[ncdnhc-discuss] Re: WLS proposal

[James Love]

Here is an important reason why domain holders would be better off under
my proposal.   During the 30 day period when people signed up for the
lottery to get the expired name, anyone who wanted could contact the
previous owner of the domain, and ask them to reregister the name
(permitted during the 30 day period), and then sell it.  If the domain
holder had let the domain expire by mistake, they would then be alerted. 
If the domain holder did not make a mistake, they would then be informed
that (a) the domain has value and (b) the name of one or more persons
willing to buy it.  In every case where someone actually contacted the
previous owner of the domain, the domain owner would be better off.
 Jamie



> The problem is more than just the submission of a false credential, it
> is the operations of the Registrar with that false credential that
> compounds the problem. I would suggest that an additional requirements
> such that the registrars were required to ping each one of the
> addresses that their domain managers have supplied and any that bounce
> more than once are flamed, and the domain is pulled and held in
> suspense for an additional 30 days.
>
> If you have a domain and you don't know whether its up or down in a
> months time then its not too important and well should be flamed.
>
> Todd Glassey
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
> To: <simons at acm.org>
> Cc: <james.love at cptech.org>; <marc at fuchsia.bijt.net>;
> <nc-transfer at dnso.org>; <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 4:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [nc-transfer] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] WLS proposal
>
>
>> My proposal was *not* an endorsement of any US legislation.   What I
>> mean by "accurate" whois data is that the person expressing interest
>> in an expired domain has to be a real person, with a real billing
>> address. That is already a requirement in the gTLD registry contracts.
>>  It could be any real person, including a real person who is doing it
>> for someone else.
>>  This is in the context of a one person one chance lottery over
>>  expired
>> domains.    If you did not think you could address the one person one
>> chance approach, you could have a lottery among registrars, which are
>> unique.
>>   Jamie
>>
>>
>> > Jamie,
>> > What do you mean by "accurate" whois data?  Does this mean that you
>> > support HR 4640, which would make it a felony to provide inaccurate
>> > information, even including address info of the domain name holder?
>> > I'm sure you appreciate the privacy implications of requiring domain
>> > name owners, eg parents who have purchased domain names for their
>> > kids, to provide their physical addresses.
>> > Barbara
>> > P.S.  While it's important that accurate whois information be
>> > provided for the technical contact, I see no compelling reason for
>> > providing accurate address information about the owner of the domain
>> > name.
>> >
>> > On 6/17/02 12:35 PM, "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Marc Schneiders wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> How do you make sure that I do not try to be 1000 persons, so
>> >>> enhancing my chance at getting a domain in the lottery?
>> >>
>> >>   Well, I would require that you provide accurate whois data in
>> >>   order to
>> >> bid, and if you committed fraud, I would bar you from future
>> >> participation.
>> >>   You could also rely upon a financial transaction to confirm a
>> >>   real
>> >> billing address.
>> >>
>> >> Jamie
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ------
>> >> James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
>> >> http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love at cptech.org
>> >> voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>> >> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >>
>>
>>
>> --
>> James Love
>> http://www.cptech.org mailto:james.love at cptech.org
>> mobile +1.202.361.3040
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


-- 
James Love
http://www.cptech.org mailto:james.love at cptech.org
mobile +1.202.361.3040