Second Lawsuit Filed Against ICANN (and VeriSign)

penciling_in writes "CircleID reports on a second lawsuit filed against ICANN and VeriSign. 'Newman & Newman, the law firm representing an ad hoc coalition of ICANN-accredited domain name registrars, has filed a lawsuit today against ICANN and VeriSign to Stop 'Anti-Consumer, Anti-Competitive' Wait List Service Implementation.' According to the report, "The complaint attacks ICANN and VeriSign based on 1) Unfair Trade Practices Act Violations; 2) Violation of California Business & Professions Code; 3) Unlawful Tying Arrangement; 4) Attempted Monopolization; 5) Violation of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act; 6) Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage; 7) Breach of Contract; and 8) Declaratory Relief." Also a related website launched at fightwls.com."

Comments

Re:Nice try

[kfg]

No, no. Verisign is suing ICANN for Sitefinder. Crazy, mixed up world, isn't it?

KFG

Re:Monopoly?

[Tango42]

Because 2 DNSs would mean 2 internets. (Unless there was an uberDNS, but then you would just move the problem up a layer)

Re:WLS an "OPTION" or a "CONTINGENCY FEE"?

[tonyray]

Verisign not only holds the domains for several *weeks* after they expire, they also lock them for several weeks *before* they expire so they cannot be transferred to another registrar. They do the latter because they charge twice as much as just about anyone else and once you get your bill from them, they know you will jump ship. By locking the domain you are stuck with either paying them or having your domain resolution halted for several weeks. Now, with a waiting list, Verisign can also threaten you with losing the domain altogether.

Re:anti- W(hich) L(egal) S(tand)

[jdkane]

Just out of curiosity I looked up the domain and it's registered to a Canadian entity. Yes, it would appear as an American venture off the top. Could Canada be coming to the U.S.' rescue, or is the domain just harder to touch from outside the U.S.? Interesting indeed
---
Domain fightwls.com

Date Registered: 2004-1-23
Date Modified: 2004-1-23
Expiry Date: 2006-1-23
DNS1: ns1.momentous.ca
DNS2: ns2.momentous.ca

Registrant

Momentous.ca In Trust
43 Auriga Drive
Ottawa
ON
CA
K2E 7Y8

Administrative Contact

Momentous.ca
Wayne MacLaurin
NOC
43 Auriga Drive
Nepean
ON
CA
K2E 7Y8
6137685100
6138200777
noc@momentous.ca

Technical Contact

Momentous.ca
Wayne MacLaurin
NOC
43 Auriga Drive
Nepean
ON
K2E 7Y8
CA
6137685100
6138200777
noc@momentous.ca

Registrar: NameScout.com

Re:Monopoly?

[Tango42]

People have tried (and still are trying), but because of the problems getting ISPs to recognise them (the ISP has to simulate the uberDNS I was talking about), they don't do very well.

Waiting Lists Work... For Smart Domain Buyers

[gbulmash]

GoDaddy.com offers a "backorder" service. There was a .com version of a .net name I owned and the owner wasn't doing anything with it, so I wanted to grab it and point it at my .net. I knew it was expiring in a few months, so I figured I'd try to backorder it in case it wasn't renewed.

The "backorder" service hovered and watched the status of the domain name, sending me updates when anything changed.

When it expired, they let me know.

When the original registrar put a 30-day Grace Period lock on it after keeping it in expiration mode for 45 days, the service let me know.

When the original registrar released it back into the wild, the backorder bot registered it in my name and let me know.

But if that name hadn't been expiring within a year of my buying the service, it would have been a total waste of money for me to buy the service. And if the prior owner had established a site with any traffic at that domain, then I would have faced a potential battle once I grabbed it. I made sure that it was not in use and was expiring within a few months before I bought the service.

Currently, VeriSign refers you to SnapNames.com for backordering. I'm not sure about any new wait list service they're planning to offer. Here's the differences and similarities between GoDaddy's service and the SnapNames Service:

• First and foremost, SnapNames costs $69 per year per domain name. GoDaddy's service costs $18.95 per year per domain name.

• Each offers you the ability to check the whois for the expiration date on the doman, but both will also let you get to the checkout phase with domains that won't expire for 4 years or more in your cart and never automatically warn you.

• GoDaddy will not offer you the backorder on really prominent .com domain names like Yahoo, Google, and Amazon (though it did on IMDb, Altavista, and Wired). SnapNames will.
• Both warn in the fine print (SnapNames in their T&C, GoDaddy in their "tell me more") that there's no guarantee you'll get the domain even if it expires, though only SnapNames explicitly warns that there might be competition for the name if it becomes available.

Honestly, the services can easily glean date of expiration information from most of the WHOIS records. If some clueless idiot is about to spend $69 a pop to stake backorders on domains that won't expire until 2008, does either service have a responsibility to overtly warn them that this is a waste, or can they bury everything a link or two away from the process and claim it was the buyer's responsibility to check things out?

It would be nice if the courts held consumer service/purchase agreements to a higher standard... requiring a "for dummies" version of the fine print that hits the major points in plain language to be on the front of the order form in standard type. But they don't, and if you're buying a service online, it's your job to know what the heck you're buying.

- Greg