Domain Name Wire | Domain Name News

Domain Name Industry News

Featured Domains

Tucows offers “Whois Publicity” for domain names

by — Domain Registrars 0 Comments

Customers can now publish their information in Whois.

Graphic with the acronym GDPR for General Data Protection Regulation

Tucows (NASDAQ: TCX) has started allowing customers on its Enom and OpenSRS platforms to display their information publicly in Whois—as long as their reseller enables it.

Called “Whois Publicity“, the new option allows registrants to include their registrant information in Whois. Whois will still not show Admin, Tech and Billing contacts even with the Whois Publicity option turned on.

The company masked Whois information for all “thin Whois” domains on its platform after the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation went into effect last year.

ICANN requires all registrars to allow customers to show their information in Whois, but few have enabled this option so far. That’s because ICANN added a loophole to this requirement:

7.2.1. As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder.

“Commercially reasonable” could mean one year, two, or more. Many registrars are probably waiting for the temporary specification in which this requirement exists to be made permanent.

(Hat tip: George Kirikos)

New features? I just want domain platforms to work.

by — Services 4 Comments

Some domain platforms have major flaws that should be fixed quickly.

Frustrated man with hands on head and the words Just make it work!

I’ve read a few posts from domainers recently who want domain service providers to add new features. I want new features, too, but at a minimum, I just want the services to work. Few things are more frustrating than when services don’t work as they are intended.

Here are a few examples of services not working correctly that have caused me to pull out my hair.

NameJet – When you buy a domain name, you expect it to show up in your account. It might take a few days, and even longer when it’s a private party transaction. Things can happen that delay this but I expect NameJet to be on top of it. Earlier this year, I had to follow up to get a domain in my account. It took multiple support requests to get a response. If I hadn’t noticed this domain wasn’t added to my account, it probably wouldn’t have happened. I would have paid for the domain but never received it. This erodes trust.

Oh, and NameJet’s app alerts (still) don’t work. I don’t understand how a company can leave so much money on the table by not fixing this. Heck, redo the entire app if needed.

Enom – I’ll give Tucows a bit of a pass because I know it’s replacing the Enom system with a new backend. In the meantime, ever try to get authorization codes? Some arrive within minutes. Others arrive within weeks. Re-requesting them speeds it up sometimes, but I have serious questions about the stability of this platform.

GoDaddy – When you spend time adding domains for sale, the last thing you want is an error message that forces you to start over. I haven’t seen this error message in a while, but it sure is/was frustrating. [Update: as of 6/21/19, the error isn’t fixed.] Even for a beta, this should have been fixed earlier. I also have numerous domains that appear to be stuck in some sort of Afternic purgatory and can’t be added.

So while I understand calls for new features, I hope platforms prioritize fixing bugs and creating systems to verify the integrity of their platforms.

Scratch.org update and subpoenas

by — Policy & Law 10 Comments

Here’s why domain investors got subpoena notices from Enom.

Picture of Subpoena document

There’s been a lot of talk in domain circles today about subpoena notices for domains at Enom.

The subpoena stems from a lawsuit that Scratch Foundation, a non-profit created at MIT, filed against the domain name Scratch.org.

Scratch Foundation filed the case as in rem (meaning against the domain), but Ravi Lahoti stepped forward as the owner. Lahoti says he’s owned the domain name since 1998. DomainTools historical Whois records seem to corroborate his story, at least until Scratch Foundation was formed, although the domain has bounced around different entities/privacy services.

This brings us to the subpoena, which you can view here (pdf). Attorney David Weslow, who is representing Scratch Foundation, asked Enom for a list of Lahoti’s domains. The original subpoena was quite a bit broader than that, but these things are often narrowed between the lawyer and recipient. Regardless, Enom has apparently notified anyone who owns a domain that was at any point tied to Lahoti.

It seems that Weslow is trying to paint Lahoti as a serial cybersquatter.

Indeed, in a recent order (pdf), the judge wrote “Plaintiff has also brought various other anticybersquatting cases against Mr. Lahoti to the Court’s attention which demonstrate that Mr.
Lahoti is a notorious cybersquatter.”

Whether or not Lahoti is a notorious cybersquatter shouldn’t matter on the claim under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act so long as Lahoti proves that he owned the domain before Scratch Foundation had rights in the mark. This seems like it will be easy to do.

But there’s an interesting wrinkle in the lawsuit: it also claims trademark infringement. Should Scratch Foundation show that prior ads on Scratch.org infringed on its trademarks, could it win a judgment against the domain? I’m not familiar with how a judgment for trademark infringement works in an in rem case. But it’s clear that the trademark infringement claim is part of the effort to get control of the domain.

There’s a lesson here involving in rem lawsuits. Lahoti asked the court to name Lahoti as the defendant instead of in rem. This might make it easier to defend but also opens him up to personal liability. The court denied this request on the basis that Lahoti didn’t object early enough to in rem jurisdiction.

Big news: Enom switches from NameJet to GoDaddy for expired domains

by — Expired Domains 28 Comments

GoDaddy adds coveted Enom inventory to its expired domain name auctions.

Picture of expired parking meter.

Enom has moved its expired domain inventory to GoDaddy Auctions.

GoDaddy Auctions has another domain name registrar on its expired domain platform and this one is a doozy: Enom.

This morning I noticed many Enom domain names flowing through GoDaddy Auctions’ expiry stream.

The move is not surprising. Tucows (NASDAQ: TCX), which acquired Enom in 2017, already sends its non-Enom inventory to GoDaddy. For its Tucows domains, it essentially did a bake-off between GoDaddy Auctions and NameJet to figure out which one produced the most revenue. GoDaddy won.

The Enom acquisition came with a 50% ownership interest in NameJet and Tucows kept Enom’s expired domains on NameJet while sending its other domains to GoDaddy. But Tucows sold its stake in NameJet to Web.com late last year.

At the time of the acquisition I wrote:

The big question is if Enom domains will remain on NameJet and for how long. This was obviously part of the negotiation and ultimate purchase price. If Enom leaves the platform for GoDaddy at some point in the future, it will further degrade NameJet’s role in the marketplace.

We now have the answer.

So is this a win for domain investors? Yes and no.

On the plus side, they no longer have to manage domains at Enom. All domains they win will be added to their GoDaddy accounts.

Also, GoDaddy Auctions start at $12 (plus renewal, so about $20 total) whereas NameJet auctions start at $69.

But auctions at GoDaddy can be quite rich. Domain investors might end up paying more for domains there than if they same names ran through NameJet.

Also, I worry when there aren’t two strong competitors in a market. NameJet is getting weaker. Its valuable inventory is now mostly Web.com’s registrars Network Solutions and Register.com.

Web.com acquires Tucows’ half of NameJet

by — Expired Domains 0 Comments

Deal is a sign of the times in the expired domain business.

Web.com is now the sole owner of domain name auction site NameJet after acquiring Tucows’ (NASDAQ: TCX) interest in the business.

NameJet was created as a partnership between Enom and Network Solutions (now part of Web.com) in 2007 at a time when SnapNames was dominating the direct-transfer expired domain business. The deal meant that Network Solutions’ expired domain inventory would move to the new NameJet platform, delivering a blow to SnapNames. Oversee.net had just acquired SnapNames but knew about Network Solutions leaving the platform before completing the acquisition.

In 2014, Web.com acquired Snapnames from KeyDrive for $7.4 million. That meant that Web.com owned all of Snapnames and half of its competitor NameJet.

SnapNames and NameJet later combined forces on grabbing pending delete domains, which are domains that make it through the deletion cycle and are deleted by the registry.

Tucows acquired Enom last year and Enom’s half ownership in NameJet was a sort of “gift with purchase”. After the acquisition closed, Tucows shifted its expired domain name inventory from GoDaddy to NameJet, only to switch back to GoDaddy later in the year.

This was a big indication that GoDaddy was far better at monetizing Tucows’ expiring domain names than NameJet.

Today’s news makes sense. In fact, it probably makes sense to merge the SnapNames and NameJet platforms.

The big question is if Enom domains will remain on NameJet and for how long. This was obviously part of the negotiation and ultimate purchase price. If Enom leaves the platform for GoDaddy at some point in the future, it will further degrade NameJet’s role in the marketplace.