New program would let registrars trade-in domains they no longer want.
VeriSign has filed papers with ICANN proposing a “Domain Name Exchange” that would let .net domain name owners trade in their domains for others. The stated purpose of the exchange is to allow service providers that offer packages for less than a year to change in domains when customers are no longer using them:
Today when a registrant terminates a package of services from a registrar after, for example, an introductory 1 or 3 month period, the registrar is forced to recoup the investment in the associated domain via monetization or the secondary market. The domain exchange will allow a registrar to offer another registrant a package that sits on top of that same registration using a new domain…
Many web hosting companies offer monthly packages and could take advantage of this exchange.
In its filing (pdf), VeriSign acknowledges that some people may view this as an opportunity for “domain tasting”, whereby a registrant could register a domain and exchange it for another if it doesn’t produce enough revenue:
Some members of the Intellectual Property constituency and certain registrars whose primary business is brand management have raised concerns similar to those raised in the development of policy concerning the use of the Add Grace Period (“AGP”).
However, VeriSign is proposing several measures to quell these fears:
-Allow exchanges only every 30 days
-Not allow a grace period following an exchange
-Publish a report that lists the domain names exchanged as part of a registration
-Create a WHOIS/WHOWAS record for all domain names exchanged under the Domain Name Exchange Service.
The “WhoWas” service VeriSign refers to (pdf) would only include registry whois information, not registrar information such as the registrant name.
Acro says
Horribly bad idea, especially if it’s run by ICANN itself. Also, why only .net and not .com domains? And finally, how would this prevent the proliferation of selling stolen domains? ICANN already has a lot of unresolved issues on its plate, including the scandalous gTLDs.
michelle says
@ Acro – who said ICANN is running it?
ask your registrar for the verisign registry lock service from your registrar to prevent names being stolen..
Acro says
Michelle – ICANN is proposing and sanctioning it, I don’t see anywhere saying they will be outsourcing the service to a third party.
About the reference to domain locking, that’s pretty basic stuff. I meant to say, how would ICANN ensure that domains that were stolen would not be traded on this proposed platform?
michelle says
@ acro – who do you think put the proposal into ICANN so really ican is the body but the one who would be carrying this out is verisign.
As for stolen domains, opt in for registrar or registry lock for all your domains so they should be “locked” up from the get-go instead of depending on icann to ensure anything…
jp says
Where can u reg a .net for 3 months?
Andrew Allemann says
@ jp – a lot of web hosts sell packages with a domain month-to-month. But they cost more than a year’s worth of registration because it’s part of a package.
Acro says
Michelle – Understood about Verisign vs. ICANN (are you affiliated with ICANN by any chance?)
You’re still not getting what I am saying with regards to stolen domains. I am not concerned about *my* domains being stolen, I am stating that domains – which are stolen daily – can end up being traded on this new ICANN-sanctioned platform, despite all these ‘measures’ of 30 days etc.
Andrew Allemann says
Guys, think about how this will work in practice. It won’t apply to stolen domains; it wouldn’t be worth stealing a domain.
-Registrar pays extra fee for initial registration
-Customer leaves service after three months
-Registrar exchanges crappybrandname.net back to VeriSign in return for another domain one of their other customers requests.
So let’s say a registrar/web host has 1,000 domains outstanding at any given time. Any month maybe 200 of them are “canceled” by customers, so they have 200 credits to apply to the next batch of domains (albeit for the remaining registration time).
Jim Fleming says
Have people missed the ICANN CEO’s recent comment about .NET being “Worthless” ?
Verisign funds ICANN and decides the fate
of .NET. There was supposed to be a .NET
Community with 1 vote per domain. That does
not appear to be emerging in the “Eco System”.
Instead, .NET has been chosen for remodeling.
.COM is the only stable TLD (somewhat) backed
by the U.S. Department of COMmerce. Anything
can be built under .COM. That is where the
smart money gravitates.
.NET will become some R&D “Grid Thing”.
http://New.Net ends up in the swamp?
Andrew Allemann says
@ Jim Fleming – Beckstrom denies he made the comment
Chip says
I think the idea for VeriSign is that domains get reregistered at a decent rate if they have been registered and/or developed (even for only a short time) and they are circulated through the drop lists. VeriSign not only gets the original registration (only exchanges will be allowed, not partial regs) but a percentage bump of those that are regged via the drop process.
I see this as an inital attempt at real marketing for VeriSign. They have always been reluctant to do anything with one of their anchor TLDs (Com/Net) because they had them sewn up. Makes me nervous when they start “finessing” with registration rules. Opening up a can a worms. The lesson “Tasting” should teach ICANN is that registrars and VeriSign can get very creative and aggressive to squeeze revenue out of TLDs without regard for the industry as a whole. Alarms should be going off with this one folks.
michelle says
@ arco – i dont work for ICANN
Louise says
Chip, Thanx for nicely written, thoughtfully expressed comment. Enjoy your site, FreshAvails! Is it your site?
Already I was in a panic over Verisign’s process for Bulk Transfer After Partial Portfolio Acquisition of dot coms and dot nets (and created RecoverDomainName.com blog about it!) passed in November. What does it mean? It sounds like the Registrars are setting up to trade in our livelihoods – our dot com web properties, and I am against it! My domains will be lost if they get transferred to a Registrar I didn’t choose because I won’t sign the agreement of a Registrar I don’t choose.
So this maneuver Andrew writes about sounds like small potatoes, compared to what already is done.
average domainer says
As the saying goes – “follow the money”.
Who really benefits from this?
Verisign, Icann and the ppc suppliers (G, Y & M).
Does this strengthen the integrity of the internet?
I don’t think so. I believe it only benefits a handful of people like Google, Microsoft/Yahoo, Enom, Godaddy, Moniker, Name, Verisign and Icann.
(Plus the old tasters that have evolved into a new version of tasting)
Is it amazing how the internet ‘powers to be’ are becoming more like Washington?
Passing rules to benefit only the inner circle.
Andrew Allemann says
@ average domainers – well, it also benefits the web hosting companies