Re: [ga] go daddy

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 03:23 p.m. 20/11/2005, you wrote:
> I have a question. I understand a Registrar has to have price raises in 
> their agreement with ICANN. Is selling the names after they expire but 
> before they drop back into the pool at a higher price just a way to get 
> around the price restrictions?
>
> If a registrar lets the name drop back into the pool, it can be registered 
> by anyone at any registrar. If the registrar doesn't drop it back into the 
> pool and instead sells it at a higher price, then it's not a fair system 
> in my opinion.
>
> The only reason for not dropping expired names back into the pool is to 
> give the registrant a grace period to renew their registration. By putting 
> it up for auction during the grace period they are selling a name that the 
> registrant still has the option to renew?

> I'd like to hear what others think about that.


Chris,

Since you are asking:  the lack of concern for the rights of DN registrants 
is a major hindrance in the development of a grassroots web-based economy.
The current legal (contractual) status of the Registrant favours those with 
in-house lawyers and deep pockets.

Economic history shows that as soon as property rights are protected, 
owners are motivated to make their property thrive.
GoDaddy is actually not a bad registrar. Who can blame them for what ICANN 
did not do?

Protection of the  elementary property rights of the registrants should 
have been the primary focus of ICANN's DNS policy, instead of helping to 
enlarge the legal envelope for the IP lobby and creating a gold-plated 
franchise for the registration industry.

Selling the "name space" that registrants actually create, over and over 
again, with negligible marginal cost per registration and no cost for 
"renewals" , but a holding a huge value of the registrant hostage....  What 
a business!

-joop-