RE: [registrars] Domain Names are a service and not a product

["Rob Hall" <rob@momentous.ca>]

Yes Bhavin, we do.

We have the national Goods and Services tax on all domain sales (7%).

However, the provincial retail sales tax, that does not apply to "services",
is not imposed.

I agree with Mike.  Domains names are simply a "contract for service".  We
do not want any asset or product rights to attach to them.

Rob.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Bhavin Turakhia
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 11:13 AM
To: Michael D. Palage; Ross Wm. Rader; Bruce Tonkin; registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars] Domain Names are a service and not a product


hi,

this is actually a very debatable topic. infact a very important one to us
because it implies service taxation ....

does anyone have service tax imposed on domain names in their country.... i
was wondering how other registrars handle this issue.

i believe if software on a cd maybe considered as a product, then a zone
file in a registry database should probably be considered as a product too

bhavin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 8:09 PM
> To: Ross Wm. Rader; Bruce Tonkin; registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: [registrars] Domain Names are a service and not a product
> Importance: High
>
>
> Ross,
>
> I must object to your qualification of domain names as a product. Numerous
> courts have uniformly held that domain names are a service that exist as a
> result of a service contract.
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Ross Wm. Rader
> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 9:44 AM
> To: Bruce Tonkin; registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Verisign registry requirements for credit
> during 45 day grace period after domain name expiry
>
>
> Bruce/All:
>
> There is a third option - that VRSN act like 99% of all other
> suppliers and
> extend credit terms for goods sold to their clients. It would certainly be
> my preference that we receive an invoice for items sold once a
> month rather
> than allow VRSN to manage our accounts payable.
>
> -rwr
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>
> To: <registrars@dnso.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 1:39 AM
> Subject: [registrars] Verisign registry requirements for credit during 45
> day grace period after domain name expiry
>
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > At present the Verisign registry requires a credit balance to be
> maintained
> > by registrars.
> >
> > After a domain name passes the expiry date, the registry
> "auto-renews" the
> > name, and charges against the funds maintained by the registrar.
> >
> > There is then a 45 day grace period, during which the domain name may be
> > deleted, and the registry fee refunded.
> >
> > Given that probably only around 50% of domain names are
> renewed, there is
> a
> > need for a registrar to maintain a higher credit balance than necessary
> > (unless the registrar chooses to not take advantage of the 45 day grace
> > period, and explicitly delete the domain on the day of expiry).
> >
> > Melbourne IT feels that either:
> > (1) Verisign should not debit the account balance until the end
> of the 45
> > day grace period
> > (2) Verisign should only debit the registrar at the beginning of the 45
> day
> > grace period for an amount that reflects the average renewal
> rate of that
> > particular registrar (e.g if the registrar on average renews 10% of
> domains
> > by the end of the 45 day period, then the registry could debit the
> > registrars account by that number of domains at the beginning of the 45
> day
> > period).
> >
> > What do other registrars think?
> >
> > We have found that as our total number of domains under management has
> > grown, the requirement for a large credit balance is increased
> (and hence
> > the opportunity cost of providing those funds that could be used
> effectively
> > elsewhere).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Tonkin
>
>