Slashdot Mirror


ICANN Finds No Wrong Doing in Domain Front Running

eldavojohn writes "Remember the investigation ICANN did in domain name front running? Well, it turns out that there was no wrong doing going on at all. What went wrong? Domain name 'tasting', which involves a free five day trial of a domain name, was the big culprit. From the article: 'In some cases ... the committee found that a separate practice of domain name tasting may be causing problems. That refers to someone testing the financial viability of a name for up to five days and then returning it for a full refund, using a loophole in registration policies. Domain tasting can tie up millions of Internet addresses, including ones someone checks but does not buy.' If you check for availability of a website and someone sees you do it and they reserve it before you, it's fair play."

14 of 132 comments (clear)

  1. ICANN finds many coincidences... by jea6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "The ICANN committee said cases suspected of front running often turned out to be coincidence, with multiple parties interested in the same names."

    That, of course, is a load of horse feathers. There were countless examples of the practice being exposed by people searching for domains like NETSOLSUCKSALOT12300091.COM. Were there really many parties interested in that domain?

    --

    sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
    1. Re:ICANN finds many coincidences... by gotzero · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would like to see a list of some of the names there were looked at by multiple parties at the same time...

      I hope they will work on their excuses a little harder next time. They should know who their audience is!

  2. Did not examine Network Solutions by 22_9_3_11_25 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "The report, brought before the ICANN board in New Delhi on Friday, did not examine a controversial practice by domain name seller Network Solutions LLC of grabbing names that people search for on its Web site but don't immediately register."

    1. Re:Did not examine Network Solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "grabbing" isn't quite right. we held the name for 5 days, so the user would have to come back to us to register it, and then released it after that time. We never "tasted" these domains, and never kept any for ourselves. (even though that would probably have been more profitable).

      The idea was that people couldn't use our site/servers to find a domain's availability, and then register it via godaddy. /posting anonymously to preserve employment.

    2. Re:Did not examine Network Solutions by snowlick · · Score: 3, Interesting

      People can buy domain names wherever they choose. That's the way the game operates now, it's for a reason. This practice is quite plainly anti-competitive since domain names are unique. It's nothing but a cheap attempt to lock in buyers in a way reminiscent of the "good old days".

      Despite the fact that you "never kept any", you still stole the right to buy for a period of days. Can you imagine that happening with another commodity? Take lawnmowers for example:

      "Can I buy a John Deere 324 here?"
      "Yep. Now that you have asked, we're the ONLY place that you can buy it for the next 5 days. Oh, during that period we'll be willing to sell it to you for five times more than home depot."
      "Punch in the face"

      --
      Crystal Meth: Would you ingest somthing made from a poisonous gas and an explosive metal? You do it every day -- Salt!
  3. Re:Whew by amasiancrasian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For those that don't know, Bruce Tonkin, Chair of the Generic Names Supporting Organisation (GNSO) of ICANN, holds shares in Melbourne IT, which is an ICANN-approved registrar. Hence a conflict of interest. So don't ever run a WHOIS query on a registrar you intend to buy the name from!

  4. Wow, I just got hit by this today. by Alonzo+Meatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is kinda ironic, because I just got hit by this today. I used Network Solutions lookup tool to search for a domain - simply out of habit - and then when I went to buy the domain at my usual discount registrar, I was told that the domain name was already taken. Then I went back to Network Solutions, did the lookup, and lo and behold, it's still available! Confused, I did a whois lookup, and saw that the site was apparently registered to Network Solutions. So I called up the customer service line for NS, and I was like, "hey, do you know what's going on?" And here's the kicker - the guy tried to make it sound like NS was doing me a favor!

    The logic went something like this - some "unethical third party" could be snooping on my connection, and, seeing that I was looking into a domain purchase, they could snap up the domain and then try to sell it to me at an inflated rate. Of course, if they were to buy the domain from Network Solutions, nothing would stop them. But if they tried to buy it somewhere else, good old NS has my back. Isn't that swell of them?

    Fortunately, the guy was reasonable, and released the hold on the domain. He then tried to upsell me on some stupid hosting service, and I'm like, "Umm, no, I do my own development. And I'm going to buy this domain someplace that doesn't charge $30 a freakin' domain."

  5. Easy workaround - Buy without checking first by billstewart · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If the problem really is just domain-taster scum kiting every name they can generate that gets them ad-banners, then stopping tasters from doing that will cut way back on the problem.
    On the other hand, if it really is front-running, charging for formerly-free tasting will reduce it a bit (because the front-runner will need to spend actual money, not just kited money), so you'll only get ripped off by people who think it's worth gambling the proposed 20-cent ICANN fee or maybe the whole $6 on selling you the domain name.


    It's easy to work around that, though - if you think of a name you might want to use, and want to check if it's available, just buy it from your favorite registrar rather than checking; if it's already in use you'll get rejected. That's less helpful if you want to buy the .com, .net, .org, .info, .biz., .etc., but worst case is *you're* stuck having tasted a name you don't want to keep and paying the 20-cent ICANN restocking fee to return it. The .com name is the most likely to get ripped off, so if you can't find a registrar who'll do an atomic transaction, you could try just the .com or the .com and .net, and then check the others if you succeeded on the first two.


    Also, of course, if front-running sticks around after there's a fee for tasting, it's much more effective to run an automated check-lots-of-names bot that costs front-runners money on gambles that always lose than if it's only costing them free kiting. (There are ways to fight back - captchas on name queries, for instance - but there are also name-grabbers who use DNS/Whois queries, and you can keep querying those without captchas, and not only do those people deserve to lose even more than registrar name-grabbers, but the DNS operator for the .com domain has proposed selling information on queries to (ahem) interested customers, and this'll discourage that.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Easy workaround - Buy without checking first by EvilIdler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We're setting up a new domain at work, with some new services, and the
      other devs wanted to try various domain names. I of course warned them
      about the sort of practices you can expect on the net, and recommended
      a quick brainstorming session to come up with good names to try FIRST,
      then we'd go to our fave registrars to actually buy it only once we've
      settled for a few good names.

      We're going for a domain in a TLD which is supposed to be only for
      "serious business", a country TLD, but anyone can get an org. number
      and grab a whole bunch of stupid typos and point to a pagefull of ads.

      I really wish there was a sort of "credit rating" system for companies
      and individuals who bought domains. No spots on the record, go ahead
      and buy a few domains. Owned domains for years without incident, fine,
      you can buy lots more domains. Buying typo-domain names for your own
      company is fine, but once you start squatting you rack up demerits.
      At some point registrars would then stop selling you more domains.
      NO company or individual should need thousands of domains. Only shady
      people collect 'em like Pokèmon.

  6. Sounds like we should do a distributed project by giminy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why not write a distributed project. It will slowly, in the background, hit up all the recently 'tasted' domain names. This would make tasters think that they got a good domain name and buy it. Then they'll go bankrupt, because they'll buy all these crap domain names that are only touched by the distributed client.

    For every problem, there is a solution...

    --
    The Right Reverend K. Reid Wightman,
  7. Re:Not even "fair" here. by a_nonamiss · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I know this is Slashdot and nobody is expected to RTFA anymore, but at least RTFS(ummary):

    In some cases ... the committee found that a separate practice of domain name tasting may be causing problems ICANN acknowledged that domain tasting is bad and is considering charging a $.20 non-refundable fee to registrants per domain reserved. This would more or less end domain tasting, or at least create an economic disincentive for registrants to do it.

    If they would put this $.20 fee in place, then people would just start writing scripts to generate millions of random queries per day, and the practice would end overnight.
    --
    -Arthur
    Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
  8. Re:Nice. by cheater512 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But how do we know that its safe and that your not just using it to grab good domains? :)

  9. What ICANN is by rs79 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ICANN went through three stages of evolution. At first it was bunch of - by their own admission - clueless board members picked in secret by the US government, specifically Ira Magaziner, Clintons senior science advisor, and Roger Cochetti from IBM.

    Next they were taken over by intellectual property attornies from multinational corporations. Once they'd had their way with internet law and policy came... ... the "domainers" and registration people. That's who goes to ICANN meetings and populate the various ICANN committees.

    Is it any wonder they didn't find anything wrong with the practice they invented and make money from?

    The US Government mandate ICANN operates under says they must be "open and transparent" and are not to create policy, but to determine the consensus of the Internet community and implement policy based on this. I have personally watched them chnage their bylaws retroactively to prevent the "wrong" poeple from being a part of the organizatin. I've personally watched them kick people out of meeings advertised beforehand as "open to anyone". I've personally wathced them adopt policies where only 13 out ot 1000 people agreed with the policy. I can go on for hours about things like this.

    They are one of the most secretive Internet organizations to ever exist. Does anybody else remember Karl Aurbach, when elected to the board had to sue just to see the books? How many organizations do you get to be a board member off but the corporate books are kept secret from you? Why would you need to keep those books secret in the first place.

    ICANN was supposed to be a "membership organization". A decade has gone by. Can you find any way to become a voting member of ICANN? Nope. Doesn't exist. You know why? They're scared they'd be voted out of office and for damn good reason.

    ICANN runs on a $60M a year budget and it a beurocraic nightmare more complex than the UN in terms of its org chart. (cf. Rutkoswki's brilliant diagram of same. It does NOT fit on a regular sized piece of paper). Now keep in mind the job it does used to be done by Jon Postel as a part time task ("IANA") for $15,000. a year.

    When Jon announced there would be new tlds coming ("300 at least, 75 in the first year") the intellectual property attornies made his life a living hell and he sought a legal entitiy as IANA had no legal personality and he himself did not want to assume personal legal liability for adding .web or whatever. His employer, USC/ISI would not back him up. Jon died of heart failure 3 years later.

    If you think ICANN is the best and the brightest of the internet you're sadly mistaken, and if we, as the internet community cannot do better than this, then shame on us all, squared.

    Scrap ICANN. Make something useful.

    A good starting point would be the consensus points from the last IFWP conference - this was to have been ICANN before thart effort, and a years work to reach that consensus, was scuttled by the actors operating in the shadows who have controlled it ever since in a regime where only they benefit.

    Or roll your own root. The only reason ICANN is on power is because they control the legacy root zone. If nobody used it any more, they would fade into the sunset where they belong.

    If Linux computers used a different set of root servers, who cares what Microsoft and ICANN did.

    Read this: http://iconia.com/before_the_dns.txt

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  10. Rule of law by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 3, Interesting
    We have several centuries of experience of what happens when the lawmakers behave like this:

    If you dont want people to support the Mafia, Jihadists, vigilanty groups and various kinds of thugs hitting people with baseball bats, drilling kneecaps with electric drills, or randomly killing and calling it "summary justice", then you have to have a better legal system. If people cant get redress for this kind of thing through the law, you can expect they will take the law in their own hands.

    In short, its governments that behave like this that create third world countries.

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII