RE: [ga] defining a problem...

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

If you review the actual GNSO motion pending, the fees would be a lot
higher than what you have indicated.  If a registrar registered 500
names (as in your example), and returns 499 of them, the following would
apply:

1.      If only 1 name were kept, the registrar would be allowed 50
deletes for the month.  (The motion states the greater of 10% or 50
names)
2.      450 names would have to be paid for at full price.
3.      Assuming $6.42 per name that means the registrar would have to
pay $2889.00 (not $99.80).
4.      Selling the name at $250 per name would mean:

$ 250.00 -

$ 2889.00

____________

      $ - 2639 (clear loss)

 

Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & 

Business Development 

NeuStar, Inc. 
e-mail: Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>  

________________________________

From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Karl Peters - TLDA
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 10:27 AM
To: GA
Subject: [ga] defining a problem...

 

All here,

       In all the effort to define and re-define the problems faced
here, I would like a qualified interpretation of what I experienced and
described some time back, as I believe it is an example of the most
profitable and least risky form of abuse of this policy that would be
slowed, but certainly not stopped through any recommendation I have seen
here thus far.

 

       You may recall my initial input:

 

       I registered tldainc.org about a year ago and chose not to
register the .com for it because I really only need one address and
those who want to find us certainly can with a ,org. I did check once or
twice during the year and found that the .com had not been registered
and thus no-one was trying to confuse things with us. About a month ago,
I got an e-mail suggesting theu would help me out by selling me the
"completing" tldainc.com for ONLY $295. I checked and sure enough, it
was indeed registered. I wrote back in protest and now wish I had kept
those messages as evidence. I heard nothing more and one week later
checked, out of curiosity, to find the .com was available again.
Someone, no matter what you want to call this program, was making short
term registrations and trying to make a fast dollar off of unsuspecting
potential registrants. (Having been around the internet for a while, I
trust very little I see!) Other than the currently discussed AGP, what
could allow this attempted fraud to exist? What could be done to
prosecute such people? 

       You may also remember that protiability was at a very low
threshold, even with a 20 cent fee to return the un-used (unsold) names.
if someone registered 500 names in this manner, sought to sell them for
$295 and sold only one of the 500 (let's say for a "discounted" $250)
before returning the other 499 at 20 cents each, their profit outlook
would be as follows:  

               $250.00        Registration of one discounted SLD

               -$99.80                $.20 fee for each returned of 499
SLDs

__________________________

                 $150.20                Clear profit

 

       Tell me how that is not a good return for an unethical person
abusing the system! Tell me any other way they could do it without the
AGP?

 

-Karl E. Peters