Joseph Green]

I never know if they're telling the truth?

It's only true if you see this image on the page:

Otherwise, it's parody domain news.

 

[Electric-Shadow]

ICANN would loose too much money, as would registrars. Common sense alone tells you it's not feasible, as much as some people would agree with every last word of the article.

 

[FPForum]

Not true, and they would have no real way of implementing this kind of thing. It would take them years alone just to get some sort of remote system setup that could even do this, lol.

 

[slimjim270]

My thoughts...

There is no way to track the count per individual / company - at least not consistently - which would lead to bias... and then lawsuits.

For example - if they go by owner "Name", there would be a ridiculous amount of overlap. [not feasible]

For example - if they go by "Tax ID" (SSN / EIN in the U.S.) - great in theory, but not in reality, as this would exclude non-US based buyers of .com domains that would all have "N/A" as their Tax ID. [not feasible]

For example - if they go by "hair follicles on your ars" - too many butt kissing politicians would game the system and we'd have a Congressional hearing on the subject or a Presidential debate on the subject during the upcoming election. Not to mention, Kim Kardashian would have the largest "asset" base.

Nothing but hype in my opinion. Your thoughts?

-Jim

 

[baldonius]

My thoughts...

There is no way to track the count per individual / company - at least not consistently - which would lead to bias... and then lawsuits.

For example - if they go by owner "Name", there would be a ridiculous amount of overlap. [not feasible]

For example - if they go by "Tax ID" (SSN / EIN in the U.S.) - great in theory, but not in reality, as this would exclude non-US based buyers of .com domains that would all have "N/A" as their Tax ID. [not feasible]

For example - if they go by "hair follicles on your ars" - too many butt kissing politicians would game the system and we'd have a Congressional hearing on the subject or a Presidential debate on the subject during the upcoming election. Not to mention, Kim Kardashian would have the largest "asset" base.

Nothing but hype in my opinion. Your thoughts?

-Jim

It'd just add a whole new layer of bureaucracy and checking. Although they're a non-profit so maybe they'd like all the extra funding they'd get!