<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Has GoDaddy Done a 180 on Invalid Whois?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/</link>
	<description>News and Views for the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 15:04:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Altaf</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/comment-page-1/#comment-350307</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. Altaf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 07:39:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/#comment-350307</guid>
		<description>Where are the actual rules? Even we found that the address e.g. email, contact tel with area code etc. are correct the rgistrars send a standard notice of whois update. If the whois info not correct, why the registrars are not compelled to update their database with correct &amp; uptodate whois collected from the registrant? It is obvious that if the sign up with the registrar was many years before the contact address cannot be feasible/updated for hundred of thousand domains if held by any registrant. Here TDNAM
should come up with improved policy how to protect alls ineterests.
Also we observed, despite escured user &amp; password how domains are stollen from the arsenal of the registrar? In that case what action TDNAM might take to return the domain to the original owner/registrant of the domain? Thanks.

Regards,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Where are the actual rules? Even we found that the address e.g. email, contact tel with area code etc. are correct the rgistrars send a standard notice of whois update. If the whois info not correct, why the registrars are not compelled to update their database with correct &amp; uptodate whois collected from the registrant? It is obvious that if the sign up with the registrar was many years before the contact address cannot be feasible/updated for hundred of thousand domains if held by any registrant. Here TDNAM<br />
should come up with improved policy how to protect alls ineterests.<br />
Also we observed, despite escured user &amp; password how domains are stollen from the arsenal of the registrar? In that case what action TDNAM might take to return the domain to the original owner/registrant of the domain? Thanks.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GoDaddy Changes Expired Domain Pricing &#124; The Domainer Times</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/comment-page-1/#comment-299606</link>
		<dc:creator>GoDaddy Changes Expired Domain Pricing &#124; The Domainer Times</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 06:38:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/#comment-299606</guid>
		<description>[...] made to TDNAM, it shows that the company is open to criticism and willing to address issues: it now suspends domains with invalid whois rather than deleting them, and no longer allows employees to bid on TDNAM [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] made to TDNAM, it shows that the company is open to criticism and willing to address issues: it now suspends domains with invalid whois rather than deleting them, and no longer allows employees to bid on TDNAM [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LosAngeles</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/comment-page-1/#comment-175818</link>
		<dc:creator>LosAngeles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 05:48:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/#comment-175818</guid>
		<description>Assuming either the Left Wing or the Right Wing gained control of the country, it would probably fly around in circles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Assuming either the Left Wing or the Right Wing gained control of the country, it would probably fly around in circles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; How Did Pool Score Shoppers.com? - The Domain Industry's News Source</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/comment-page-1/#comment-148331</link>
		<dc:creator>Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; How Did Pool Score Shoppers.com? - The Domain Industry's News Source</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/#comment-148331</guid>
		<description>[...] delete a domain for invalid whois. Instead, the company suspends it pending correction, much like other registrars [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] delete a domain for invalid whois. Instead, the company suspends it pending correction, much like other registrars [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DomainerPro</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/comment-page-1/#comment-104020</link>
		<dc:creator>DomainerPro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 19:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/#comment-104020</guid>
		<description>The new policy is much more reasonable and quite fair in my opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The new policy is much more reasonable and quite fair in my opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Snoopy</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/comment-page-1/#comment-103835</link>
		<dc:creator>Snoopy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/#comment-103835</guid>
		<description>This doesn&#039;t sound like an ethical way of trying to acquire a domain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This doesn&#8217;t sound like an ethical way of trying to acquire a domain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/comment-page-1/#comment-103639</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:30:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/2007/11/02/has-godaddy-done-a-180-on-invalid-whois/#comment-103639</guid>
		<description>I bet these names don&#039;t end up going through a delete cycle either. . . they&#039;ll just sit there and end up on TDNAM like any other &quot;expiring domain&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I bet these names don&#8217;t end up going through a delete cycle either. . . they&#8217;ll just sit there and end up on TDNAM like any other &#8220;expiring domain&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
