Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)

    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    .eu registry suspends 74,000 domains | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 9 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Letter sent to EURID - 20th July 2005
    by Richard_Henderson on Wednesday August 02 2006, @05:21AM (#16861)
    User #3269 Info | http://www.atlarge.org/
    Dear EURid team,

    First of all, thank you very much for the courtesy of your detailed reply.
    If I am correct in my understanding of what you have told me:
    1. Pool.com are not yet accredited and if this remains the case they are not
    allowed to offer any services.
    2. The individual registrar has to submit a domain application, and it has
    to be on a first-come first-serve basis. If the registrar (who must be
    accredited) is successful in acquiring the domain name, he/she may not
    re-sell the domain name (for example, to another registrar).

    I feel that some further clarification may be needed, however.

    Question 1: Pool.com simply attracts interest in .eu names and passes the
    names of interested applicants to one of its EU-accredited registrars. In
    this sense, Pool.com would not exactly be offering the service themselves.
    They would be saying, "You can contact us, and we will make sure that your
    application is passed on to one of our registrars to legitimately carry out.
    Would this be acceptable to EURid?

    Question 2: I understand the model Pool.com offers is that many people may
    contact POOL for the same .eu domain name. They will attempt to legitimately
    acquire this domain name through various registrars who work for them. In
    the event of this being a popular domain name which various people have
    asked POOL to acquire for them, there will then be an auction with the name
    going to the highest bidder. Will this process be acceptable to EURid?

    Question 3: I understand that Pool.com may charge $60 for each name one of
    their supporting registrars acquire for the people who contacted POOL
    (unless an auction pushes the price higher). Would EURid consider that
    Pool.com are entitled to act as 'agent' for these registrars, and charge the
    winning applicant $60?

    Question 4: When you say that (without accreditation) Pool.com "are not
    allowed to offer any services", does this extend to acting as the point of
    contact for .eu domain applicants, where these applications will then be
    dispersed to legitimate and accredited registrars working to catch domains
    for Pool?

    Question 5: Would any similar restrictions apply equally to companies like
    Snapnames or Enom, if they use multiple registrars to increase their chances
    of 'catching' a domain name, and then auction the name to the highest

    Question 6: You say that no reselling of domain names will be allowed. Do
    you mean just during the launch process? How will you stop this and enforce
    this? Or do you mean no reselling ever? You will be aware that it is an
    industry norm that domains may be freely traded, bought and sold, through
    all the major TLDs? Surely you are not proposing to break this norm, and how
    would you enforce such a rule, given that all the original registrant has to
    do is change the nameservers and contact email, and another person would
    have control of a domain name anyway?

    These questions are in no sense meant to be critical. I am just respectfully
    asking for clarification, so that the process is clear, so that rules can be
    clearcut and upheld, and so that I (and other consumers) do not lose money
    through EURid interventions or confiscated domains.

    The last thing you want is for the launch to come crashing down (as the .info launch did 3 years ago) and therefore it is very important that EURid
    anticipate as many potential 'gaps' in their processes as possible, and
    intervene in advance. Experience in recent years has shown that various
    registrars will attempt all kinds of methods to circumvent the established
    rules in order to gain an advantage in the process.

    For example, will your release of domains favour a registrar who submits
    just 10 names for a favoured customer, as opposed to another registrar who
    submits 2000 names for its general clientele? In this case, would the
    registrar with a small number of applications gain any advantage? (This
    happened in the .info LR2 names release and also the .biz names release.

    And then, if one registrar just operates in its own right as a single
    registrar, and another company has created 100 'shell' registrars or even
    40, will that mean that the company who has exploited the technicality of
    having multiple accredited registrar 'shells' will in effect *swamp* the
    applications of the ordinary registrar who operates in good faith as a
    single accredited entity?

    My advice is that, at the very least, the distribution of names should be
    built around a structure which includes "blank rounds" for any registrar
    with a short list of applications. In other words, to make the distribution
    fair, if an ordinary registrar submits say 1000 applications, and another
    registrar submits just 10 applications, I propose that 990 'blank' rounds
    should be added to the registrar applying for only 10, so that they don't
    just grab 10 best names in the first 10 rounds of names being released. Or
    are you going to simply let any registrar fight it out real-time, in which
    case you will be inundated by people running scripts via all their 'shell'
    registrars in order to grab the best domains.

    Surely a controlled and orderly names release must ensure fair distribution
    of domain names, and also attempt to prevent exploitation of the system by 3
    or 4 companies with multiple accredited registrars, otherwise all the
    registrars who simply apply as single registrars may find their provisions
    for their customers have been compromised.

    Just a few thoughts, but I'd be very grateful if you could consider answers
    to my 6 Questions at the top of this mail. As usual, I will forward this
    correspondence to various ICANN Directors, the ICANN Registry and Registrar
    Liaison Managers, and representatives of the At Large internet users groups.

    Thank You. I appreciate your response and willingness to engage in dialogue.

    With kind regards,

    Richard Henderson

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

    Search ICANNWatch.org:

    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