Raven.com - stolen name - was sold on Sedo

[danielg]

Interesting...

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

Interesting...

__________________
Signature removed because of pathedic stalkers.
Some buttons are just not meant to be pushed.

Curious, why did you remove your signature, who is stalking you and why ? You seem angry that someone pushed a button of yours. Full story please. Putting that in your sig. means you want us all to know.

 

[steveto]

I've had a few domains hijacked by people and listed them on Sedo like a week before they were to expire. I went to log in to make payment and I noticed they weren't in my panel, so I was like WTF? I got them back, but it was all hush hush at enom. They never told me "why" it happened..just that they fixed it. It was "pushed" to another account.

Dudes..I really think most of these hijackings are inside jobs and to keep low profile, they just deal with only the people that complain and for the unlucky ones that don't notice...they get screwed.

 

[Raider]

Dudes..I really think most of these hijackings are inside jobs and to keep low profile, they just deal with only the people that complain and for the unlucky ones that don't notice...they get screwed.

Are you saying that Enom is stealing domains from its customers?

Do you have a Retail or Reseller enom account?

 

[Theo]

At NetSol, quite a few domains about to enter redemption - or during redemption - magically get renewed and end up in the hands of other individuals. That's definitely an example of an inside job.

 

[katherine]

At NetSol, quite a few domains about to enter redemption - or during redemption - magically get renewed and end up in the hands of other individuals. That's definitely an example of an inside job.

Yeah I noticed that some people are very efficient at locating the owners of expired domains and 'buying' the names before they go to snap

If you notice anything shady at Netsol here are 2 useful contact persons:

Tracy Lillis
Legal Dept
Phone: (570) 708-8700 ext 9125
Fax: (570) 708-3077
tlillis {at} networksolutions {dot} com

Peter Kerrick
Customer Service Supervisor II
Phone: (570) 708-8483
Mobile: (570) 233-3047
pkerrick {at} networksolutions {dot} com
He is in charge of investigations into domain theft issues.

 

[Raider]

That's definitely an example of an inside job.

Or an outside job. Are you referring to employee theft unknown to the Registrar? I can see that happening.

 

[jberryhill]

At NetSol, quite a few domains about to enter redemption - or during redemption - magically get renewed and end up in the hands of other individuals. That's definitely an example of an inside job.

If you are talking about anything that happens after expiration of the registration contract, then you are not talking about a hi-jacking. Every Netsol registrant agrees that after the renewal date, the domain name is fair game.

Sorry, you don't pay your rent, you don't get to stay in the apartment. That's normal.

 

[Theo]

If you are talking about anything that happens after expiration of the registration contract, then you are not talking about a hi-jacking. Every Netsol registrant agrees that after the renewal date, the domain name is fair game.

Sorry, you don't pay your rent, you don't get to stay in the apartment. That's normal.

But during redemption the domain can be renewed by no other than the registrant. And yet, it seems that there are other "paths" available.

 

[Dave Zan]

But during redemption the domain can be renewed by no other than the registrant.

At least, by one who claims to represent the registrant. If there are issues,
Netsol's rather "good" at dealing with them (yet covering their arses which
they have to anyway).

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

At least, by one who claims to represent the registrant. If there are issues,
Netsol's rather "good" at dealing with them (yet covering their arses which
they have to anyway).

Well for what it's worth Dan even someone who " represents the registrant " better still have the login/pass. Why ? Take Rumble.com for prime example. These are FACTS of the case I experienced as I was the potential buyer pre drop.

Rumble.com set to expire

I call up owner and offer X, owner agrees to sale the name but needs to renew it asap ( approx a week's time or so to do so )

Via phone conversations and instructions how to renew he informs me the employee who had the login/pass is no longer with the company and he is trying to explain this to Netsol. ( He gets no where , keep in mind he is the Pres. of the company and they have documented proof they own the name )

Last ditch effort he has his lawyer contact Netsol and send proof of ownership explaining the situation ( still they refuse to renew the name for them)

Guess what ? Name proceeds to drop and enters snap auction and is won.

Now the original owner is screwed because basically the cost to sue outweighs the name eventhough it sold for $2Xk if I recall. I have not followed up to see what happened since.

So you dont think Netsol gets a good cut of auctions ?

I have seen them take action on behalf of large corp. time and time again, yanking them from even an auction itself. They know better then to screw with the big boys, their policy on the average joe is quite clear. You find this is a common practice in business, if it makes economic sense screw em. Makes my blood boil .

 

[jberryhill]

But during redemption the domain can be renewed by no other than the registrant.

And the RGP is a mandatory procedure... where?

The actual RGP is a default registry process in the absence of the registrant having agreed to other post-expiration terms.

Read paragraph 14 here:

http://www.networksolutions.com/legal/static-service-agreement.jsp#domains

I'm surprised you don't appreciate this well-trodden topic.

Let's forget domains for a minute, and let's talk about any other service contract.

Let's say that you and I enter into a contract that says:

"For payment of $5, Acroplex agrees to provide the service of posting 'John is a swell guy' to DNFORUM every day for a term expiring on September 4, 2008."

Now, Acro, read that service contract. You are obligated to do utterly nothing for me come September 5, 2008.

Here's a really simple legal question - How long is a registrar obligated to do anything for a registrant under a one year contract?

I mean, this is one of those Groucho Marx bonus questions like "What color is a red handkerchief or how long is a ten foot pole?" It's not rocket science. When a contract expires, it expires.

 

[Theo]

Paragraph 14 appears to be the longest and most winded paragraph in the entire contract!

So the RGP is not a mandatory procedure; one learns a new thing each day.

 

[jberryhill]

So the RGP is not a mandatory procedure; one learns a new thing each day.

It wasn't supposed to be optional, but there are too many boneheads that can't leave a good policy alone.

As a technical matter, however, Verisign makes certain technical requirements in addition to the bare minimum in order to implement RGP renewals. So a given registrar may be literally unable to process them.

Here's what happened:

http://gnso.icann.org/issues/deletes/report-final-17jun03.shtml

(5) Danny Younger argues that Recommendation 3.1.2 is seriously flawed , as it allows a registrar discretion as to when a domain name may be deleted within the forty-five days following its expiration. He proposes a uniform policy whereby domain names are deleted only on the 45th day following expiration.

TASK FORCE COMMENT ON 5:

Mr. Younger raises an issue that the Task Force discussed early in its deliberations. At its initial meetings, members of the Task Force appointed from constituencies composed of users raised the same issue as Mr. Younger. The registrars, however, made the point that given their various business models, some flexibility is needed during this grace period. For example, registries bill the registrars for a renewed domain promptly on its renewal date and then credit the renewal fee back if the domain name is deleted within forty-five (45) days. While some registrars are willing and financially able to front the registry fee on behalf of a domain name registrant, not all registrars are in the same position. The registrars expressed the strong concern that requiring them to bear the registry fee would place an undue hardship on smaller registrars. Based primarily on this concern, the Task Force compromised on the discretionary window of 45 days, which will provide some uniformity and certainty while also allowing those registrars who wish to do so to avoid the registry renewal fee for domain names not renewed by the registrant. In order to provide registrants with an understanding of their registrar’s deletion policies, however, the task force has recommended that registrars provide registrants with those policies, including a specific time after expiration at which names will be deleted.

You have to bear in mind that a registrar is an interface to the registry, which imposes its own conditions on the registrar. The registry is required by ICANN to only enter names for integer year periods. The initial "fix" of the "whoops there goes my domain" problem was to implement a registry auto-renew, charged to the registrar, and refundable after 45 days. That allowed Verisign to hold a fistful of registrar cash on a rolling basis, even if registrants didn't want to renew their domain names.

It was in the context of the argument over who is responsible for payment of the domain name during that 45 days that registrars could opt out of registry auto-renew, even if Verisign ran the RGP.

So, the Deletes Task Force Final Report sat on a shelf for another year and half before it was hastily re-drafted as a consensus policy and grafted into the registrar accreditation agreement as follows. Note the phrase I have in bold:

http://www.icann.org/registrars/eddp.htm

3.7.5 At the conclusion of the registration period, failure by or on behalf of the Registered Name Holder to consent that the registration be renewed within the time specified in a second notice or reminder shall, in the absence of extenuating circumstances, result in cancellation of the registration by the end of the auto-renew grace period (although Registrar may choose to cancel the name earlier).

3.7.5.1 Extenuating circumstances are defined as: UDRP action, valid court order, failure of a Registrar's renewal process (which does not include failure of a registrant to respond), the domain name is used by a nameserver that provides DNS service to third-parties (additional time may be required to migrate the records managed by the nameserver), the registrant is subject to bankruptcy proceedings, payment dispute (where a registrant claims to have paid for a renewal, or a discrepancy in the amount paid), billing dispute (where a registrant disputes the amount on a bill), domain name subject to litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction, or other circumstance as approved specifically by ICANN.

3.7.5.2 Where Registrar chooses, under extenuating circumstances, to renew a domain name without the explicit consent of the registrant, the registrar must maintain a record of the extenuating circumstances associated with renewing that specific domain name for inspection by ICANN consistent with clauses 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 of this registrar accreditation agreement.

3.7.5.3 In the absence of extenuating circumstances (as defined in Section 3.7.5.1 above), a domain name must be deleted within 45 days of either the registrar or the registrant terminating a registration agreement.

3.7.5.4 Registrar shall provide notice to each new registrant describing the details of their deletion and auto-renewal policy including the expected time at which a non-renewed domain name would be deleted relative to the domain�s expiration date, or a date range not to exceed ten days in length. If a registrar makes any material changes to its deletion policy during the period of the registration agreement, it must make at least the same effort to inform the registrant of the changes as it would to inform the registrant of other material changes to the registration agreement (as defined in clause 3.7.7 of the registrars accreditation agreement)."

3.7.5.5 If Registrar operates a website for domain name registration or renewal, details of Registrar's deletion and auto-renewal policies must be clearly displayed on the website.

3.7.5.6 If Registrar operates a website for domain registration or renewal, it should state, both at the time of registration and in a clear place on its website, any fee charged for the recovery of a domain name during the Redemption Grace Period.

3.7.5.7 In the event that a domain which is the subject of a UDRP dispute is deleted or expires during the course of the dispute, the complainant in the UDRP dispute will have the option to renew or restore the name under the same commercial terms as the registrant. If the complainant renews or restores the name, the name will be placed in Registrar HOLD and Registrar LOCK status, the WHOIS contact information for the registrant will be removed, and the WHOIS entry will indicate that the name is subject to dispute. If the complaint is terminated, or the UDRP dispute finds against the complainant, the name will be deleted within 45 days. The registrant retains the right under the existing redemption grace period provisions to recover the name at any time during the Redemption Grace Period, and retains the right to renew the name before it is deleted.


Okay, now the entire deletion policy hinges upon the absence of a registrant's consent to renew the name, right?

Now go back and read the domain terms par. 14 at Netsol:

Should you not renew the domain name during any applicable grace period, you agree that unless you notify us to the contrary we may, in our sole discretion, renew and transfer the domain name to Network Solutions or a third party on your behalf (such a transaction is hereinafter referred to as a "Direct Transfer"), and your failure to so notify us after the domain name expiration date shall constitute your consent to such a Direct Transfer.

There's the consent of the Registered Name Holder that renders the Deletion Policy entirely meaningless.

Now, go read GoDaddy's, Enom's, etc. etc.

 

[Theo]

Looks to me that they have all bases covered! For themselves, that is.

 

[jberryhill]

Looks to me that they have all bases covered! For themselves, that is.

Mmm... one might argue that those two bolded clauses are not quite meeting each other.

 

[Dave Zan]

Looks to me that they have all bases covered! For themselves, that is.

You bet, especially Netsol. Not exactly a stranger to legal disputes.

Bottom line: once a domain name expires, the registrars don't have to do any
thing for you unless they see it's worthwhile. So make sure that never, ever
happens.

Most of you folks know that, of course...

 

[Focus]

Many of us have a bad habit with domains, esp. the ones at GD and Enom to let them expire for a few days because we are just plain lazy and know that we can login later and renew it the next day, next day, next day, etc...well guess what eventually happens...you login to do so and it's just simply not there anymore. So as suggested above, RENEW your names NOW, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to let valuable domains worth thousands of dollars get anywhere NEAR expiration...or valuable typos for that matter..all my GOOD names are reg'd out to at least 2009-2010 right now minimum...it's like $7 a year, big frickin whoop!