Bulkregister Sues Verisign Over Marketing Campaign

zentec writes "An article at Datacenter wire indicates that Bulkregister sued Verisign over their often confusing and pretty slimy mailing campaign. The campaign is (of course) targeted to domains registered somewhere other than Verisign. The mailings are nothing more than domain "slamming", and look like renewal bills rather than a solicitation to renew with Verisign. What's particularily slimy is that the mailings are for renewals on domains either recently renewed with someone else, or for domains expiring between 120 and 180 days! Bulkregister is also seeking an immediate injunction against the mailings saying that they are an impediment to current contracts with their customers." There's also a Reuters article, or see our original story. Bulkregister has run their own sleazy marketing campaign in the past, and paid the price for it.

Comments

slamming?

[night_flyer]

The mailings are nothing more than domain "slamming"

obviously the writer doesnt have a clue as to what slamming is

I used to work at WorldCom, slamming is switching long distance without the customers permission/knowledge, if the customer returns this card to VeriSign, then they give permission, its not VeriSigns fault that the customer is clueless...

Re:slamming?

[LoadStar]

obviously the writer doesnt have a clue as to what slamming is

I used to work at WorldCom, slamming is switching long distance without the customers permission/knowledge, if the customer returns this card to VeriSign, then they give permission, its not VeriSigns fault that the customer is clueless...

Slamming is also using a deceitful or misleading sales technique in order to elicit the customer to change long distance companies. An example is treating "no" as "no I don't want to keep my existing phone company," or a company naming a subsidiary "No Thanks Long Distance" so those who say "No Thanks" get switched.

These are extreme examples, but there have been others where the customer clearly did not intend to switch long distance companies, but an underhanded technique by the telemarketer allowed them to switch the customer.

This is now why they have "Slamming Protection" to prevent any long distance company from changing you without you explicitly telling both companies (the long distance company AND your local carrier) that you intend to switch.

And for the record, I agree - these "renewal notices" are, in my opinion, clearly mail fraud (disguising a sales promotion as an invoice) and highly deceptive, not to mention sleazy.

P.S. Might I compliment you on your wonderful attention to customer care? "The Customer Is Clueless." Yeesh. Thanks - I'll add WorldCom to the list of companies never to do business with.

Re:I dont see the problem...

[Junta]

Well, sometimes the people receiving the mail may not be the ones last responsible for registering the domain (in a company).
Even if they do know, they may not keep that much track of the company and may think that perhaps Verisign bought up whatever company they registered with.

Good 'ol caveat emptor

[Mannerism]

True, the business practices that some domain registrars have been employing have ranged from the appalling (see article and links) to the amusing and rather clever (marketing the Western Samoa domain digraph - .ws - as "website"). But when it comes right down to it, we're all paying way less than we did when NSI was the only game in town. Given a choice, I'd rather keep careful records and read the fine print than subsidize yet another monopoly.

Decide for yourself

[nobodyman]

Here's a picture of the notices sent out by verisign.

A while back, some companies were getting in trouble by sending businesses "invoices" for office supplies when they were in fact nothing more than a cheap attempt to get office managers to accidentally sign off on them. I'm pretty sure that you don't see this as much anymore because the offending companies got the smackdown from the government. These "renewal notices" seem to fall under the same guise.