Re: [Re: [ga] Re: [Verisign and WLS: The Mike Tysons of domainproposals]]

[Loren Stocker <loren@800.net>]

Dear All,

Herein a clue for the clueless. There are a million more, I suspect.

Best, Loren


"Genie Livingstone" <genie@magi.net> wrote:
2. At the core of this frustration and concern is an ill defined and
poorly
enforced deletions policy and practice between the ICANN accredited
registrars, their agents and their registry.

[Gomes, Chuck] I don't have a clue what is ill defined with regard to
deletions.  It is very clearly defined from the registry point of view.
Moreover, the current practice with regard to deletions is fairly and
uniformly enforced for all registrars by VGRS.  It would be accurate to
say
that registrars have built various business models for the purposes of
grabbing deleted names.  Those business models are essentially the cause
of
the whole deleted names issue coming up in the first place.

Chuck Gomes points out that does not have a clue what ill defined
enforcement of deletions policy and practice is.  I have hence prepared
a single example of this, although we can provide many many more if
needed to illustrate the glaring issue:

POINT ONE: Verisign Registrar domain hoarding:

Registrant:
Graphics Co-op (WEBSITEGROUP-DOM)
3498 N. San Marcos Pl., Suite 6
Chandler, AZ 85224
USA

Domain Name: WEBSITEGROUP.COM
Record expires on 02-Aug-1998. <<<<====================
Record created on 02-Aug-1996.
Database last updated on 9-Jun-2002 21:06:11 EDT.

This is a domain held by VERISIGN Registrar, like tens of  thousands of
other domains held by Verisign Registrar past expiration dates of 1998,
1999, 2000 and 2001.  In this paricular domain's case - the consumer
would have paid FIVE TIMES THE WLS SUBSCRIPTION FEE FOR 1998, 1999,
2000, 2001 and 2002 while Registrar cybersquats on this domain.  Unless
there is a clearly defined UNIFORM DOMAIN NAME DELETION POLICY  on
Registar Level, Registry's best of policies for domain deletion are
worthless since the domain will never get to the Registry delete pool in
the first place.  The only beneficiary  of WLS would be the cash grab by
Verisign Registry registry itself, drawing funds from a consumer who may
never have a chance to secure this domain due to Registrar's domain
hoarding.

POINT TWO: Conflict of Interest

WLS or any similar Registry sponsored effort is simply confilct of
interest as long as Registry also owns a Registrar.   Without a clearly
defined UNIFORM DOMAIN NAME DELETION POLICY Verisign Registrar may
intentionally withold expiring of a certain domain name if the Verisign
Registrar knows that it's sister Company Verisign Registy stands to
benefit more by collecting WLS type of a fee indefinitely.  As there is
no specific rule that would force Verisign Registrar to delete any
domain within a specific time frame past the domain's paid/expiration
date, the problems of domain hoarding to the detriment of consumer by
one specific Registrar - e.g. the one owned by Verisign - will only
grow.



Sincerely,

Genie Livingstone
Magi Inc




--
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