Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Network Solutions Settles With FTC

Posted by timothy on from the slap-on-wrist-with-noodle dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Not sure if this is new or merely corrected: Network Solutions, Inc. has settled Federal Trade Commission charges that its deceptive marketing practices unlawfully tricked consumers into transferring their Internet domain name registrations to the company. The terms of the settlement permanently bar Network Solutions from misrepresenting that a consumer's domain name is about to expire or that the transfer of a domain name is actually a renewal. The order also requires the defendant to pay consumer redress pursuant to the terms of a previously settled class action lawsuit."

9 comments

  1. I've been affected by this by Jack+Schitt · · Score: 2, Informative

    I administrate the website for my company and I have actually received notices the the domain was about to expire. The first one scared me, but I check the records of when I registered the name and found the email to be incorrect.

    --
    This message brought to you by Jack Schitt's Previously Shat Shit
  2. settlement bars them from lying? by srstoneb · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The terms of the settlement permanently bar Network Solutions from misrepresenting that a consumer's domain name is about to expire or that the transfer of a domain name is actually a renewal.
    I think it's a little scary that a settlement was required to bar them from doing this. As deceptive business practices, bordering on blatant lies, why aren't all registrars barred from such practices by default?
    1. Re:settlement bars them from lying? by njchick · · Score: 3, Informative
      It's not just blatant lies. It's racket. Unlike other registrars, Netsol (now VeriSign) actually has technical means to "expire" your domain name from the nameservers if you don't pay. Netsol could easily do it and then claim that they "forgot" that the domain was transferred to another registrar. A notice from another registrar could have been ignored without much fear to lose the domain.

      I'm assuming VeriSign was lucky to have such an "understanding" plaintiff.

    2. Re:settlement bars them from lying? by ulmanms · · Score: 1

      There's nothing in the settlement that says that they've ever done that.

      I think this is great news, having received several 'expiration' notices for domains that were up to 2 years from expiring, but saying that they'd intentionally expire your domain that was registered with someone else is going a little too far, don't you think?
    3. Re:settlement bars them from lying? by njchick · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If somebody threatens to break your car and then doesn't, it's still racket if the threat is credible. It was a credible threat that Netsol would expire domains.

      The story with *.com and *.net wildcards only confirms that VeriSign has no integrity and can only be stopped by legal actions.

  3. More about the VeriSign Class Action... by yadayadayada · · Score: 1

    Here

  4. Screw Verisign by chrispyman · · Score: 1

    I got one of Verisigns renewel notices too, and I did have to read it carefully to find out it was to transfer my domain to them. I fear that many didn't read the fine print and fell for this scam. Now all we need to do is to sue them for their horrible sitefinder "service."

  5. How much longer? by osguru · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is the US goverment going to allow companies that flat out disregard ethical, moral, and legal standards - only to drag things out in court to an eventual settlement.

    This only continues to enforce that if you have enough money, time, and lawyers - you can side step anything.

    We are a nation that continues to contradict ourselves. This isn't surprising given that our entire foundation is built on a contradiction claiming that we are rightous while the actions our goverment continues to be nefarious.

    Why are we allowing this to happen?

  6. Network Solutions being bad? Big surpise ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's no big suprise given other recent actions of it's associate (anyone that's a regular around here knows of what I speak).

    It really does not surprise me that they would use such a marketing tactic, as they are not trustworthy and have followed unethical practices in the past. They've left a mountain of ruined people behind them, and what do they get? A slap on the wrist.

    We should do what's best for the industry and cull companies from our ranks quickly and efficiently, before the consumers have suffered losses. Too often we are left simply repairing damage - we should work to prevent damage in the first place.