Statement
of the
Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC)
on
Domain Name Tasting
6 December 2007
Intellectual Property Issues
The Sample Zone File Data Study
Conclusion
Robin,Thank you for the work that you have done on thistopic. Having served as a representative on thedomain tasting ad-hoc working group, allow me to makethe following observations:(1) You cite the five purportedly legitimate uses ofthe Add Grace Period as stipulated by the registrarsin the ad hoc report; lets review them as I find noneof their justifications to have sufficient merit:AGP Use 1: Correction of typographical errors made byregistrant -- with all the redundancies built into theregistration process (including all the upsell pages)the AGP is no longer needed to dealt with this remotepossibility.AGP Use 2: Cart “hold” to provide access to domainnames -- the concept of reserving a domain at theregistry once it gets "looked up" by a user (thathasn't paid for the registration) is an abomination.As stated in the White Paper: "The failure to make adomain name applicant pay for its use of a domain namehas encouraged cyberpirates and is a practice thatshould end as soon as possible."AGP Use 3: Fraud remedies -- arrangements regardingthe settlement of fraud claims can be built into theCredits section in the Service Level Agreement withinthe relevant registry-registrar agreements; it neednot be part of the AGP.AGP Use 4: Monitoring, testing and development ofsystems -- This argument seeks to make the "cost ofdoing business" a registry subsidy. The argument isweak and can readily be rejected.AGP Use 5: Addressing Registrant ‘Buyer’s Remorse’ --a fine example of BS.The best way of dealing with the current spate ofdomain tasting is to eliminate the Add Grace Period;this option is preferable to all others.Even the PIR approach is amenable to gaming asregistrars can adjust their business and pricingmodels to compensate for the extra miniscule chargesthat are being imposed -- five cents is not asufficient barrier, and even a twenty centregistrar-level transaction fee may not be sufficientto stem the tide as registrants have been willing topay registrars .2 Euro (see the NASK domain tastingprogram launched 3 September) for the privilege oftasting a domain -- here in the States, programs suchas Traffic Club already charge 25 cents for tasting --what we don't want to do is to create another newopportunity for registrars to game the system andthereby allow domain tasting to continue.If you take a close look at the .org Monthly registryreports, you will see that capitoldomains deleted1,026,628 domains in .org during the month of May --they certainly weren't deterred by the PIR feeassessment. Accordingly, I disagree with yourconclusion that "Of the proposed responses to thegrowing practice of domain name tasting, the mostappropriate may be the imposition of a modest excessdeletion fee." Simply put, it won't work.The only safe course of action is to advocate for thecomplete elimination of the AGP -- the "modestrestocking fee" approach can and will be gamed.(2) By the way, with regard to your reference tophishing/pharming, I should point out that the APWGstudy found no correlation between phishing and domaintasting -- seeThe APWG does note that "tasting affects anti-phishingefforts. Members of the anti-phishing community havehad to increase their infrastructure to account forthe larger number of potential phish sites that arebeing registered by tasters, and this impedesanti-phishing efforts and increases the cost ofdetecting and mitigating the fraudulent behavior."regards,Danny____________________________________________________________________________________Be a better friend, newshound, andknow-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ