ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] The Expiration and Re-Distribution of Domain Names


Title: Help
 
Starting point : It is unacceptable that ordinary internet users and members of the public are disadvantaged when domain names expire and are redistributed.
 
The underlying principle of ICANN is that domain names should be "distributed fairly without advantage to any party".
 
However, when expired domain names become available, they are often snapped up by registrars, or scripts designed to detect their availability in seconds. This prevents the fair distribution to ordinary people.
 
Therefore a process is required. I propose:
 
60 days after expiry date, names are automatically placed in a central pool of expired domain names.
 
Every 60 days, the names that have been in that pool for at least 30 days will be published and offered in a Public Landrush.
 
This Landrush will be administered along the lines of the .info and .biz landrushes, through competing registrars (thereby providing some much-needed revenue to the failing domain name industry).
 
However, the rules will be tightly regulated:
 
1. There will be no advantage gained by submitting "exclusive" queues because in the selection process, ALL applications for a given name will be randomised, and ONE name chosen. This will NOT be done on a "round-robin" process going from registrar to registrar.
 
2. All participating registrars will be required to use identical "Common User Interfaces" accessible online so that EVERY member of the public can have access to EVERY interface. Registrars who do not wish to open their sites to everyone using this common user interface need not participate. They can just carry on their normal business with their chosen clients but not take part in the Public Landrushes for Re-Distributed Names. The Re-Distribution of Domain Names must be organised for maximum benefit for consumers, NOT for the sake of registrars. (There will, however, be benefit for participating registrars.)
 
3. The registration price for a domain will be the same, whichever registrar you apply through. However, once you obtain a domain using this method, registrars may subsequently offer you additional services at their own prices, in order to facilitate competition and variation of product.
 
4. There will be a small token price for each application (say $5) to prevent frivolous applications and to secure credit card details for successful applicants. However, there will be no card "authorisation" and you will only be charged when you are successfully selected. In the event of a failed credit card, the applicant will have 7 days to re-submit credit card details, after which the name will be offered to the randomly-selected number 2, 3, 4 etc on the list. If no applicant obtains a domain, it will return to the Pool and be re-issued in the next Landrush. After a second issue in a Landrush, if it has not been taken, it will simply be placed for sale live.
 
A Second model would bypass Registrars altogether and simply offer a Landrush through a centralised provider. On successful selection, the applicant would then select from a list of Registrars and purchase the name through them. This would favour competition because people would tend to choose cheap Registrars unless they wanted special services, in which case they could exercise choice.
 
I suspect the Second model might involve greater difficulties with the problem of an applicant using multiple identities and multiple e-mail addresses - but, to be honest, that problem will always exist, and my analysis of the .info and .biz whois databases suggests that in practice, a large variety of applicants obtain names... much larger than the small exclusive groups who presently "snatch" expired names on their release. In some cases, they are never really released at all.
 
While I'm not saying that these models do not need discussion and fine-tuning, I suggest to you that the interests of ordinary members of the public - and the obligation for a fair and open distribution of names - are better served this way than by the "inside" hijacking of expiring domain names which takes place at present.
 
There will be those who argue that because my systems reject "round-robin" they will disadvantage small registrars. My counter-argument is (a) my system puts the needs of the public first (b) I think the public may very well NOT choose NetSol just because they are big... indeed Landrush applications are showing a growing discrimination against big registrars (c) if this is still asserted as a problem, then part of the application fees could be used to "subsidise" those who are supposed to lose out (though I would not like this very much).
 
There will also be bleatings from the Intellectual Property industry of course. But I would not involve any Sunrise or IP claims process at all in these Landrushes. There are already due processes in place for the protection of Intellectual Property, and as these are re-distributed names, companies would already have had time to challenge the names previously, and would continue to be able to do so in the future.
 
I invite comments from interested parties, and from ICANN, on this way of re-distributing expired domain names.
 
Richard Henderson


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>