Advertisement
Promo

Online business Toolkit

Story: Registrar named in massive cybersquatting suit

  • Previous comment

Posted by: Anonymous (Friday 23 June 2006, 2:09 AM)

  • Reply

This is a start but... ICANN and Verisign need to stop hiding behind the tree and start doing their job to combat this problem. They are NOTORIOUS for collecting our fees on domain names and not doing anything to create a FAIR marketplace for us. It seems that they are PROTECTING the registrars so they can Unless they start furnishing us reasonable service, we should have the right to choose other companies to give our hard earned money too.

As it stands now, its a monopoly and we have no option but watch them do nothing.

"Over 35 million names were registered for the month of May. Of those just over 2.7 million were permanent registrations. That means that 92.3% of all domain names registered were part of a scam now known as domain kiting. These names were kept off of the market, they were used to generate search engine revenue – AND BECAUSE OF A LOOPHOLE ICANN REFUSES TO ELIMINATE – those 32.3 million names were used without being paid for."

Source: BobParsons.com
http://www.bobparsons.com/MayKiting.html

Any registrar that "kites" more than 10% of the registered domains per month should have their "registrar" status pulled from them and put back on the market. Also, pull their ability to purchase domains for 30 days. They should also be fined 2 dollars for each domain that has been returned. Hit them in the wallet or they are not going to stop. If this continues, people like myself, will have no option but to join the "kiting" community, just to be able to give our customers a fair shot in the marketplace.

The kiting wars will ruin business on the net as we know it since it creates an unfair playing field for all but the registrars.

Dotster is a start, but as you can see, ICANN and Verisign is looking the other way. Business are having to challenge the registrars and this should be the job of ICANN and Verisign.

If not, then why is it mandatory that we have to pay their fee to do little, if not anything.

  • Previous comment

  • Reply to this comment
  • Return to story
  • Report this as offensive


Full Talkback thread


Sentry Posts Blog

McKinnon lawyers seek judicial review

Lawyers seeking a judicial review for Nasa hacker Gary McKinnon lodged fresh evidence of his psychiatric state at the High Court on Thursday. Karen Todner, McKinnon's solicitor,... More

1 comment

Beware of keeping your head in the clo...

Information security professionals can look forward to a deepening appreciation for their skills as security continues to be recognised as an essential element for doing business in... More

1 comment

Civil liberties groups attack file-sha...

Civil liberties and digital rights organisations have strongly criticised Lord Mandelson's Digital Economy Bill. Liberty said in a position paper on Tuesday that the bill, part of... More

Post a comment

Video icon

Video

Google Chrome

Roundup: Full coverage of Google Chrome

The search giant has launched a beta of its own open-source browser, sending a clear challenge to Microsoft in the way it lets users work with applications More

Blog: Google Chrome has Microsoft's code inside, says MS manager

And furthermore, he says, that's a good thing... More

Blog: Google Chrome — nine things we've found since launch

Google must be very happy with the coverage Chrome has gathered. But it's not all good news... More


Skip Sub Navigation Links to CNET Brand Links

Help

Become part of the ZDNet community.

Newsletters