ICANN to Add Anti Front Running Charge?

shashib writes to tell us that ICANN is considering a new $0.20 per-transaction fee for large numbers of domain registrations in order to curtail domain tasting abuse. Network Solutions, previously accused of front-running, is offering their support of the new approach and promises to remove the security measures that caused such a commotion back in January. "Because of the prevalence of these practices, earlier this year Network Solutions enacted an opt-in domain protection measure for our customers that reserves available domains for four days. If ICANN adopts the anti-tasting provision, Network Solutions will feel safe in discontinuing its service since the non-refundable fee will deflate domain taster's profits and provide a substantial blow to front runners who use and sell search data for tasting purposes."

Comments

Still won't feel safe

[the4thdimension]

Probably won't do much to deflate the use of this by registrar's that are in a perfect position to do this. They need to lock down about 50 domains without a sale before they lose money... that's quite a few domains. If they get a sale in there somewhere, it was worth it on some level.

NTM, they will likely just find some way to push this cost off onto the customer as a "service fee" or the like.

Why not every time?

[khasim]

Why only for "large numbers of domain registrations"?

For the average person checking a domain, 20 cents is nothing. I'd be happy to pay that to put a temporary "hold" on a domain I was considering.

Re:Why not every time?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry for slightly offtopic but this needs to be said. (BTW, reason for AC is not this being offtopic but in me forgetting password and having used guerrillamail in registering...)

no matter what altruistic reasons they have stated, the real reason for wanting to implement this is to make money.

Why do people keep saying this? Not just about ICANN but every time something happens.

Ofcourse they (big organizations) want to make money. However, we shouldn't care about that. We should care about this: They are doing something to stop domain tasting, which is a big problem. If the company does something that is good for all of us, I don't care if it makes it because of they love us, because they want to earn money or because the CEO's obsession on blue badgers.

Yet, every time anything good happens (ICANN tries to prevent domain tasting, MS announces that IE8 will follow standards better, whatever) there are comments "It's just for money.". Sure but does it matter?

(That all said, I won't comment on how well this particular approach fixes or doesn't fix it. Just commenting on the "but they are making it for the money" comments. I will, however, comment that IE8 following standards properly is a load of bullcrap. Give it a try and weep, if you are a webmaster.)

Re:Why not every time?

[poetmatt]

This has 0 to do with money.

ICANN makes plenty and does just fine.

If you want to buy a domain you can do that the same as always. Want abdjiophgnbio.net, .com, etc, go buy it and pay for it. No surcharge.

However, want to prevent someone from using that domain infinitely for free? Not anymore. This is what it prevents.

It wasn't that someone could hold a domain for a week while they decide to get it that was the issue. It was that they would continually do this between shell companies for a lifetime, until someone pays for it, at no charge to the abuser holding the domain name. Meaning you could automate enough to hold every domain in the world if you had the resources.

To cost them money means its not free, and you need to sell a much higher amount of domains held. The average consumer paying 20 cents is nothing. The average squatter paying 40 bucks for 200 domains, is more in line with the "hey, quit jacking the market" idea.

Also, had this not occurred, what makes you think another company wouldn't do the same?

Stating that this is to make money is obviously not even remotely understanding the issue at hand.

Re:Why not every time?

[mabhatter654]

ICANN is not raising any new fees. They are just making the cut they already get (yep, only 20 cents per domain!) non refundable for registration. Sure it will make them gobs of money off spammers and such... until either they start actually paying for names to keep, or they give up and register less names. Remember there are MILLIONS of domain names registered on 3-day free passes. Spammers and such just create a new account online and pass the domain along for another 3 days.

Regular people that register real domains to use won't pay 2 dimes more! If you're wishy-washy, and change your mind a lot you might pay a few bucks turning names back in... but the spammer problem is so bad now you can't "guess" names, if you don't register spammers take them. Choose wisely.

What of bulk squatters?

[kiehlster]

I just want to see those spammy squatters get a punch in the face one of these days so I can help a friend buy his domain back. There should be a fee imposed on perpetually parked domains. The whole practice of buying expired domains and then holding them ransom for years is so irritating, almost as much as front-running.

Re:What of bulk squatters?

[Just Some Guy]

I just want to see those spammy squatters get a punch in the face one of these days so I can help a friend buy his domain back.

One question: what's a squatter? I have a few domains with no website but with active mail service. Some of these are in the form of $common_city_name$common_business_category.com, so others might incorrectly think that I'm holding their domains hostage.

Re:What of bulk squatters?

[Dan541]

My domain danscomp.net as you can see here http://danscomp.net/ isn't a website, I use it for email and a variety of other purpose's that aren't all http oriented.

Who the hell are you to say whether or not I'm using my domain?

Second,
Why shouldn't I be allowed to reserve a name I may use in the future?

ObTrans: Fine, we'll stop being mafia

[leto]

The only reason Network Solutions will stop domain tasting ("we will protect you for money, or else we will have your knee cap") is because ICANN is putting a stop to it. They never "protected" customers, they reamed in the profits of domain tasting.

and as long as people still pay $35/year to them for domains because they don't know the old monopoly has died, NetSol will play games like these to cash in on that. Just like they sent former customers those fake "renewal" invoices to try and fraud people into going back to them.

Eliminate Tasting

[jon159785]

Get rid of this tasting altogether or at least put severe limits on it. If I go to a bakery I may get to taste one or two cakes, but if I try to taste 100, I get kicked out. The same should apply here too.

Translation

[Gewalt]

Market-Speak-Translation: Spammers make us rich, and we are not willing to take measures that could potentially damage this lucrative relationship. But we are willing to pretend.