Ashman
Top Contributor
I'm not the type of person who lets political or industry best interest get in the way of what I believe is a legitimate discussion. So here is the story.
Recent domain name discussions on this forum include utube.com.au and botox.com.au and were regarding their domain eligibility.
Utube.com.au has constantly been removed from registration and Botox.com.au was recently registered for over $3000 even though there is a word trademark registered. Both these domain names were registered via the drop catch service providers.
It is my opinion that the drop catchers are essentially dealing in prohibited goods, essentially black market products as they have no legal right to issue licenses for those domains (and others not included in this discussion) and they are just cashing in on a policy loophole. Actually it’s not even a loophole it just a vagrant disregard for auDA eligibility policy.
When you normally register a domain name through a registrar there is usually a 48 hour approval process or there is with my registrar anyway. I don't think the approval process is some arbitrary way of the registrar appearing to check domain eligibility nor should it be. An example being when I recently registered a domain I was required to provide further information regarding my eligibility to register the name, which I provided and subsequently was issued a license.
So here is the point I'm trying to make. The drop catch providers essentially bypass the approval process in their race to catch expiring domains. There is no approval process, no checking of eligibility and domains seem to be issued on first come first served basis.
The domain eligibility policy is then enforced retrospectively that is after the domain has been licensed and after the drop catchers deposit the proceeds of the sale in their ever increasing bank accounts.
The approval process for a domain names should require the registrar to check the eligibility of the registrant, not only that it is a close and substantial connection to the business name but in the case of domains registered for monetisation that the registrant has valid and current business credentials.
I have often heard that the drop catchers invest vast sums of money into their domain catching technology but how much do they invest into technology to enforce policy compliance. My guess = $0.
This retrospective policy enforcement which results in disputes and complaints is a massive pain and costly process for the businesses that do have the right to legally register domain names.
However, since the drop catcher’s are not checking domain eligibility they will just continue to profit and trade in "Black Market" domain names. What makes this process worse is that auDA are aware that this constantly occurs and they appear to take no action to stop this illegal trade by drop catchers.
When will we have a governing body that will enforce policy not retrospectively but before domain licenses are issue? If they don’t take action soon I can see the potential for legal proceedings not only against the registrars but against auDA.
Recent domain name discussions on this forum include utube.com.au and botox.com.au and were regarding their domain eligibility.
Utube.com.au has constantly been removed from registration and Botox.com.au was recently registered for over $3000 even though there is a word trademark registered. Both these domain names were registered via the drop catch service providers.
It is my opinion that the drop catchers are essentially dealing in prohibited goods, essentially black market products as they have no legal right to issue licenses for those domains (and others not included in this discussion) and they are just cashing in on a policy loophole. Actually it’s not even a loophole it just a vagrant disregard for auDA eligibility policy.
When you normally register a domain name through a registrar there is usually a 48 hour approval process or there is with my registrar anyway. I don't think the approval process is some arbitrary way of the registrar appearing to check domain eligibility nor should it be. An example being when I recently registered a domain I was required to provide further information regarding my eligibility to register the name, which I provided and subsequently was issued a license.
So here is the point I'm trying to make. The drop catch providers essentially bypass the approval process in their race to catch expiring domains. There is no approval process, no checking of eligibility and domains seem to be issued on first come first served basis.
The domain eligibility policy is then enforced retrospectively that is after the domain has been licensed and after the drop catchers deposit the proceeds of the sale in their ever increasing bank accounts.
The approval process for a domain names should require the registrar to check the eligibility of the registrant, not only that it is a close and substantial connection to the business name but in the case of domains registered for monetisation that the registrant has valid and current business credentials.
I have often heard that the drop catchers invest vast sums of money into their domain catching technology but how much do they invest into technology to enforce policy compliance. My guess = $0.
This retrospective policy enforcement which results in disputes and complaints is a massive pain and costly process for the businesses that do have the right to legally register domain names.
However, since the drop catcher’s are not checking domain eligibility they will just continue to profit and trade in "Black Market" domain names. What makes this process worse is that auDA are aware that this constantly occurs and they appear to take no action to stop this illegal trade by drop catchers.
When will we have a governing body that will enforce policy not retrospectively but before domain licenses are issue? If they don’t take action soon I can see the potential for legal proceedings not only against the registrars but against auDA.
