Re: [ga] WLS Questions

[eric@hi-tek.com]

I am of an unsettled mind when it comes to domain names.
I cannot really see them as a right but simply a commercial commodity.
I almost see email addresses as a right like a physical address and a right to
send and receive mail.
Clearly once you have established a commercial right in a thing it should not be
taken away lightly.
But if you look at the WLS closely it would appear that it's founding premise is
that someone owns them if they are not registered.  That someone being the
registry.  This may even be right in the case of a government run ccTLD where it
is viewed as a country resource.
But it cannot be right when it comes to dotCOM - Can it?

It would seem that the registry should just stabilize their system so that it is
consistent and then let appropriate market forces handle expiry.  It would seem
that our old argument must soon be settled in the fashion that a domain name is a
piece of property.

Sincerely,
Eric

Ellen Rony wrote:

> At 9:30 AM -0400 6/14/02, James Love wrote:
> >What would fix the WLS issue would be to have a period after a domain
> >expired, where anyone who wanted it could express intereset, and there would
> >be a fair lottery to see who got it.     And, at any point before the
> >lottery, the old domain holder should be able to get it back.
> >
> >Jamie
>
> I like the idea of a 30-to-60-day grace period.  It's a common business
> practice among insurance companies and providers of cable, telephone and
> other services. People miss payment deadlines due to oversight, travel, and
> mundane distractions.  Given what is at risk, a post-expiry date grace
> period makes sense.
>
> But why a post-grace period lottery?  Who would administer it?  What
> mechanisms would assure its accountability, fairness and timeliness?  Who
> would  be the registrant of record after the epiry date, if the registrant
> chooses not to renew? Who would get to claim the fees involved?  How would
> they be determined?  How would all registrars be assured equal access to
> WLS?  Would the process run in tandem with the registration procedure--a
> shared registry system for WLS requests.  Who would determine the rules
> that apply?
>
> Demand for domain names has slowed, and resale prices have softened.  More
> than 1 million domain names are available at auction.  Millions sit in
> virtual inventories of companies, organizations and individuals, unusued.
>
> IMHO, WLS adds an unnecessary layer of expense and complication atop the
> FCFS race and provides opportunity for internal abuse.  Nothing prevents a
> party from approaching the current registrant and expressing direct
> interest in acquiring the domain name.  Will that make the price go up?
> Maybe so, but surely no less than the registrant knowing that someone has
> paid for the privilege of waiting in line for it on the oft-remote chance
> the domain name becomes available.
>
> What is the problem the WLS proposes to solve?  Is it that cybersquatters
> and speculators currently have some technical advantage not available to
> ordinary folk, such as bots that scoop up expired names instantly?  Can
> such bots be prohibited?   Is it that people with genuine interest in a
> specific name want to be spared the time and expense of monitoring its
> availability?   Can this be accomplished without imposing additional
> expenses on those who are willing to do such monitoring on their own?
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Ellen Rony, Co-author         )/_    http://www.domainhandbook.com
> Domain Name Handbook         <" \      http://www.domainsleuth.biz
>                              /)  )                  ellen@rony.com
>                          ---/'-""---
>        The more people I meet, the more I like my cockatiel.
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html