Verisign Sending Deceptive Domain Renewal Mail?

General_Corto writes: "Declan McCullagh's PoliTech list just forwarded a message detailing how Verisign is sending letters to people who own domains through other registrars, attempting to make them change registrar on renewal. Looking at the letter it is very unclear that you are signing up with a different registrar. Sneaky games are being played."

Comments

Nothing new

[cre8tor]

Registrars have been doing this for a while, not just Verisign.

Re:Nothing new

[hey!]

It's hard to beleive that the revenue from domain owners they manage to trick is worth more than the damage to their brand. First of all, people will make that mistake only once. Secondly, as the number of people who associate Verisign's name with skullduggery increases, the trust that underlies their certificate authority business will evaporate. Granted, this trust is more by default than anything else -- people don't know enough not to trust. But this is all the more reason not to blow it. There was never a monopoly built on such a flimsy foundation.

Reminds me of "slamming"

[Mnemia]

This strikes me as a similar, albeit different, tactic to what is known as "slamming" in the phone industry. It was once a common scam for the shadier long distance providers to change your carrier without your permission or consent; the practice was (I believe) outlawed in the 1996 Telcommunications Act (correct me if I'm wrong). This is slightly different because they are just being deceptive about gaining consent, but it does seem similar. Wonder if Congress will step in on this type of practice as well?

Not sure that's the best idea, but it will probably take Washington 10 years to notice this anyway and by then there won't be any players but Verisign left anyway.

Absolutely

[clark625]

I own a house. For those of you not fortunate enough to understand what that means, consider your average junkmail that you receive now in your rental house, apartment, whatever. Multiply that by roughly 15.

This letter may be somewhat deceptive. So is every other friggin' piece of mail in my mailbox right now. Most people do the same thing with all such letters--they throw them out. But, like always, there is a sucker born every minute who will just plop down the credit card number and send the thing in. That's the ropes, folks.

When I looked at the letter, I saw Verisign's name immediately. I also noticed that you are signing for "renewal and transfer authorization", not just renewal. Sure, this might not say explicitly that you're going to change registrars... but there's a heck of a lot of fine print near the bottom that I can't read. My guess is that everything is spelled out there very clearly--to the person who cares to read it anyways.

Sorry folks, that's life. There's enough stupid people in the world who fall for things like this to make it economically worthwhile. Maybe next time get mad at the people dumb enough to sign things without reading--cause it's really their fault in the end.

So how is this different...

[Jace of Fuse!]

So how is this different from the mail I got from several other Registrars?

I just now sorted through this month's mail, did my bills, and threw away a ton of junk. In my sorting, I had TWO paper mails from other registrars telling me that my domain was about to expire and that in order to keep them I had to re-register them. Well, guess what? I'm registered with Verisign, but both of the letters were from other Registrars. One of which was Registrar of America (or something like that). They're both in the trash now, but the point is, Verisign isn't the only one guilty of it.

Class Action

[wytcld]

Of course it makes no sense for one person who's lost perhaps $15 by paying too much - and ended up with much worse customer service, but still - to sue. Unless that person becomes lead claimant in a class action suit on behalf of at least everyone who has suckered for this scam, plus perhaps everyone who has wasted valuable business time urgently asking employees or consultants why the renewal hasn't been "taken care of," or assuring bosses or clients that the notice - from the best-known name in the business - is a fraud.

Not to mention that it perpetuates the notion that anything dot.com related is suckersville - but I guess you can't sue for making the neighborhood look bad.

Still, if none of the lawyers reading this can frame it as a rich class action, we need to attract a brighter class of lawyers.
____

this doesn't seem deceptive

[toast0]

on the page w/ the recievers name and address, it clearly has the verisign logo, and the instructions have for step 3..

Sign the form to authorize your renewal, transfer and payment.
It also clearly states the renewal rate and additionally, it has a section of inputs for 'Renewal and Transfer Authorization'

The fine print didn't really come through the scanner very well, so i have no idea what that says.

In any case, if you bother to read the mail, its not deceptive at all. I don't think its the greatest way to advertise, and it certainly doesn't encourage me to use verisign directly again, but theres nothing improper about it.

Re:Versign != Network Solutions

[AndyMouse GoHard]

But I don't see your point. Verisign has some responsibility here don't they? They own the company, right?

Will they do anything about this? If not, then they are endorsing it by their silence.

Bill