Verisign to stop releasing expired domain names
Shinji Ikari
release any expired domains but will, instead, auction them off to the
highest bidder. All domains that are currently expired will not be
released.
The recent Wait List Proposal is the first step in finding
alternatives to the current practice of releasing expired names for
resale. The success of SnapNames (http://www.snapnames.com) has
proven to Verisign that there is much more money to be made in expired
domain names.
Bruce Williams
for domains that you can pay $35 to get on. See the following page
for details:
http://www.verisign-grs.com/wls.html
I'm surprised there hasn't been much comment on this but it is fairly
recent news. As for Snapnames, they are in cahoots with Verisign
(that's disclosed in one the documents on the above page) and they
were probably the ones who suggested this to Verisign (in my opinion.)
Snapnames has already signed a deal to be part of this if it happens.
I have mixed feelings about this. It'd be nice to know at the time a
domain expires that you will get it when the registrar finally gets
around to freeing it up, but I don't know if it would discourage or
encourage domain speculators from "snapping" up all the good names for
auction.
What does everyone think of this plan? It is under discussion by the
registrars so speaking up may influence their direction!
Dan Norder
>registrars so speaking up may influence their direction!
Makes perfect sense to me. It is certainly more fair than the current system,
which is registrars that refuse to release names at all so they can try to sell
them themselves to the highest bidder, other registrars selling off their pipe
to private individuals and flooding the entire system on drop day so that the
public can't get in, and various other shenanigans.
With one solid, fair, system that everyone uses, maybe there'd be some fairness
introduced to the system. ICANN should have cracked down on the shady dealings
long ago.
--
Dan Norder
No song is ever over-played on the radio...
some people just listen to the radio too much.
John Berryhill
"Dan Norder" <dann...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> Makes perfect sense to me. It is certainly more fair than the current
system,
The idea that there is a "fair" system by which a unique item is going to be
assigned to only one person on the planet makes me smile, at best. I am not
an experienced socialist, but I am willing to learn something other than...
> which is registrars that refuse to release names at all so they can try to
sell
> them themselves to the highest bidder,
Registrars should not be selling them to the highest bidder, and I don't
know of any which are. The idea of allocating a finite resource to the
highest bidder, though, is how things function in practically every other
context in capitalist economies. Think of an initial public offering - all
shares are issued at a fixed price into the secondary market, which
determines their value. We also do this with mineral and gas leases,
electromagnetic spectrum, and land.
> other registrars selling off their pipe
> to private individuals and flooding the entire system on drop day so that
the
> public can't get in,
That hasn't been true for some months now that the system is divided into
the two server pools for registrar access. I am unaware of any documented
instance of someone not being able to register a name because of registrar
spamming. Drop time is relatively short, and certainly does not last all
day on any day.
> With one solid, fair, system that everyone uses, maybe there'd be some
fairness
> introduced to the system. ICANN should have cracked down on the shady
dealings
> long ago.
What ICANN did was to turn name registration into a multi-level marketing
scheme. Citing a return to a single monopoly service provider (except now a
provider of the wait list service) as something ICANN should have done long
ago is a bit funny, in that if it were not for ICANN's artificial division
of "registrar" and "registry" functions, then none of those "shady dealings"
would have developed in the first place.
I'm surprised you aren't more cynical about the real subtext here. NSI
makes more on renewals than all of the other registrars combined, but the
other registrars get a larger share of new registrations than NSI does.
Most new registrations are dropped names, and most dropped names come from
NSI. Now, you put all of those together and the reason why they just
happened to pluck $35 as the price for the wait list service out of thin air
becomes readily apparent. This is Verisign's strategy for, in effect,
obtaining the same revenue they would have obtained for a renewal even if
the domain name is in fact re-registered through another registratr.
I would be very curious to know why you think a race to the waiting list is
more "fair" than a race to get the name when it drops. It is still a race
to obtain a single thing, except now we are racing to get a spot on a list
instead of a name. Only one person will win. The only difference is that
Verisign will make $35 out of the same contest for which they are now
obtaining nothnig.
Dan Norder
>be assigned to only one person on the planet makes me smile, at best.
I said more fair, not fair. But, yeah.
>Registrars should not be selling them to the highest bidder, and I don't
>know of any which are.
NameZero.com has names that expired a long time back (and some that haven't
expired) that they are offering up for sale to the highest bidder (though there
aren't many bids since most of them suck).
Register.com has instituted an Unpaid Names department, by which names that
would have been dropped are being held by them instead. Some people have said
that they take large amounts of cash in exchange for changing ownership of
these names, though I have nothing to prove that.
In fact, it is really hard that prove anything these people do behind closed
doors. Just have to go by what you see. And I see NameZero selling names and
see names that normally would have been dropped suddenly change ownership to
Register.com Unpaid Domains...
>The idea of allocating a finite resource to the
>highest bidder, though, is how things function in practically every other
>context in capitalist economies.
True... but the various bidding processes are hidden right now from average
people... and with Namewinner's bidding and secret Register.com bidding
(rumored) and some people buying a huge chunk of a registrar's access, it's all
a damn mess.
And the highest bidder should be the person who owns the name, not a registrar
who doesn't really own the name anymore than any other registrar.
> I am unaware of any documented
>instance of someone not being able to register a name because of registrar
>spamming.
And how would you document that? Certainly registrar spamming gives someone an
unfair advantage.
I liked the original system: first come, first served, back when everyone had a
fair chance of being the first person. These days script runners (which are
supposed to be forbidden from accessing the system, but they get away with it
anyway), registrars giving preferential access, others not dropping names that
should be dropped (I can't tell you how many I'm tracking that are way past
normal drop dates), it's all a mess.
>I'm surprised you aren't more cynical about the real subtext here.
I'm way cycnical about domain name registrars in general. I think I'm cynical
past the point of caring on a lot of it.
>This is Verisign's strategy for, in effect,
>obtaining the same revenue they would have obtained for a renewal even if
>the domain name is in fact re-registered through another registratr.
Eh, but at least they are offering a useful service in exchange for it. The
current system is just to much of a mess.
>I would be very curious to know why you think a race to the waiting list
>is more "fair" than a race to get the name when it drops.
Because a waiting list is equal access. Races to drop are now run by huge
script farms, registrars giving preference to certain clients, and places just
not dropping names in the first place.
A waiting list is simple, fair, and one time race that spreads the runners out
over forever instead of just certain days of the year. Someone can get in at
any time, and the big players will have to pick which names out of *all* names
to ge after instead of just grabbing tons periodically on drop days.
Shinji Ikari
>
> Register.com has instituted an Unpaid Names department, by which names that
> would have been dropped are being held by them instead.
How do you find out if an expired name has been shifted to the unpaid
names deptartment?
> (I can't tell you how many I'm tracking that are way past
> normal drop dates),
I was tracking a name that was over A YEAR past its renewal date. It
was not subject to any dispute and yet Verisgn was still holding it.
What can you do in such a situation?
>
> I'm way cycnical about domain name registrars in general. I think I'm cynical
> past the point of caring on a lot of it.
I guess everyone is cynical, but that's what you get in a system that
is effectively unregulated. Screwing the public for profit is what it
is all about.
Dan Norder
>How do you find out if an expired name has been shifted to the unpaid
>names deptartment?
On some I've seen the ownership record was changed so that the original
registrant and all identifiying info was removed and replaced with
"register.com Unpaid Names Department-R" with emails and addresses listed
belonging to register.com ... and this was done after the period of time the
names are normally released by Register.com to be registered by the public. I
don't think register.com has been doing this on all the names that are past
due, just certain ones they think might be valuable (a few were ones that had
gotten bids at register.com's auction site Afternic.com that the previous owner
ignored... they why they ignored bids and just let the name expire is beyond
me).
>I was tracking a name that was over A YEAR past its renewal date. It
>was not subject to any dispute and yet Verisgn was still holding it.
>What can you do in such a situation?
Nothing that I know of, unfortunately. It's like the wild west. Guns, money and
their images are all these people care about. Fairness, contracts with ICANN
and even perhaps the law are ignored if they aren't favorable to what they
want.