[ga] Critics say VeriSign still has advantage
If ICANN can establish domain-type rules for those seeking to register domains within existing or proposed TLDs, then it can propose and implement rules against domain hoarding. Both are subjective and require human judgment.
How about this: If you register a domain and don't have a legitimate site running under it within, say, two years, you lose it. What's a legitimate site? Of course, that's the tough question. Probably the best way to answer it is to allow people to challenge a hoarder's registration of a particular domain after two years, as they can currently challenge on the basis of trademark infringement.
This is a difficult issue, certainly. But it's the type of issue that needs resolution, and some might argue that it's among the top issues we face.
As far as consensus is concerned, that's one of the favorite topics around here. So let's build some: Who thinks domain hoarding harms the consumer?
And to head off the obvious first retort, let's not pretend that this is a free market and that the current situation simply allows the marketplace to set the appropriate price for a domain name. The Verisign situation proves that this is not true. It costs them nothing to maintain control over these names, which they are attempting to sell at a profit after being granted a public monopoly. That is a blatant abuse of the privilege they were awarded, as custodians of a public resource.
Electrical utilities' prices are regulated for the same reason. Thus should the price of domains be regulated.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html