<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] WLS referred to the DNSO; WLS & competition
Will there be a comment on this specific instance of WLS abuse from the
VSign people or anyone else?
Thomas, will this make the summary you're preparing?
Perhaps we'd all be better served if Ben Edelman started an exhaustive
research into just how many domain names have long been expired and are
potentially WLS abuse material (which _all_ of them are of course, but
some more than others).
Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> Here's an interesting example of the abuse which Verisign (and others)
> will be able to practice if the WLS is implemented:
>
> I wish to register the doma
>
> Domain Name: DIGITALBOOKS.COM
> Administrative Contact, Technical Contact
> Dickson, Chris (CD6751
> <http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?%21CD6751&id=0>)
> austin@CDICKSON.NET
> Individual
> 14924 Jacks Pond Road
> Austin, TX 78728
> 512.244.3348 (FAX) 512.244.3358
> Billing Contact:
> Slaughter, Kristen (KSS203
> <http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?%21KSS203&id=0>)
> kristen@IBOOKS.COM
> ibooks.com, Inc.
> 804-C Rio Grande St.
> Austin , TX 78701
> 512-478-2700 X102 (FAX) 512-478-0500
>
> Record last updated on 22-Mar-2002.
> Record expires on 20-Jan-2002.
> Record created on 20-Jan-2000.
> Database last updated on 22-Apr-2002 09:34:00 EDT
>
>
> *****Expired since January 20th of this year!
>
> Of course, it is possible for me to BACK ORDER this domain through
> Verisign's SNAPBACK service...
>
> Now, this is evidence of a clear-cut abuse of Verisign's
> registrar/registry position.
> Perfect example why the WLS schema should not be implemented.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>
> in name
> DIGITALBOOKS.COM
>
> But, I am unable to do so through my registrar of choice despite the
> fact that the domain is expired:
>
> inThomas Roessler wrote:
>
>> According to
>> <http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-22apr02.htm>, the WLS
>> proposal has been referred to the DNSO for comment.
>>
>> I'd suggest that the GA tries to dig out those arguments which are
>> actually reliable, and compiles an "official" position, this time.
>>
>>
>> Here's one possible argument which hasn't come up, yet, I think.
>> Maybe my thinking is flawed - if so, please point it out.
>> Consider any registrar who has hoarded expired domain names. Such a
>> registrar could wait for WLS subscriptions being made through it.
>> Once a WLS subscription for a hoarded domain name is there, the
>> domain could be relased - and immediately re-registered through the
>> same registrar, due to the WLS subscription. If a WLS subscription
>> is made through a different registrar, nothing happens.
>>
>> Rumor of this could be expected to quickly spread in the community:
>> If you want to back-order a domain name which has expired, but is
>> not available, go to the old registrar for your WLS subscription.
>>
>>
>> Ultimately, this approach to selling off hoarded domain names (which
>> would be economically quite attractive at least to Verisign, and - at
>> sufficiently high WLS prices - possibly also for other registrars)
>> could lead to a _significant_ increase in the cost for registering
>> an expired domain. It would also skew competition between
>> registrars as far as registrations of these domains are concerned -
>> effectively, potential registrants would be forced to go to the "old"
>> registrar.
>>
>>
>> The conclusion from this scenario is to hold up WLS until the
>> hoarding problem has been solved.
>>
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|