New Nominet Policy to Kill Drop Catching

[Aaron Clifford]

All the Government bang on about is helping out SME's and growing small businesses and we seem to have here a Government appointed body basically freezing out 100's of small businesses that rely on drop catching as their main income.

Not forgetting the designers, content writers and SEO guys that will loose out on work from the lack of name development from lots of the drop catchers.

Just seems to be a massive swing in favour of two or three large companies IMO.

 

[Aaron Clifford]

I'll just email nominet ...

 

[Aaron Clifford]

Everyone still interested, including dropcatchers, will still bid on and buy expired domain names especially if they appear at an independent auction site rather than at auctions controlled by the major registrars. You'll probably have bidded in threads on here and on domainlore so why would you not do so at another auction site? The only other difference is you didn't also have a chance at getting the domain name for £6 by battering the DAC and EPP servers. The sky isn't quite falling unless, perhaps, you recently spent £100,000 buying someone else's dropcatching business only to find that it's probably going to be worthless.

I didn't spend £100k , I had a feeling it would change at some point. Will be interesting to see what happens...It just seems parts of the proposal are a little counter productive to Nominets mantra.

 

[GreyWing]

You'll probably have bidded in threads on here and on domainlore so why would you not do so at another auction site?

For me, mainly because of transparency, one of the reasons I don't bid on sedo at the moment. That's why like you said earlier these things if they do happen have to go through Nominet and the auctions run by them.

Otherwise the real wild west is about to hit the .uk's. Which has implications far beyond drop catching.

 

[foz]

Is their any Registry in the world that auctions off cancelled domains? The draft put forward doesn't even come close to implementing such a concept.

If a few registrars sold off cancelled domains, it would NOT be the end of drop catching as we know it.

The right of renewal clause in the 92 day period, is an issue on the current draft for a registrar auction proposal.

 

[foz]

The current proposal theoretically allows Registrars to do as they wish and any registrar would quickly realise the value of domain names that were expiring, especially after enough smart registrants contacted them offering to buy upcoming expired domain names from them directly. Once the trend goes the way of letting Registrars do as they please with expired domain names we could have all sorts of outcomes and it really would be "wild west". If you want that free for all, then so be it. Just so you know that if that does happen, there were alternatives.

Registrars are bound by the right to renew clause. They can't sell the domain before the 91 day period ends and when it does transpire the domain will be cancelled by the Registry. So they are left with an attempt to catch (or renew within 1 minute past midnight on the 92nd day).

Folk approach registrants on expiring domains at the moment, so the right to renew registrant has the last say (not the Registrar).

 

[foz]

Aren't some Registrars already ignoring the clauses by renewing and selling the domain names before the 92 day expiry period (whether they take control of the domain name and change the Registrant details before transferring them or not)?

I haven't noticed this on a large volume scale.

Have some Registrars built in other dubious T&Cs allowing them to take control of the domain name after the expiration?

In the future, if a Registrar was allowed to auction off a domain name then this may also give them the opportunity to simply hold on or transfer the domain name as they wish. I'd rather they couldn't do that.

Not aware, but seems highly unethical and a breach of Nominets policies.

If Registrars were allowed to keep and hold back suspended/cancelled inventory I doubt the cherries would even hit the re-seller auction market. End user sales only.

I think the main question to be asked of this draft, is do we (Nominet members) allow Registrars to take ownership of suspended/cancelled domain names that are on their own system?

 

[foz]

If Nominet ran auctions for expiring domains (hence new registrations) it would breach the "first come first served" rule.

 

[foz]

I don't understand why Nominet is giving so much leeway to Registrars in this draft. Nominet should set the expiring rules and every Registrar should comply.

 

[rob]

I don't understand why Nominet is giving so much leeway to Registrars in this draft. Nominet should set the expiring rules and every Registrar should comply.

Registrars had the most input?

 

[monaghan]

If the aim of the policy was to kill drop catching, I'd not have wasted my time going to anything other than the 1st meeting!

If auctioning is wrong don't tell us who already know, tell Nominet, but please put a reasoned case not just a grumble.

Personally I would be in favour of some form of controlled parking / auction providing it was a manual opt-in after the issue of the initial renewal notification. I can see the DRS cases now for non-opt in auctions!

 

[davedevelopment]

I'm in the domain industry predominantly for the drop catching, I don't have the capital to buy (decent) domain names on the secondary market, so I'd be pretty much shut down by this. I've used the money I've earned from dropcatching to supplement my income, buying the missus a new (to us) car, holidays and it's paid a little bit towards my wedding, and it doesn't owe me anything, so I'm not too bothered, especially as it's become a little saturated.

I am on the other hand against the idea of the larger registrars profiting from this. Like others have said, this needs to be handled away from the registrars, with the possibility of them receiving some royalties to cover extended costs etc.

 

[monaghan]

The reason I suggested opt-in after renewal notice has been issued is to prevent a small well written clause being inserted into T&C's which we all know are rarely read prior to the average purchase, who's going to even remember seeing T&C's 2 years ago, let alone remembering what was in them?

Policing policy is of course another debate, we all know how easy it is to for a registrar bypass many of the current protection processes!

 

[foz]

If such a FCFS rule actually exists Nominet were happy to see it breached when they auctioned off all of the 1 and 2 character domain names via a third party auction host. That was claimed as a success.

FCFS

First-come, first-served. We operate the .uk registry on this basis for the allocation of domain names. Nominet does not make any decisions on who has the greater right to a domain name.

http://www.nic.uk/about/glossary/


It was a one-off, supply limited. The third party auction site was rubbish (IMO).

 

[Edwin]

A single central auction run by Nominet or a Nominet-designated agent is a fair solution. Anyone in the world can
participate (just like they can on eBay for example) and the cost of entry is zero (until you actually bid and win an auction costs you nothing)

Arguably it's a more level playing field than the current drops, since all participants have access to the same tool (auction platform) and it's a simple "highest bid wins" situation. No inside knowledge or technical expertise required.

What should be avoided at all costs is the utter chaos of .com, where some registrars (eg Tucows, Register.com) help themselves to the best names on expiry, others run "closed" auctions (you have to pre-bid before the drop to be in the auction), others run open auctions and yet others just let names drop. The net result is that it's almost impossible to stay abreast of all drops and there's a vastly confusing mass of drop types you have to master to stay in the game.

 

[foz]

A single central auction run by Nominet or a Nominet-designated agent is a fair solution. Anyone in the world can
participate (just like they can on eBay for example) and the cost of entry is zero (until you actually bid and win an auction costs you nothing)

Arguably it's a more level playing field than the current drops, since all participants have access to the same tool (auction platform) and it's a simple "highest bid wins" situation.

Arguably participants in the two letter auctions didn't find it a level playing field, being priced out of most auctions. Be careful what you wish for.

I think its fair at the moment (status quo) as no one entity is repeatedly picking up the cherries. A lot of inventory makes it onto the re-seller market too.

 

[rob]

Arguably participants in the two letter auctions didn't find it a level playing field, being priced out of most auctions. Be careful what you wish for.

I think its fair at the moment (status quo) as no one entity is repeatedly picking up the cherries. A lot of inventory makes it onto the re-seller market too.

The big registrars though see no coin, just 20p on renewals profit!

 

[foz]

The big registrars though see no coin, just 20p on renewals profit!

It's volume, multiple extension offerings and addons (hosting etc) that makes the money.

Godaddy is proficient with "would you like fries with that".

 

[Alien]

It's volume, multiple extension offerings and addons (hosting etc) that makes the money.

Godaddy is proficient with "would you like fries with that".

Supersize me! :grin:

 

[DarrenTSO]

What would you guys say if a registrar engaged in this behaviour with respect to expired domains (monetisation, redemption fees, eventual auctioning off for their own profit) but charged below cost for domain registrations. We could feasibly see this business model evolve because of the cross subsidy of domain registrations through domain expiry profits.