Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet

Inexpensive Alternatives for ICANN Disputes? 35

Posted by Cliff from the playing-the-name-game-gets-expensive dept.
SerialHistorian asks: "The commmunity college newspaper that I was once a staff member and webmaster of had its domain name expire recently without realizing it, and it was snatched up by a porn merchant from the Dominican Republic. Unfortunately, we found that the ICANN dispute fees -start- at $1500. For a college paper whose full annual budget is $10,000, that's not a realistic price... so is there any alternative to the ICANN dispute method so that they can get their domain name back?" According to ICANN's website, there are a limited number of approved UDRP providers, none of which will arbitrate for anything less than US$1100. Are there cheaper methods that one can use to challenge a domain name reassignment? Is it possible to challenge domain name transfers without invoking the UDRP? Why does the handling of such disputes cost so much?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Inexpensive Alternatives for ICANN Disputes? More

Inexpensive Alternatives for ICANN Disputes?

Comments Filter:

  • why should you get it? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by oyenstikker ( 536040 ) <slashdot@sb[ ]e.org ['yrn' in gap]> on Thursday December 19, 2002 @08:24AM (#4921932) Homepage Journal
    I'm asking a question here, not trying to say anything.

    Why should you get your name back? You didn't reregister it when it expired. Someone else did. Isn't domain name allocation supposed to be first come first serve?
    • Normally I would agree with this... but I've seen first hand that domain registrars are beyond incompetent in handling renewals and providing warnings to about-to-expire accounts.

      There should be some sort of regulation that puts these bulk-registering or domain name extortion rackets out of business. There is no legitimate need for any organization to register thousands of domain names.

  • Plain and simple... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Geraden ( 15689 )
    It costs a bundle to keep people from arbitrarily challenging any domain name at any time -- if it's going to take > $1000 to challenge, you're going to be PRETTY damned sure you have a case before you undertake.

    In essence, it keeps the channels clear for serious challenges.

    If you feel you have a case, challenge, then sue the party when you win to recover court costs.

    Oh, and IANAL.

    Scott

  • Aye? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Whinger ( 255233 ) on Thursday December 19, 2002 @08:30AM (#4921950) Homepage
    I really don't see how you have a case. The domain expired, they bought it. Deal with it.
    • Yes, I agree. I guess it sucks to be you! If you let your driver's license expire, and the cop arrests you, why should you be able to arbitrate yourself out of it? And even if you could, why should you be able to do it cheaply????? You need to pay for your blunder, and it costs serious money to arbitrate a dispute. Frankly, $1500 is a good deal.
      • While I want to agree with you(a little just because your .sig is most cool, and a don't want to disagree with another Rushfan(tm))...I don't see it as the same thing. Domain names in many cases are a very personal thing, and to have it ripped away as such is disheartening. I also disagree because I think domain names really should be property, and your just paying the registrar to maintain your info about DNS servers and such. You've staked your claim, now you have to pay your taxes on the property so to speak. The registar has an obligation to bill you and you have right to pay the bill(even late) before the property gets sold at auction.
        • The domain name wasn't ripped away!!!! If you let your domain expire, then you've thrown it away. If your registrar doesn't make it easy for you to remember when to pay, then you've just made a bad choice in registrars. My registrar will automatically charge my credit card when the domain is about to expire, so I have no worries.

  • Not realise? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by OrangeSpyderMan ( 589635 ) on Thursday December 19, 2002 @09:01AM (#4922030)
    without realizing it

    Please give me your secret! Seriously though, given the hawk like gaze that most registrars have on expiry dates, I can't believe you didn't get hounded with renewal notices. Heck - one of my domains is up for renewal in febuary and I've been getting at least one mail a week asking me to renew it. Sounds simply like the person who was the contact wasn't doing their job, so as everyone else on Slashdot will point out eagerly, I think you're just gonna have to deal with it, and that's the best and fairest way there is - I for one sure would be pissed if I registered a domain only to get it taken off me because the former owner suddenly decided he still wanted it after all.
    • Christ! February! I've got one up for renewal in MAY and Register.com has been sending me emails weekly since early November!
    • Well, the same thing happened to me and I'm here to tell you that, at least at one point in time, for at least my domain, registrars were really bad about sending out renewal notices. I don't think it is quite fair to assume that the poster was "hounded with renewal notices" and was just careless.

      I lost "potts.com" (my personal domain) about 1997 when I failed to receive a renewal notice, for whatever reason.

      In previous years, I had gotten notices both by paper mail and e-mail; this year, nothing came. To the best of my knowledge, InterNIC(?) still had my valid home address and e-mail address. However, the designated domain server was at a previous employer's site, and it is possible the notice went to them, and my former co-workers didn't forward it, or whatever.

      Yes, I should have been personally "watching it like a hawk" and realizing that it was going to be up for renewal, but I failed to. But, please realize that registrars have not always been known for applying scrupulous care in maintaining customer domain registrations.

      In any case, the next time I checked the domain it was gone. (Try it: http://www.potts.com)

      Also, the new owner is not "using" it in the usual sense; there is no individual, company, or whatever by the name of Potts with a web site or service available there. DotcomEmail.com are squatters. They buy up domains and then try to sell people e-mail or web service using that domain. Their web site claims "over 1500 domains available." But they don't want to sell you the domain, they want to rent their services at that domain.

      And, yes, I've contacted them to request the name back. I can't pay them for my name back, so all I can do is ask. I can't say I think much of their business model.

      Incidentally, I've submitted postings asking for ideas and advice on how to recover this domain to "Ask Slashdot" twice. The posting has never been accepted. So, it is interesting to see someone else get an "Ask Slashdot" posting accepted with, essentially, the same question.

      It looks like the only hope I have is that DotComEmail.com (which used to bill itself as a "pre-IPO Internet Startup") will one day go out of business and I can put potts.com to some legitimate use (perhaps advertising my consulting services).

      Would they be pissed if I won it back? Does it matter? Should I care, given their business model?

      Well, if I had the resources to dispute it, I would do so, but that probably won't be possible. Now whether they have a legitimate right to potts.com by the rules of the registration system: well, of course they do.

      But by any other world view? I don't think so. In the dot-com domain, someone who holds a company name or trademark or service mark, or even a family name, would be a better candidate.

      But, note that potts.net and potts.org are also owned by another similar service (NetIdentity). Which is why my family has had to resort to "thepottshouse.org" for our personal site.

  • Do you really want it back now? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Samus ( 1382 ) on Thursday December 19, 2002 @09:23AM (#4922114) Journal
    If as you say your domain is now owned by a porn site operator do you really want it back? Its probably quickly getting black listed across corporate proxy servers all over the country as we speak. Cut your losses and get a new name. Perhaps since you are part of a community college you could just get a sub domain off of them? It would be a lot cheaper and would probably make more sense. If you haven't soured your relations with the porn guy you could even ask him to link to this new domain.
  • 1) Start printing nudie photos of the campus girls in the paper. Offer some sort of tuition discount. Heh heh heh.
    2) Use a different suffix? .org, .net... hell, grab a subdomain from your college's .edu domain.
    3) Cry a river, build a bridge, and get over it.

    Backing down is not a bad thing, espicially when backed into a corner like so. Chances are that you're not getting your old domain back. Tough nuggets. Just get another one, and spend a day changing the urls on your paper's page (if necessary...).
  • when your school newspaper's url is [mbhs.edu]
    hotxxxlickdrip.com[hotxxxlickdrip.com] ?
    .

    • Who in the heck moderated this guy as "flamebait"? What were you thinking, that he was trying to goad the rabid fans of hotxxxlickdrip.com into starting a flame war? Did you even follow/look at the link?

      He was jokeing!

      -- MarkusQ

  • Simple (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jon787 ( 512497 ) on Thursday December 19, 2002 @10:17AM (#4922353) Homepage Journal

    Why does the handling of such disputes cost so much?

    Obviously because it was designed to let corporations take domains away from the little guy and not the other way around. Yet another case of the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

    • Yet another case of the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

      Well, in this case it would be the rich get domain names, the poor lose domain names.

  • Cant believe nobody suggested this yet... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Linux_ho ( 205887 ) on Thursday December 19, 2002 @11:03AM (#4922669) Homepage
    Have you tried calling the pr0n merchant directly and negotiating with them? It obviously will be the least expensive route, and is probably your only real chance at getting the domain back anyway. They may accept a payment far less than ICANNs arbitration fee.

    Why do people so often look to involve the authorities when they havent yet tried a neighborly approach that is so often more effective and far less expensive?
    • Because it's like buying stolen property (back) or paying "protection" money. It may be the cheapest short term solution, but it's going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run.
      • Because it's like buying stolen property (back) or paying "protection" money. It may be the cheapest short term solution, but it's going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run.

        Bullshit. It's not stolen property. They didn't pay the registration fee, they let the registration lapse, and someone else paid for the domain in the meanwhile. It's their own damn fault, and they will be lucky if the pr0n merchant is willing to sell it back to them at all. Given that the domain legitimately belongs to the pr0n merchant now, the least they can do is make an offer to buy it from them before whining to the authorities.

      • It may be the cheapest short term solution, but it's going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run.

        How is it going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run?

        Buying back stolen property or paying "protection" money is only a bad idea because there's no guarantee you'll get your property back or your "protection". In this case you enter into a contract to get your domain back for a certain price, and if you don't get your domain back you cancel the check.

  • $1200? Dominican republic? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by wowbagger ( 69688 ) on Thursday December 19, 2002 @11:43AM (#4922934) Homepage Journal
    For $1200 in the Dominican republic, you could arrange for the domain to become free again quite easily - dead men don't need domains.

    But seriously -register a new domain and move on - your old domain will be on blacklists and won't be accessible from NetNannied systems.

    How about just creating a subdomain under your school's domain - if the school is skuul.k12.ar.us, create paper.skuul.k12.ar.us and use that. That way, you save a domain fee, and you will only lose the domain if your school does something incredibly stupid.
  • I'm amazed at the law of the jungle mentality that is prevalent in this discussion.

    Domain names are meant to direct people to the appropriate and meaningful sites. When the system works so that something else happens, the sytem has to be held to task for this failure and reformed. Having a school newspaper's former url, against the will of that school, redirected to a porn site is not in keeping with this principle.

    I realize that rules must be followed, but in this case the rules have bad, unintended consequences.

    Domain name squatters really are scum of the earth.

    Their business model is based on taking something that someone else has added value to and taking possession of said good (in this case, the domain name) and essentially holding it for ransom.

    If one can get a wholesale rate for domain names, then it only costs about $1-$2/year per domain name. At that rate, squatting can be lucrative. Even if only 1% of sites get sold back at an average of $200, the squatter can make money. Remember that domain names used to cost $70/year, so paying a $200 ransom is not completely unreasonable.

    There needs to be a systematic change in ICANN to strongly discourage this kind of squatting. Squatting provides no good, and in fact does a great deal of harm, by diluting the purpose of domain names, to direct people to the appropriate IP address.

    A lot of once useful, or potentially useful domain names go wasted because of this secondary market.

    One group that does profit great, though indirectly, from domain squatting are the legitimate registrars. Domain squatters help maintains a gold rush mentality that leads to preemptive and excessive domain name buying.

    While the admin at the school screwed up by letting the domain name lapse, the system is also at fault for promoting such predatory

    I'm not sure what the proper solution should be.

    I am wary of anything as simplistic as requiring a domain name be used, as domain names can be parked for legitimate reasons, and the consideration is too subjective.

    One idea is to charge a prohibitively high "tax" on domain name sales over a certain amount. This tax would then subsidize the arbitration process.

    I suppose that this problem is one that must be faced by any secondary market. Ticket sales and scalping come to mind. Maybe the right idea is just to make resale of domain names above a certain mark-up totally illegal and void.

    While primary-market sellers must treat any possible domain name as a common good that buyers can purchase from anyone, and thus shop around for price, secondary-market resellers have an effective monopoly power over any name they possess.

    Another problem for any solution restricting reselling of names, is that work-arounds may come-up. A reseller may only "rent", rather than sell a site, and thus escape the restricions on selling.

    I'm not sure of the answer, but this definitely is a problem that should be addressed. Perhaps some bright light reading this can come up with an answer.

    Then they can suggest it to ICANN at their next meeting, which I believe is in the Marianas Trench.

    Better yet, post it here on slashdot.

  • Slightly OT, but this is probably useful to fellow /.'ers:

    Like many of you, I once bought some domains from Dotster, during the time they were advertising their services on Slashdot.
    After getting spam pestering me to buy more domains, I stopped dealing with them.

    About a week ago, I logged into my Dotster account to see what domains I have left. I was shocked to see that next to all my domains was a checkbox that said "Auto-Renew" and was checked! I guess now that the domain name gold rush is over stealing money under the guise of a service is now considered a legitimate tactic by these sleazeballs.

    You have been warned !

  • sex.com (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I believe sex.com was transferred to a new owner because he forged a letter of consent from the owner. Wouldn't cost much at all.
    • Likewise, slashdot should acquire the domain "nationalenquirer.com" and "theglobe.com" since that would complement the mentality of its users. I'm always amazed by the array of garbage that is posted in reply to slashdot articles.
  • All the other Slashdotters are bitching about evil ICANN/UDRP/whatever, I can provide you with some information. I have done two UDRP cases against some squatters, the other was with WIPO and the other with National Arbitration Forum.

    WIPO is all right, but at $1500 it's quite expensive. Of course, if you want to do it correctly the first time, you might want to use a specialist (not necessarily an attorney but someone who has done these cases previously).

    NAF used to be pretty cheap, for $950 you could file couple of names. The procedure is pretty painless (well, you need to send them three copies of all docs, such as all registration papers, trademark docs etc. which can be a big bunch of paper and even cost some shipping costs if you live here in .eu).

    Comparing the present day fees, the cheapest was The Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (ADNDRC) $1000. If you do not put your faith in foreign princes, there's Nat'l Arbitration Forum $1150.

    There is actually some work involved, and considering the amount of effort the arbitrators put in writing the decisions I think the price is quite reasonable. You could try to raise the money via a charity of some kind, a common enemy is a good way to gather cash as GWB might say...

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close