Slashdot Mirror


ICANN Moves To Disable Domain Tasting

jehnx writes "Following Google's crackdown on 'domain tasters', ICANN has voted unanimously to eliminate the free period that many domain buyers have been taking advantage of. At the same meeting they also discussed Network Solutions' front running but took no action on it."

22 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. KISS by Amorymeltzer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good.

    (all other posts after this are either wrong or repeating)

    --
    I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
    1. Re:KISS by EveryNickIsTaken · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, IMO, KISS was highly overrated. Gene Simmons is a marketing genius, though.

  2. Network Solutions by Kagura · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Network Solutions recently released a comment on their supposedly unscrupulous business practices. They claim that their automatic registration of domain names that were searched for was an effort to stem the problem of domain tasters. I have a hard time believing that.

    1. Re:Network Solutions by tritonman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yea I think they are full of crap. I tried this myself, I searched on network solutions for some random domain name like kljihsd2342.com, it said it was available, then I decided that I would maybe go with register.com (we do have freedom of choice right?) and it said the domain was unavailable, it was registered by network solutions. This is most certainly abuse of power.

    2. Re:Network Solutions by badfish99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So the solution is simply to do your searches on register.com if you're going to buy from them, and not to go to networksolutions.com at all.

      Although: if ICANN eliminate the free tasting period, so that it costs network solutions some money for each domain they "protect from domain tasters" in this way, it would surely be fun to go to networksolutions.com and do a few hundred more searches for random domain names.

    3. Re:Network Solutions by morcego · · Score: 3, Informative

      Humm, please correct if I'm wrong, but doesn't getting rid of domain tasting pretty much stops NSI from doing this front running scheme ?

      --
      morcego
    4. Re:Network Solutions by julesh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Couldn't you just do a DNS request to see if a domain is taken?

      Some ISPs compile a database of DNS requests for non-existant domains and sell these to the people who put up those obnoxious advertising sites. Your lookup may trigger one of these companies to buy the domain.

  3. Is this really about domain tasting by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Or domain kiting? In tasting, customers register the domain for 5 days and use that up and then let it expire. In kiting, they delete the domain before the grace period is up and then re-register for another 5 day grace for the same domain.

    1. Re:Is this really about domain tasting by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I RTFA. Their main concern was Domain Tasting, but Domain Kiting would be attacked by the same action they took, so it doesn't matter.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:Is this really about domain tasting by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, of the two practices, kiting is perhaps the more harmful practice, since the lather, rinse, repeat cycle essentially allows people to skate on paying, but still holding onto the domain.

  4. Where's the tag? by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I expected to see a 'suddenoutbreakofcommonsense' tag on this one, but maybe I saw it before it had time to be tagged.

    In this case, it doesn't seem to be a sudden outbreak, though... Reading the notes (yeah, I RTFA) I can see that with the possible exception of Bruce Tonkin (who dropped off the call because of possible conflict of interest, thus making him a good guy no matter his opinion on this matter) everyone agreed that any measure except removing of the Add Grace Period (AGP) would be ineffective and only cause other harm to the community.

    It's also obvious from the notes that they've spent no little time thinking about this, and they had their arguments ready. And when talking was done, they were ready to do the right thing. All of them, unanimously.

    It was unclear whether the 21-day period was in effect, though... They talked about having to notify the public of policy changes 21 days in advance or more. Even if it is, 3 weeks is pretty short.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:Where's the tag? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

      For those that don't know, Bruce Tonkin holds shares in Melbourne IT, which is an ICANN-approved registrar. Hence his conflict of interest.

  5. They could deal with an actual problem instead... by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is domain tasting really the most important problem that ICANN could sink its teeth into?

    I say no.

    ICANN has the role of accreditation of domain name registrars themselves (particularly for .com, .net, .org, .info domains). But yet they chose to remain toothless in all but the most very extreme cases of bad registrar services.

    Bad registrars, such as pacnames.com, yesnic.com, and more recently mouzz.com, are willing partners in the international spamming epidemic. They have or still do sell domains to computer criminals, willingly accepting bogus data from these criminals in exchange for a kickback.

    If ICANN really wants to make a positive difference on the internet, they need to flex their muscle and make use of their ability to un-accredit bad registrars. Why they continue to neglect the opportunity to do so is beyond me.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  6. What is interesting to me... by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is the fact that last night I was searching for a sprayfoam insulation company in maryland (using google), and the very first link that came up, was a domain taster domain registered 3 days prior to yesterday, that only had ads and click through sites on it...

    It was most annoying, but the fact it came up as the first link, means google really should do soemthing about sites abusing the ranking systems and not just people abusing the adsense program.

    --
    I came, I conquered, I coredumped
  7. cyber squatters by Tusaki · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Its a good move, but im still waiting to see some more action against domain squatters. It is so infuriating to have a good idea for a website, only to have 99% of the possible/good domain names being taken and being part of some advertizement network. And I just refuse to pay them.

    Ofcourse, in economic terms, it would probably be worth it in the long run if you have a very good idea to pay some extra for the better domain name. But its like paying for "protection" money because the alternative is worse...

  8. Re:They could deal with an actual problem instead. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why they continue to neglect the opportunity to do so is beyond me. Well, as they always say, follow the money.

    If pacnames, yesnic and mouzz are getting kickbacks from the criminals, maybe they are sending a cut to ICANN.
  9. Impact on registrars like GoDaddy? by StringBlade · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder what impact this will have on registrars such as GoDaddy.com who (according to Wikipedia) have 55.1 million domain names registered a year of which 51.5 million are canceled and refunded just before the 5 day grace period.

    While GoDaddy.com doesn't get to keep that money, it does generate a revenue flow. That is, GoDaddy.com must return the money, but there's no requirement to cut a check that day. It may be a week or three before GoDaddy.com has to cut a refund check. In the meantime they have money to work with much like banks do. Most businesses operate on revenue flow and not strictly the net balance they have available at any one time.

    If ICANN drops this grace period and domain tasters drop away (possible if unlikely) that leaves GoDaddy.com with 51.5 million domains at $10 per domain (or $515 million) in revenue flow that just dried up. That's a lot of money to just disappear from your business finances.

    IANAA, but I think that this decision will have the most impact on large registrars. Perhaps a one day grace period for people who honestly made a mistake would have been more appropriate. One day is not enough to get a domain properly "tasted" because it takes about that long for the DNS entry to propagate through the network, and by the time it was out the domain would either be permanent or gone.

    --
    ...and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
    1. Re:Impact on registrars like GoDaddy? by IBBoard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      GoDaddy.com who (according to Wikipedia) have 55.1 million domain names registered a year of which 51.5 million are canceled and refunded

      As you said, they can't do that any more so they'd have either 55 million domains registered with 0 cancels, or 3.5 million domains registered for legitimate reasons and 51.5 million domains that weren't registered because the registeree couldn't get a temporary freebie.

      If ICANN drops this grace period and domain tasters drop away (possible if unlikely) that leaves GoDaddy.com with 51.5 million domains at $10 per domain (or $515 million) in revenue flow that just dried up. That's a lot of money to just disappear from your business finances.

      It's also a lot of revenue to be relying on when a good proportion of it will be from suspect activities (spammers/squatters) who could be restricted by decisions such as this at any moment.

      At the end of the day if GoDaddy vanishes then it's no big loss. All the smaller registrars will survive without the 'ill gotten gains' money and registrars will continue. It happens with .uk domains, so it can happen with .coms. NIC.uk's FAQ page doesn't even have any reference to returning a domain.
  10. ICANN says by Ranger · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't taste me, bro!

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  11. Don't worry about the name by Comboman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It is so infuriating to have a good idea for a website, only to have 99% of the possible/good domain names being taken and being part of some advertizement network.

    If you have a good idea for a website, pick a unique, memorable name, not an obvious one. Who's the number one auction site; auction.com or eBay? Who's the number one on-line bookseller; books.com or Amazon? What is an ebay anyway? What does a river in Brazil have to do with books? Nothing, it doesn't matter, most people are going to find your website through Google anyway rather than typing in a URL.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  12. Overall a great decision, but . . . by MisterSquid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Along with many others, I deplored Network Solutions' preemptive domain registration which took advantage of domain tasting. However as a former beneficiary of the present domain tasting policy, I can see at least one benefit to consumers (and businesses) that gets overlooked because of the audacity of Network Solutions' behavior.

    About a year ago I registered a domain that had a transliteration of a foreign word. I discovered, within a few hours, that my transliteration was not the preferred spelling (for example, "perogi" as opposed to the preferred "pirogi"). I asked my registrar to refund my money for the first domain and registered the domain with the preferred spelling.

    Honest mistake and no one was harmed in the process of deleting the undesired domain. Sure, I could have researched that transliterated word before registration but it simply did not occur to me that a spelling which in my day (yeah, I'm over 40) was correct would have been superseded. (Sort of like finding out BBQ is actually spelled "barbecue".)

    --
    blog
    1. Re:Overall a great decision, but . . . by SnapShot · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I understand your anecdote, but considering that a domain name only costs $9 I'm still on the side of banning the practice.

      ICANN says it pretty eloquently:

      Whereas, it is apparent that the AGP is being used for purposes for which it
      was not intended;

      Whereas, abuse of the AGP is, in the opinion of the majority of respondents
      whose statements were collected by the GNSO Ad Hoc Group on Domain Name
      Tasting (4 October 2007 report), producing disadvantages in the form of
      consumer confusion and potential fraud that outweigh the benefits of the
      AGP;


      In other words, your experience has become the exception (by a factor of millions) not the rule and a few bad apples have ruined it for the rest of us.
      --
      Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.