Re: [ga] Slamming: An Industry Out of Control

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Eric and all assembly members,

eric@hi-tek.com wrote:

> Hot dang Danny,
>
> Can the courts figure this out?

  Sure they can!  But the more important question is do we want them to?

>
> Nope because by the time they do the playing field will change.
> What was the name of that organization before the U.N.?
> ICANN?

  Given the UN's already perceived problem as perhaps being "Irrelevant"
in the current Bush administration, some concern on other matters such
as ICANN will eventually become or be perceived irrelevant as well.

>
> I know it seems simple and then complicated but how do we get a group together
> that can help?

  The WHite Paper and the MoU did a pretty good job of outlining how.
The problem almost from the start of ICANN was and remains, that
the ICANN staff and BoD did not like or wish to adhere to those
contracts to the stakeholder/users adequately...

>
> e
>
> DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
>
> > Register.com v. Domain Registry of Canada
> > By ComputerWire
> > Posted: 13/09/2002 at 07:22 GMT
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/27101.html
> >
> > Register.com Inc is suing a competitor for allegedly using deceptive tactics
> > to lure away its domain name registration customers. But defendant Domain
> > Registry of Canada Inc seems to think Register.com is using very similar
> > tactics itself, Kevin Murphy writes.
> >
> > Register.com sued DROC in its native New York this week, alleging unfair
> > competition, false advertising, breach of contract and misappropriation of
> > trade secrets. The larger firm alleges DROC engages in a "deceptive and
> > misleading scheme" - a marketing practice known as "domain slamming" - that
> > is costing it thousands of customers.
> >
> > Slamming is the name given to the practice when a registrar sends a
> > solicitation to a customer of a competitor, asking them to transfer their
> > business, but makes the solicitation look like a renewal notice or an
> > expiration notice, to confuse them into making the switch.
> >
> > "These solicitations do not mention that it was Register.com, and not any of
> > the defendants, that originally registered the customers' domain names," the
> > complaint reads. "Nor do they explain that customers who accept defendants'
> > solicitation will actually be transferring their domain name registrations to
> > a direct competitor of Register.com."
> >
> > The company said that in a sample week this August, about 15% of all the
> > customers that transferred from Register.com to another registrar transferred
> > to DROC, which is a reseller for Washington-based eNom Inc and also trades as
> > Domain Registry of America Inc.
> >
> > This is a large percentage, considering there are 122 accredited registrars
> > and thousands of resellers on the market currently. Register.com says it has
> > already lost thousands of customers, each of whom pay around $30 a year for a
> > domain, and is in danger of losing thousands more if DROC continues its
> > mailshots.
> >
> > A copy of a DROC letter sent to a rival's customer, seen by ComputerWire, is
> > entitled "Important Notice" and encourages the registrant to "renew" their
> > domain with the company. It does not use the word "transfer", but explicitly
> > says that it is not an invoice, and alludes to the fact that other registrars
> > are available.
> >
> > But DROC says that it is doing nothing wrong. The company is suing Tucows
> > Inc, another rival, for defamation over claims Tucows told customers its
> > mailers were misleading and could not be trusted (Tucows is countersuing,
> > alleging slamming). DROC also says Register.com engages in similar practices.
> >
> > "They were the first company that ever did it," a DROC spokesperson said.
> > "This is nothing new."
> >
> > A copy of a Register.com mailer seen by ComputerWire is entitled "Domain
> > Expiration Notice", and invites the registrant to "renew and transfer" their
> > name to Register.com. Like the DROC mailer, it does not mention the original
> > registrar by name, but it does use the word "transfer".
> >
> > "All the mailers sent out make it very clear it's a transfer," a Register.com
> > spokesperson said. "We make sure there are a certain amount of references to
> > 'transfer'."
> >
> > While this may be true, the Register.com notice looks very similar to direct
> > mail that VeriSign Inc was enjoined from sending out two months ago, after it
> > was sued by two rivals. The notice from VeriSign, the market leader, made
> > less references to "transferring" domains to another registrar than the
> > Register.com letter.
> > --
> > 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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