Basically, it's all about what we already know on the topic.
http://digitalmass.boston.com/columns/internet/1018.html
Some interesting points in the article:
>Chris Clough, NSI's vice president of corporate communications, won't
>comment about the suit, except to say that Powell's press release was
>the first that NSI had heard about it.
Not true. I brought this up at the ICANN registrar's meeting in Yokohama.
The NSI representatives said they'd look into it, but never got back to me.
I was standing there when one of them made a note of it in his notebook. (I
forget which one was the person of color.)
The NSI present at the meeting were Michael Aisenberg, Directory of Public
Policy, Michael Johnson, Director of Business Affairs--and Bruce ???, whose
business card I didn't get. (Large guy.)
>Stan Smith, an Alabama resident, is suing NSI, contending that it's abused
>its power. His attorney, Scott Powell, claims that Network Solutions is
>deliberately withholding expired names from the general pool with the
>intent to auction them, which he says violates the registrar's agreement
>with ICANN.
This is a common misconception. They are auctioning off names that were
registered but not paid for. They are NOT auctioning off expired names. In
their words, they're simply trying to recover the money they lose on
"chargebacks." And the domains they auction off will not go for more than
$35, which is what they charge for a domain name. Even if someone offers
more than $35 for the name, they won't accept it.
For reference, here's the message I sent to the policy list as soon as I
returned home from the meeting.
At 11:15 PM +0900 7/13/00, Richard M. Pavonarius wrote:
>X-Authentication-Warning: opensrs.org: majordomo set sender to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
>X-Mailer: Macintosh Eudora Pro Version 4.2.1-J
>Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:15:39 +0900
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: "Richard M. Pavonarius" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: A response from NSI about unreleased domains
>
>I live a few hours away from Yokohama, Japan, so I decided to attend the
>ICANN meeting and see if I could get some answers about all the expired
>domains currently being held by NSI.
>
>During the Code of Conduct meeting for ICANN accredited registrars, the
>problem of unreleased expired domain names at NSI was brought up in a
>somewhat roundabout way (NSI's auctioning of chargebacks was discussed
>mostly), but the issue wasn't addressed directly until I made a bit of a
>nuisance of myself. I feel bad about that, but I did get the result I
>wanted.
>
>There were three people representing NSI at the meeting--Michael
>Aisenberg, Directory of Public Policy, Michael Johnson, Director of
>Business Affairs--and Bruce ???, whose business card I didn't get. (Large
>guy.) Here's the lowdown:
>
>1.If you own a domain name you wish to auction off, NSI will post it on
>their site. No problem with that, only I can't find the word "auction"
>anywhere on their site to verify.
>
>2. NSI isn't auctioning off expired domain names, but they ARE auctioning
>off their chargebacks and other unpaid registered domains for a maximum of
>$35 to recoup their losses. Some other registrars in attendance had a
>problem with that practice. (Rhetorical question: If they were to auction
>off expired domains too, who'd know the difference?)
>
>3. If a domain name registered at NSI shows up in WHOIS as expired but
>it's not registerable, it's probably because there's a payment
>problem--bounced check or the like. (However, there's no way for an end
>user to know exactly what the problem is with a specific domain. When you
>inquire through the proper channels, you get a boilerplate e-mail reply
>from NSI to the effect of, "There's probably a billing problem, keep
>checking WHOIS daily.")
>
>I presented a real-life example: I'm trying to register a domain name
>"word1word2.com" which expired in May but is not available. I'm also after
>"word1-word2.com" which expired in June but it's not available either, and
>both were originally registered by two different people. Coincidence? And
>it's not just me with this problem, it's been discussed frequently on
>openSRS mailing lists and recently on Slashdot.
>
>So basically, they're now aware of the issue; apparently until now they
>were not. Michael Johnson said he will personally look into why some
>expired domain names aren't being put back into the pool. It's not out of
>the question that it could be a technical problem. If/when I hear back
>from him, I'll let everyone know. Also they agreed it would be a good idea
>to look into clearly stating on their auction site that they're not, as
>rumor has it, auctioning off expired domain names.
>
>Another registrar said I "shouldn't show up at their meetings and talk
>trash." While I see his point, and I don't like being a pest, I seriously
>doubt I would have gotten anywhere otherwise, having been ignored in the
>past by big companies until I raised a stink.
>
>What I forgot to ask was how long a domain name is held if it's expired
>but in dispute. From what I've read, it could be a year (their billing
>period), but there are domains such as YEN.COM which have been in limbo
>since 1998, so who knows.
>
>Rich
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Richard M. Pavonarius, Global Commons, Inc., Tokyo
------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard M. Pavonarius, Global Commons, Inc., Tokyo
