| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Verisign typo-squats
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 54 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
|
there is also the concept that, with all those domain speculators out there with unresolving domain names, that Verisign could "purchase back" a prettygooddomainname.com in the aftermarket for say $1k and basically turn around and put these in play via its new click through revenue model. Is there anything in the registry agreements that prohibit a registry from buying a domain name "back" from a registrant? Would it matter if there was? Could the minimum value of any given domain name then be quantified as a result (but of course certainly not below $6)? If prettygooddomainname.com has click through revenue of $500 per year, does this set the minimum price for flipping (assuming after cost recovery)? Maybe they just allow speculators to opt-in to Site Finder, on a percentage-of-click-through basis? Are there any registrars that speculate in .com?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
