Slashdot Mirror
ICANN/Verisign Sued For Monopoly Abuse
Andy_R writes "The BBC is reporting that the World Association of Domain Name Developers (WADND) have filed suit against ICANN and Verisign for alleged violations of antitrust, conspiracy, monopolization and price fixing laws. The suit alleges that the two are entering an unlawful agreement that gives VeriSign a permanent monopoly over the all .com and .net domain name registrations, and the right to raise prices at 7% per annum forever. The text of the lawsuit is available as a .pdf from WADND." ZDNet has the story as well.
...they can only afford to provide single letter domains now?
Obviously we should give control of the internet over to the UN. They would never abuse or monopolize it.
.... The only people who will win are they lawyers. Makes me wish I went into law rather than computer science.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
Domain registrations should cost $100 a year, just to help stop idiots from buying every domain name for $8.95 and reselling them for more than they are worth.
The way I see it, there should only be one entity in charge of assigning of names for the internet. With millions of people on the internet, having multiple organizations in charge of domains and such would make the internet so much less efficient.
Show this to your friends and family that don't know what a real hacker is
We can discuss .museum!
maybe i am missing something, but aren't there many companies that allow domain registration, and not just verisign? Granted ICANN is a monopoly, but I think I am missing the point of the lawsuit (the article does little to explain this any better)
the court in which country will handle this? I don't see this, since it is international problem here. Is there any interantional court? Geneva? US? UN? Japan? we are talking about whole earth...
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
7% forever is just crazy, short term it's not a big problem, but over a long enough period it's like a licence to print money (which explains why that's what they wanted). It would be a different story if they linked it to inflation or some other index.
Drag n' Drop DVD Recommendations
If WADND thinks they will win this suit, I have a hotel on the Boardwalk to sell them.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
After how that entire situation was handled, I'm disgusted by ICANN and verisign ( who's on my shit list for the wildcard crap they pulled a year+ back ).
Of course, it's not like the money is going to go anywhere else than a lawyer's pocket, but in this case I don't mind that much.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
We can only wish they both lose...
If anything the prices of new domains should go down. After all isn't the technology getting cheaper. Maybe they are adding a nightmare of a bureaucracy they need to pay, or maybe they want higher salaries. Either way if my broadband prices and computer equipment are falling so should theirs.
How can it possibly cost more every year to register a domain name? Everything involved except labour continually becomes cheaper - bandwidth, processing power, storage, everything! The process is basically automated anyway, so how can a steady increase in the cost of registering a domain be justified?
The price is already too high, in my opinion - companies like verisign (and other domain name registers) are making money by charging for something that is essentially free to create. For-profit companies should be kept out of domain registration - isn't that part of the point of ICANN in the first place?
Note that "567" is not a plausible octet in the example IP (v4) address as shown in IV.A.9 on page 4 of the complaint.
So, having lost the battle over who "owns" the Internet (or at least the DNS system), it seems as though the next step is to challenge the "owner" as a monopoly.
Hmm. Being a monopoly is not a crime. It only becomes so when abuse of monopoly power can be demonstrated. This does not look like it (yet), as there is a big difference between what you are contractually allowed to do, and what you actually end up doing.
"She's furniture with a pulse"
I'd like to see domain names to be much cheaper, so that neophytes can get a domain name for $1US/year.
What pays for the DNS system anyway, and why aren't domain names sold directly to the public instead of through registr[ars][ants?]?
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
You never know, they may just land on Free Parking.
I was going to say that Verisign has quashed any competition with respect to the provision of SSL certificates, but it appears that there are alternatives available (some of them much more competitively priced, in fact- https://www.registerfly.com/ssl/ for example. However, I did notice that they use something called a ChoicePoint Unique Identifier. Due to the security issues with ChoicePoint, I find it rather ironic that they are issuing identifiers (purpose unknown) for something related to security.
I can't see any UN involement here, so I guess we can safely be against ICANN?
They can do that? Take all the .com names I mean.
I really hope it leads somewhere, cause they also have ssl certificat (almost) monopole. I write almost, cause eventhough they're other compagnies. The price difference isn't that much. Our client demand the certificat so we have no other choices than get one...
:)
Will that make the price drop? I think not. Will they pass the bill(fees) to the customers? hum I think yep
I hate it when an action produce an equal negative opposite reaction
But at the end we, the little e-commerce business provider will have to pay. But hey that's ok, cause we gonna make so huge profit soon from our e-online businesses.
The web is getting pretty ugly. Who is really gonna do something about it? A court? UN? you guys the geeks? Skynet?
It's funny how I make sense to others and not myself...
Just like my property taxes and unlike my last few raises :( What did everyone expect though. We have a war to pay for damnit!!!
gasmonso http://religiousfreaks.com/http://wadnd.com/
Appears to be part of...
Targetedtraffic.com, who appear to be working with folks at the reputable-sounding domain names americanflags.com, revenue.net, golfcourses.com, ireit.com, erealestate.com, and it looks like they all hail from Delray Beach, Floriduh.
Congratulations, guys! I don't know whether you're spammers or not, but it takes talent to sound like a filthier bunch of domain-hijacking cockgobblers than the entire marketing department of Verisign. I mean, seriously -- I read those domains and was surprised when I didn't see any of you on the ROKSO list of the top 100 spammers. I actually looked. About the only way you could have looked like a bigger bunch of dirtballs would have been to have been based in Boca Raton, FL, or Slidell, LA.
I hate to say this guys, but even though you're not on the ROKSO list - after seeing who you're working with, I kinda hope Verisign/ICANN wins.
at least to have an informeed comment :)
http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-21nov0 5.htm/
But it doesn't mean they automatically get $500, that is an urban legend.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
an actual interesting idea!
When the article quotes the filing as saying: "thereby precludes competitors from ever entering the .com and .net domain name registration market" That seems a bit misleading, since the icann/verisign agreement is about maintaining the central "whois" database not excluding others from offering registration services.
You will still be able to register domain names through GoDaddy, Dotster or someone else.
The biggest concern here for the rest of us, who want to keep it inexpensive to register domain names, is what will be the cost that is passed along to people and companies registering domain names if the cost of versign's database management service will be rising at a rate "greater than inflation"
Was this contract put out to bid? It seems that just managing a database, running backups and maintaining the software that allows registrars to remotely access it and register new domain names shouldn't be an expense that rises much beyond the rate of inflation.
Theoretically, though, verisign could undercut the registrar competition with a deal like this. Though given its history of milking its customer base for all its worth with fees that are more than double the competition, that seems unlikely.
From the WHOIS details, the World Association of Domain Name Developers is controlled by "Virtual Dates Inc." and "eRealEstate.com". Sounds pretty serious to me.
A monopoly over .com and .net domains? Damn it, guess I need to inform my website they don't control my domains, VeriSign still does!
I guess my webhost must also be paying the added $20/year to VeriSign for my domain registration. Oh, make that $30 for one of my domains since my host registers it for me for free.
and we always used the: "paying the fines and taxes on the Community Chest and Chance cards, and income taxes into the kitty rather than to the bank" method of building the free parking kitty.
CFIT appears to be much less of "fuckweasels" to me.
SPF support for most open source mail servers can be found at libspf2.
someone must have been trying to steal boardwalk and park place from the properties manager again.
If it took them 4 rewrites of their complaint, and they still sound like a bunch of whiny brats...this trial could take awhile.
They could just take the change out of the parking meter, but then they'll likely Go To Jail.
Hi everyone,
I am writing this letter to all of you personally because it is time for all of you to stand up for a cause. Some of you might be aware that ICANN and Verisign recently announced a proposed settlement of their pending litigation (Verisign had sued ICANN a few years ago and that lawsuit is pending). We believe this settlement is unfair, unjust, inappropriate and would be blasphemous to the Internet community and to your Business.
Some Highlights of the settlement
The entire settlement documents are posted online at http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/sett lement-agreements.htm
The part with regards to pricing is in Section 7.3 of http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/com- registry-agreement-22sep05.pdf
What can you do?
This settlement agreement will be signed very soon unless the ICANN Board is convinced otherwise. You all represent the voice of the various Domain Name Consumers worldwide. All of you should send your comments about this settlement and how it will affect your business.
Send your comments to settlement-comments@icann.org
Keep the following points in mind before sending your comments:
Feel free also to forward this email to your Customers and Resellers and urge them to indivi
From Google, WADND.com and Airkatrina.com http://www.4law.co.il/gary2905.htm
g _news/12810773.htm
Working from his Aventura apartment, Gary Kraser posed as a pilot to solicit thousands of dollars over the Internet to pay for relief flights to Hurricane Katrina-ravaged Louisiana, the FBI said Monday following his arrest.
Among his pitches on www.AirKatrina.com: That he evacuated a 7-month-old infant who underwent transplant surgery in South Florida.
NEW ORLEANS, LA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 09/02/2005 -- A group of ex-military pilots was formed today to fly medical supplies in and patients in need of "extreme medical care" out of the worst parts of disaster-stricken New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. The veteran pilots, with years of special operations and air rescue experience, launched their efforts this morning to help expand traditional airlift efforts, which have become overwhelmed by the scope of the disaster. The first emergency rescue flew a seven-month old baby from Louisiana to South Florida where she underwent transplant surgery. The pilots are donating their time and planes to this effort, and have been using the Internet to coordinate both the missions and the fundraising to make these flights possible. Each emergency flight requires $3,000 to $4,000 in fuel to airlift extremely ill victims to emergency hospital settings out of state. Donations are being taken online at www.airkatrina.com and a blog of the rescue activities has been set up at http://airkatrina.blogmaker.com./ "This is an example of Internet entrepreneurs quickly mobilizing to solve a major human crisis," said Rick Schwartz, a member of the World Association of Domain Name Developers (WADND.COM), which includes the website www.WorldJet.com which was used to recruit the pilots. The cost of setting up the site was donated and additional contributions have been made by other members of the Internet community, including DomainSponsor, a division of Los Angeles-based Oversee.net. "Time is running out for those most in need," said Schwartz. "Fortunately, the Internet allows real-time donations to be converted into the precious gasoline to allow us to make many more trips to save lives." Schwartz reiterated that zero percent of the fees donated will be used for overhead, with all money (minus banking fees) going directly to gasoline. For more information or to donate money to fund an airlift, please visit http://www.airkatrina.com./
Turned into a big scam http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/breakin
What are the qualifications for being a "Domain Name Developer"?
I want to put that on my resume too.
I read
Why only 7%? Why not 70%? How high would domain prices have to go to get rid of Myspace.com?
The main page looks like wang fouey designed it with Frontpage 2000. A bunch of the images are broken. At first I thought it was just FireFox, but then I tried it with Opera and then /cringe IE. All the same, busted look. Makes me wonder if they should be in charge .com and .net if they can't get their homepage working right.
As a long time agitator for the loosening of the ICANN/Verisign stronghold over domain registrations and other internet related items, I have to admit to being surprised to find that they're facing an even bigger bunch of l4m3r& in court. Who would have thought it? I *gasp* think I might want to see ICANN win this one.
2 cents,
Queen B
HDGary secures my bank
The row concerns the decision by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) to allow the private firm Verisign to maintain control of .com forever.
Not to utterly nitpick here, but you'd think a highly reputable institution like the BBC would have journalists that comprehend that acronyms are capitalized. When one makes errors, such as improper spelling in a blog or in casual writing it doesn't bother me so much--but for some reason it really irks me to see BBC use "Icann" in a news article.
This aside, this is really an awful, uninformative news piece. For instance, it doesn't say anything about who the "World Association of Domain Name Developers" are nor who they represent.
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
As an employee of one small .com Registrar I would rather support WADND in this case. ICANN and
Verisign are a bunch of greedy lazy bastards. ICANN earns 25 cents per year per every .com/.net domain name (so called ICANN tax - basically for nothing, they only perform Registrar accreditations),
and Verisign takes 6 bucks for maintaining .com/.net Registry. But there other ICANN taxes, which
are not so widely visible to general public. ICANN charges all .com/.net Registrars $20k a year just
for the right to register .com/.net domains (plus 25 cents tax for each domain), last year that
annual ICANN tax was 5 times lower (around $4k). So basically small guys on the domain market are
now in much more difficult conditions, because profit margins have significantly decreased in
last few years, some Registrars have a profit margin of 25 cents per domain name. That is you have
to register or renew at least 80,000 domains a year just to pay all ICANN taxes, that is not counting
labour costs etc. Basically as a result of ICANN actions domain registration business has been closed for small guys, it is now not possible to enter this business without shitloads of money. It was deliberate
action of ICANN, they even planned in their annual budget a descrease of Registrar number from
500 to around 200.
Try Simple-SSL. It's exactly the same certificate offered by RapidSSL, but significantly cheaper.
Works in most browsers (test it if you're not sure!), and it's single-root, not chained-root (chained-root is a bit more cumbersome to set up).
(No, I have no affiliation, I'm not even a customer - I have a client who bought a RapidSSL cert, so I know it works fine; I didn't find Simple-SSL until after I'd already bought mine from somebody else.)
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
I'm sorry, but they really do sound like whiney little shits filing this against ICANN and Verisign. If ICANN and Verisign had a monopoly over ALL domain names in creation, I could see how people would get upset. But they created the .com and .net just for themselves to sell, okay? If you don't want to pay an increase in subscription, just change to a different .whatever; it's not really all that difficult. Does anyone else see this as flamingly stupid?
Ex nihilo nihil fit.
Oh, my God. $36 for a 3x5 state flag? You, sir, are a crook.
Use .org or ccTLDs instead.
Not jus the WADND but also the Coalition for ICANN Transparency (CFIT) has sued VeriSign. Here's a news story that tells about both the lawsuits.
d =VeriSign+Sued+by+Trade+Groups
http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=14658&he
own the damn Internet BIATCHES
You take the actions of corrupt individuals, squint your eyes and say "yup! the U.N.'s a for-profit entity!" Using that logic, the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress is for-profit entities, going by the guilty pleas and indictments over the last few weeks. Sheesh.
O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
Whoa, I'm confused. Are we for ICANN, or against ICANN, in this round?
ICANN is neither here nor there, really. They're not perfect, but they're doing a pretty reasonable job under very difficult conditions.
In contrast, Verisign is a bunch of corrupt, blood-sucking, clueless managerial parasites who hire the lowest-paid and most utterly unqualified staff ("What is telnet, Sir?"), and do their level best to milk the Internet dry while contributing precisely nothing of value.
To understand Verisign, think of RIAA + SCO + Diebold + Jack Thompson. You get the idea -- no redeeming qualities at all.
We like Verisign about as much as we like anthrax.
Who in the hell uses VeriSign (in this day and age) anyhow?
A high market share does not mean great service or product, it means great marketing tactics that appeal to spoonfed/gulible consumers.
the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
From the Complaint: An example of an IP number might be: 12.34.567.89.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
I wished Verisign was still owned by the founder of ubuntu, stuff like this would of never happened if it was, if anything they would be shipping free .com domain names to our door!
Monopoly abuse is when you try to force the whole board into your brother. That's all that has happened here.
ICANN is sued by multiple companies/organizations over the course of any given week. Often the lawsuit is just a "Hello, we're here!" type of thing. I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't their first anti-trust lawsuit, and I'm quite sure their General Counsel shrugged this off immediately.
ICANN is run and funded extensively by lawyers. While the media runs around like the sky is falling over these lawsuits, ICANN ticks along as usual.
ICANN and Verisign should be forced to give up their monopoly control of the Internet! Verisign's customer service has always been horrible precisely because they have no real competition.