ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Verisign rushes to roll out typo-squatting system on Monday

  • To: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign rushes to roll out typo-squatting system on Monday
  • From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:18:59 -0700
  • Cc: Dan Steinberg <synthesis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxx, discuss-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
  • Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
  • References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309142237140.22798-100000@npax.cavebear.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Karl and all former DNSO GA members,

  Excellent response here Karl and spot on as well, IMHO.
However haven't we all been over this ground before?  I believe
we have...

Karl Auerbach wrote:

> > >"gTLD Registry operators WILL return NXDOMAIN for ALL DNS queries for
> > >which there is not a REGISTERED domain name."
> > what existing technical standards are you suggesting are being broken by
> > the "abusive monopolist" ?
> Well, if queries for unregistered domains are returning records, those
> records have TTL (time to live) values.
> And if someone comes along and registers that name, the usability of that
> name is contaminated for at least the duration of that TTL, usually
> longer.
> The typical TTLs used these days run from a few days to weeks - the value
> is set by the registry - .com is running, I believe, with a TTL of about
> 48 hours.
> Now this means that a buyer of a domain name contract may find that he/she
> has bought tarnished goods, particularly if the prior records have had the
> effect of leading web clients to a registrar/registry picked address
> during the period of the client's registration.
> This is sort of like buying a new car and discovering that the dealer had
> been using the car before the sale and that the dealer then defers
> delivery for a few days and uses those days to put on a few hundred
> additional miles.
> There seem to be multiple remedies - the first is to ban the practice.
> The second is to have the registrar or registry forefit damages to the
> customers.  The minimal measure of these damages should be 2/365ths
> (representing the two days occupied by the TTL) - let's round it up to 1%
> - of the yearly registration fee.  A better measure is based on lost
> opportunity costs caused by the inability of a new registrant to come up
> to speed with a fully usable new domain registration due to the seller's
> ill behaviour.  Another measure, and I see no reason why these different
> measures can not be cumulative, is the value of the benefit that this
> practice gives to the registries/registrars.
> There is no doubt in my own mind that any registry/registrar that sells
> domain name contracts to unwitting buyers for names that have been used by
> the registry or registrar during the period of non registration is
> engaging in a deceptive business practices.  Whether my opinion on this is
> merely my own opinion or something of greater weight is a question that
> will have to be answered in the light of specific facts and specific
> parties in specific jurisdictions.
>                 --karl--


Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>