Deleting.co.uk RIP

[retired_member6]

You've got to at least let us know which parts of your operation were deemed illegal, there's no such thing as keeping info private like this when you've been threatened.

 

[stevie]

sorry to hear about this Andrew.. it will be missed...

good luck with the next phase of deleting!

 

[Edwin]

You've got to at least let us know which parts of your operation were deemed illegal, there's no such thing as keeping info private like this when you've been threatened.

He doesn't have to do any such thing. In fact, the very best thing to do when lawyers are threatening is to KEEP QUIET. Smart move on his part.

Just be thankful the service stayed up for as long as it did, and let him get on with his business!

 

[sneezycheese]

I Suspect the Big Domainers were involved in getting deleting.co.uk closed my answer to those haters "F*** OFF you made your money let others to !

Thank you Andrew !!!

...the issue here is not Domainers, but Nominet and their 'plans' - This site has been ran for years without ANY trouble, but Nominet have now some new 'proposals' on the table and I'm guessing 'they' wish to remove the competition from their field of view - watch out ye 'drop catchers'!

'waiting lists/.uk domain autions' - soon to be provided by your friendly 'government approved' doman supplier! :mrgreen:

All the best Andrew,

Sneezy.

 

[retired_member6]

He doesn't have to do any such thing. In fact, the very best thing to do when lawyers are threatening is to KEEP QUIET. Smart move on his part.

Just be thankful the service stayed up for as long as it did, and let him get on with his business!

Why don't you shut up. I didn't say he had to, I'm saying he should do. And no the best thing to do when threatened isn't to keep quiet. What's the secret when threatened? I aint being thankful for anything above the service being offered so don't be so patronising.

 

[retired_member6]

Nominet will have to tell us what rules were broken and in what way anyway when asked, won't they? So I'll just write to them telling them I'm setting up a similar service and would like to know exactly what rules were broken and how, they obviously know, they researched it.

 

[retired_member6]

Re Edwin, it's typical of your lot, not affected so not really bothered and shout down anyone who cares, the same thing happened on another issue recently. Oh yeah domcollect. There's nothing like a community sticking together...

 

[Whois-Search]

You've got to at least let us know which parts of your operation were deemed illegal, there's no such thing as keeping info private like this when you've been threatened.

These parts:

40,000 suspended domain names (status derived from the DAC)

Publishing the number of days suspended (using renewal date from the DAC)

Publishing the TAGs on the "who got what" pages (taken from the DAC)

Were found in breach of:

http://www.nominet.org.uk/other/dac/contract
5.3.6: "You may not provide more than an insubstantial part of the register information to a third party or end user".

Also if I didn't shut it down I get the impression I would end up in court under copyright/intellectual property infringement.

 

[sneezycheese]

Nominet scum

...Yup Nominet SUCKS!!!

Most of us know that Nominet use bullying tactics as thier first port of call and yet 'WE' do nothing about it! 'THEY' use the press/polititicians to 'further thier aims', so why don't we? everyone here needs to wake up and smell the coffee - In my opinion 'they' care very little about the 'individual' and should be ashamed of themselves! - I would like this matter to be made public if at all possible, if only to highlight how Lesley and her 'gang' behaves!

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[jonno]

These parts:

40,000 suspended domain names (status derived from the DAC)

Publishing the number of days suspended (using renewal date from the DAC)

Publishing the TAGs on the "who got what" pages (taken from the DAC)

Were found in breach of:

http://www.nominet.org.uk/other/dac/contract
5.3.6: "You may not provide more than an insubstantial part of the register information to a third party or end user".

Also if I didn't shut it down I get the impression I would end up in court under copyright/intellectual property infringement.

that's crazy - surely that's more or less the same as a registrar doing a lookup to check for availability and echoing out a "calculated" result to the end user

perhaps you can threaten legal action for development time and costs?

 

[sneezycheese]

Re Edwin, it's typical of your lot, not affected so not really bothered and shout down anyone who cares, the same thing happened on another issue recently. Oh yeah domcollect. There's nothing like a community sticking together...

...here, here - well said - it's not just about 'money', it's about 'community'!!!

 

[Whois-Search]

that's crazy - surely that's more or less the same as a registrar doing a lookup to check for availability and echoing out a "calculated" result to the end user

I believe it has to do with storing the data and republishing it. If you use a status checker at one of the big registrars like www.123-reg.co.uk then the status is shown live on the website and not stored/republished.

 

[Edwin]

Here's what I don't understand: Nominet may not be angels, but they have 100% power over the .co.uk namespace right now, and that's not going to change in a hurry no matter how strongly any one of us feels about it. It's not really smart business to badmouth a monopoly supplier - nor is it likely to be effective! There is a difference between logically and calmly spelling out issues, and taking potshots at people.

Next time you have a problem with something that you need Nominet's help to resolve, and someone there sees your name next to a complaint, do you think they're going to rush headlong to help you? Or do you think they'll think "hey, that's the loud-mouthed complainer who's given us nothing but grief?" It's only human nature...

I've always found Nominet staff to be polite and relatively efficient in dealing with issues, even though sometimes it takes a couple of emails to get their attention. Aside from policy stuff, which can't be changed in a day - or a week - and which needs to be calmly worked on through the channels set up for that purpose, what exactly is it they keep doing wrong?

As I see it, they provide a pretty smooth service in one of the busiest domain extensions in the world, with fewer problems on the whole than the .com namespace suffers from. Unlike .com, there's less or no .co.uk domain hijacking, no issues with registrars withholding EPP codes and blocking transfers (since you can ALWAYS go around them to get Nominet to do tag changes directly), no hassle about 60 day waiting periods before you can transfer domains, a known and clear expiry/drop system with no individual registrar hoarding of domains, etc.

It's certainly not perfect, but sometimes it's good to take a step back and see what WORKS rather than always looking for what DOESN'T!

 

[retired_member6]

These parts:

40,000 suspended domain names (status derived from the DAC)

Publishing the number of days suspended (using renewal date from the DAC)

Publishing the TAGs on the "who got what" pages (taken from the DAC)

Were found in breach of:

http://www.nominet.org.uk/other/dac/contract
5.3.6: "You may not provide more than an insubstantial part of the register information to a third party or end user".

Also if I didn't shut it down I get the impression I would end up in court under copyright/intellectual property infringement.

OK, well this decision effects Nominet's income, the amount of domains registered over time, registrar income, the money brought in through transfer fees, the entire one half of my operation, not forgetting your own interests so there must be a way of tackling this, it's in registrar's, tag holder's and domainer's and I dare say, Nominet's best interests to see this action fought somehow.

Legally speaking, you can still operate. You just don't show the data... and agreeing to not run the service again is one thing, agreeing not to run a similar service is another, the way round it is, in who caught what, just show domains caught but leave whois open to be looked at.

As for domains dropping, don't show dates, just show what's dropping that day, leave whoever to look at whois. The exact rules are, not showing data, don't show the data but keep the operation running. I'll be harsh here, even though it's you on the line, but in the best interests of the community regardless of the "oh well, thanks anyways" you should maybe, in your interests as well as mine and ours, go back to nominet and say hang on, you're taking a liberty here.

What if I do this, this and this, i.e. what I detailed to do above, they can't argue that, you're not showing any information and start running it again, it's plain to see through the PRSS that you can use information to your advantage as long as it doesn't get displayed publicly, which means you can store the information on your systems as long as you don't share it with a third party or end user.

So in effect, delete the days from showing and the tags and you're operational again, solicitors like to use legal fuddy duddy ye olde English to scare people into submission, it's worth going back to Nominet and see if they can argue any of what I've said - there's probably another bit in the contract... is there? What do people think?

5.2. Provided you do not breach any of the prohibitions and other terms of clause 5.3 you may do the following with the results generated by one or more DAC queries (in legal terms, we are granting you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to do these things, which we may terminate, see clause 5.3.8):

​

5.2.1. compile and store a list of .uk domain names together with their expiry date or other data from the DAC query and (optionally) use that list for providing services to your existing clients or for monitoring the availability of .uk domain names on your own behalf or on behalf of another provided that the information is passed to them on contractual terms that (a) prevent them from further distributing the data and (b) prevent any use of the data by them in a way that this contract or the general law prevents you doing yourself; or

5.2.2. in response to a query from an existing or potential customer;

5.2.2.1. confirm whether a particular domain name is available to register; and/or

5.2.2.2. confirm whether similar alternative domain names are available to register.

Cheers
Lee

 

[retired_member6]

Here's what I don't understand: Nominet may not be angels, but they have 100% power over the .co.uk namespace right now, and that's not going to change in a hurry no matter how strongly any one of us feels about it. It's not really smart business to badmouth a monopoly supplier - nor is it likely to be effective! There is a difference between logically and calmly spelling out issues, and taking potshots at people.

Next time you have a problem with something that you need Nominet's help to resolve, and someone there sees your name next to a complaint, do you think they're going to rush headlong to help you? Or do you think they'll think "hey, that's the loud-mouthed complainer who's given us nothing but grief?" It's only human nature...

I've always found Nominet staff to be polite and relatively efficient in dealing with issues, even though sometimes it takes a couple of emails to get their attention. Aside from policy stuff, which can't be changed in a day - or a week - and which needs to be calmly worked on through the channels set up for that purpose, what exactly is it they keep doing wrong?

As I see it, they provide a pretty smooth service in one of the busiest domain extensions in the world, with fewer problems on the whole than the .com namespace suffers from. Unlike .com, there's less or no .co.uk domain hijacking, no issues with registrars withholding EPP codes and blocking transfers (since you can ALWAYS go around them to get Nominet to do tag changes directly), no hassle about 60 day waiting periods before you can transfer domains, a known and clear expiry/drop system with no individual registrar hoarding of domains, etc.

It's certainly not perfect, but sometimes it's good to take a step back and see what WORKS rather than always looking for what DOESN'T!

I don't know who you're talking to, but see above, I found what works.

 

[retired_member6]

So come on, someone tell me there's another clause (not santa) and that I'm wrong, legals should always be given a few days and then replied to, there's no harm in it, they're paid to receive replies as well as send letters. I don't see why deleting can't just delete the days and tag names and carry on, can you?

 

[retired_member6]

Subsequently our DAC subscription has been suspended, all data has been destroyed, and we have agreed with Nominet not to run such a service again.

And again, they've suspended you, you didn't have to delete stored data as you didn't break any rules there, only if they terminated membership. I tell you, you should sue nominet if you've deleted data, loss of earnings and being advised wrong.

 

[retired_member16]

I guess if there was a way round then Andrew would know of it and implement it, he hasnt, therefore I think Nom hold all the cards.

Its all well and good pushing the subject but its his head on the block, not ours, and I would think that I would have pulled the plug if it was me in his shoes.

 

[retired_member6]

I guess if there was a way round then Andrew would know of it and implement it, he hasnt, therefore I think Nom hold all the cards.

Its all well and good pushing the subject but its his head on the block, not ours, and I would think that I would have pulled the plug if it was me in his shoes.

I'll not say anymore but there is a way around it, it's in the contract with nominet.

 

[Whois-Search]

Nominet are even objecting to the lists of domain names and I can't update those lists without a DAC.

Believe me I have and I am still seeking legal advice on this.

I have even looked in to cases like the William Hill database High Court case:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/863.html

http://www.out-law.com/page-5922

Also i'm not the one with millions of pounds in the isle of man