Slashdot Log In
ICANN Takes a Step Toward Ending Domain Tasting
Posted by
kdawson
on Tuesday April 29, @03:24PM
from the what-we-don't-need-when-we-don't-need-it dept.
from the what-we-don't-need-when-we-don't-need-it dept.
An anonymous reader writes "For years, domain squatters have exploited an ICANN loophole: whenever a domain name is registered, ICANN collects a 20-cent fee from the registrar. To allow for non-paying customers, the registrar can return it five days later for a full refund. The loophole has let unscrupulous registrars constantly create and refund domain-squatting websites, selling 'what you need when you need it' advertising. The problem has grown so bad that every month the world's top three domain squatters, all located in Miami with the same address and represented by the same lawyer, recycle 11 million domain names. After years of complaints, ICANN has finally begun moving on the problem. On April 17 ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organization voted to make the ICANN 20-cent fee non-refundable. If the ICANN board ratifies this position in June, those top three squatters will be getting a monthly bill for $2.2M. News of the ICANN changes has been applauded by legitimate Internet businesses, tired of having to choose nonsense names because all the good ones have been squatted. ICANN has published an analysis of the economics of ending domain squatting."
Related Stories
Firehose:ICANN ends Domain Squatters Free Ride by Anonymous Coward
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.

Higher. (Score:5, Insightful)
Reply to This
Re: (Score:2)
All the registrars are gonna do is go 'Ok, $5 non-refundable if you cancel this domain' or something to that e
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
very cool with it, in fact. [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Why would the registrar be paying this charge when someone returns a domain? It should be the registree who pays this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It is simple. (Score:2)
Three squatters... (Score:2)
This could create a worse problem (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, how much does it cost for Registrar A and its affiliate company B to register 1M domain-names and point them all to the same IP address? Not $6M/year.
Reply to This
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This could create a worse problem (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's a good plan, but I think the 20 cents is too low. There should be a 1 or even 5 or 10 dollar fee that's non-refundable, and the total cost of a domain should be higher than it is. That would help eliminate domain tasting as well as eliminate domain squatting, wherein legitimate users have to pay inflated prices for domains anyway because squatters are holding them hostage.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Back to school with you!
Forcing non-refundable fees would kill the profit margins because these guys is what he said. He didn't say that was a bad thing; the next paragraph states I think it's a good plan, but I think the 20 cents is too low. There sho
the ICANNon has fired! (Score:5, Insightful)
Reply to This
More feel-good decisions, less real action (Score:4, Insightful)
I would be much more impressed with ICANN if they actually started punishing the registrars that are so blatantly making profit from internet crime. There is a long list of registrars that sell
ICANN has allowed a long list of criminals to make money off the internet. It is one thing to turn a blind eye to a foreign domain registry, but ICANN is turning a blind eye towards the
Reply to This
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That may be true, but it doesn't really counter my statement of it being a problem that only a small group of people care about. I would have a very hard time believing that domain tasting has affected anywhere near as many people on the internet as ha
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I bet they use Dell servers to send out the spam, should we require Dell to ensure that all sales are
Re: (Score:2)
Its not a question of ICANN being held responsible for the actions of their customers (the registrars). Its a question of ICANN actually holding registrars to the terms of registrar obligations [icann.org] in the registrar accreditation agreement [icann.org]. In particular,
Re:More feel-good decisions, less real action (Score:5, Insightful)
Reply to This
Parent
Hear hear (Score:2)
doesn't go far enough (Score:2)
It has a flavr? (Score:4, Funny)
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Squatting = 5 Days??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unpossible, you say? Not if you are really a sham company who buys a domain name and returns it 4.9 days later, only to be immediately picked back up again by another sham company which happens to be located in the same place as the first, and again only holds the domain name for another 4.9 days to again return it for a refund and have it immediately picked back up again by a third sham company - a mirror image of the past two, which again holds the domain for 4.9 days, only again to return it for a full refund, at which time the first sham company picks it up again, starting the cycle all over again, ad infinitum - and at $0.00 net cost to the companies.
It's not that squatting = 5 days, but that this process continues for years. Making that $0.20 fee non-refundable means that now every 4.9 days in the above merry-go-round, there is a 20 cent charge for that domain name. What used to be free to do will now cost $1.50 a month - PER DOMAIN NAME if they keep doing this, which, obviously they will not be able to afford.
Chances are they will now have to cough up some hard cash to actually register the million or so domain names they have, or let them expire and be free amongst the intertubes yet again for legitamite buyers to catch.
Reply to This
Parent