61–70 of 129 posts
Have any TLDs attempted to implement a property tax on domains according to value to reduce cyber squatting? To implement a property tax, Glen Weyl and Eric Posner have proposed using self-assessment so that users pay what they want ( https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818494 and https://www.amazon.com/Radical-Markets-Uprooting-Capitalism-... )
I think a lot of people don't know what "domain squatting" is. If there's a domain you want, but someone else has it but is not using it, that's not squatting. If you let your personal name domain expire, and someone else registers it, that's not squatting. In order for it to be squatting, they have to be trying to profit off a trademark. I assume Jerry Alex is not a trademark. "Cybersquatting (also known as domain s…
People like to think that generic domain names are somehow common property or something, and anyone holding that property for profit is somehow evil. It’s as if someone bought the lot across from your house, and then sold it for a profit and you say “Hey! That’s next door to me... they are evil to hold or sell it.. what if my friends/parents, etc want to live there!?” Why do people think generic names shouldn’t be pr…
Buying property anywhere and then sitting on it without developing it is a negative for everyone in that community, so of course its "evil" and frowned upon.
> It’s as if someone bought the lot across from your house, and then sold it for a profit and you say “Hey! That’s next door to me... they are evil to hold or sell it.. what if my friends/parents, etc want to live there!?”
If that person bought the lot with no intention of ever building on it... you're exactly right! That's terrible, and most developments strongly discourage this sort of situation by requiring the buyer to build a house to a certain standard within a certain period of time, all to avoid empty lots all over the place.
> And with name domains... who says you get that name when there are probably tons of other people sharing your exact name.
Nobody. Nobody says that. What people say is that the first person with an intention of building something on it should get it, and not just the richest person with that name. Squatters prevent anyone using the domain until someone with a lot of money to spend shows up.
I think a lot of people don't know what "domain squatting" is. If there's a domain you want, but someone else has it but is not using it, that's not squatting. If you let your personal name domain expire, and someone else registers it, that's not squatting. In order for it to be squatting, they have to be trying to profit off a trademark. I assume Jerry Alex is not a trademark. "Cybersquatting (also known as domain s…
If it was 9 years, then the squatters definitely won.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you realize that the reason the squatter abandoned the domain (instead of keeping it forever) is the $8/year registry fee? My question is why should the squatter pay only $8 per year, and not, say, $50?
Why should they pay $50? What are you charging for above cost of service?
Timely. Not very relevant, but I just sold a domain I've owned for 5 years after being contacted by GoDaddy's brokerage service about an interested buyer. It was actually cathartic for me -- not only did I realize that I may seem like the squatter to someone else in this situation, but it forced me to come to terms with the fact that I won't be working on that idea, ever.
> it forced me to come to terms with the fact that I won't be working on that idea, ever. I think this is a feeling so many people working in the web sphere have to contend with at some point.
I decided to just let it go and let my domain expire. I didnt approach the company to try and sell it, just let it expire. I wasn't squatting, amd I intended to use it, but the purpose didn't materialize, so I let it go. I never had any communication from the similarly named company; I dont even know if theyre still around. I just didnt renew when my time expired.
Have any TLDs attempted to implement a property tax on domains according to value to reduce cyber squatting? To implement a property tax, Glen Weyl and Eric Posner have proposed using self-assessment so that users pay what they want ( https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818494 and https://www.amazon.com/Radical-Markets-Uprooting-Capitalism-... )
What are the terms by which value is measured?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People like to think that generic domain names are somehow common property or something, and anyone holding that property for profit is somehow evil. It’s as if someone bought the lot across from your house, and then sold it for a profit and you say “Hey! That’s next door to me... they are evil to hold or sell it.. what if my friends/parents, etc want to live there!?” Why do people think generic names shouldn’t be pr…
> People like to think that generic domain names are somehow common property or something, and anyone holding that property for profit is somehow evil. Buying property anywhere and then sitting on it without developing it is a negative for everyone in that community, so of course its "evil" and frowned upon. > It’s as if someone bought the lot across from your house, and then sold it for a profit and you say “Hey! Th…
Prior to that the land was owned, probably for a long period of time, before the area was deemed worthy of development.
Do you really think there are just empty tracks of land waiting for the first buyer... that are held by whom???
No... someone took a risk and bought the land speculating that eventually the land would be wanted by someone to develop something on it. Same as purchasing a domain, paying the yearly fees... and hoping eventually some one will want to develop on it.
And if it’s beach front property... the equivalent of a nice domain name... it’s gonna go for a lot more.
Again, there’s no public trust or anything to hold property just in case someone wants to develop on it, because who decides who gets to use it?
Instead there are private investors taking a risk to carry the property, possibly for a loss.
> Nobody. Nobody says that. What people say is that the first person with an intention of building something on it should get it, and not just the richest person with that name. Squatters prevent anyone using the domain until someone with a lot of money to spend shows up.
That’s some utopia!! Who decides if what you’re building is valid or useful? What if I just display “hello” on the page? How about relevant ads related to the domain? What if I want to display my favorite music... what if my son just wants to post pictures of his LEGO’s? Who defines the line?? You’re gonna say “hello” or “ads” doesn’t count but pictures of Legos do? Why? You or some cabal get to dictate what speech is relevant? Your method of handing domains to the first person with “intention” quickly falls into abuse, corruption, censorship, etc.
I’d rather have a free market, thanks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
out of curiosity, how does that work?
This is surprisingly hard to explain off the cuff. In DNS, zones are separated by dots, and a fully-qualified domain name ends in a dot. The zones exist because there are too many domains for just one server to handle and this way zones can be distributed and managed separately. DNS queries right to left, for “Google.com.” it would look at “.” and query the root servers asking if they know “Google.com.”, they could r…
Though that's not really true in practice. Com hasn't exploded under the amount of traffic it faces, and merging in the other zones would only be about twice the load.