Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes • Hacker News Board

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#21

Post by ryanlol » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:36 PM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #19

skrause wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Parking pages or any other use that intends to work around the restriction can be deemed illegitimate use. My personal domain doesn't even have an A record in the DNS, only an MX record because use it for all my email. By your definition that would be an "illegitimate use" and I should lose my domain...

Would it be an undue burden to require people like you to put up a page saying, "This is my personal domain which I use primarily for email."? Can we just agree that nobody is posting the full proposed set of rules on HN, and nobody is trying to take away your domain? Every time this solution to domain squatting is proposed, someone counters with your objection as if it's a huge problem with the idea, but it just isn…

> Would it be an undue burden to require people like you to put up a page saying, "This is my personal domain which I use primarily for email."?

Yes, this is a terrible idea.

> Surely you can imagine a set of rules that shuts down a large number of domain squatters but allows your use case.

Nope, how do you intend to perform these usage audits?

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#22

Post by ryanlol » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:39 PM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #20

StavrosK wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see that as very easy, given that there are degrees of parking pages and it can be hard to figure out where to draw the line.

Yes, but can we agree that one company owning thousands of domains with a "buy this domain for $XXXX" homepages crosses any line that we would draw? The domain squatting problem is so bad , that even just solving the most egregious cases would be a big improvement.

>The domain squatting problem is so bad

How is the domain squatting problem so bad? You’ll need to expand on this further.

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#23

Post by jefftk » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:43 PM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #19

skrause wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Parking pages or any other use that intends to work around the restriction can be deemed illegitimate use. My personal domain doesn't even have an A record in the DNS, only an MX record because use it for all my email. By your definition that would be an "illegitimate use" and I should lose my domain...

Would it be an undue burden to require people like you to put up a page saying, "This is my personal domain which I use primarily for email."? Can we just agree that nobody is posting the full proposed set of rules on HN, and nobody is trying to take away your domain? Every time this solution to domain squatting is proposed, someone counters with your objection as if it's a huge problem with the idea, but it just isn…

How do you write rules that allow "this is my personal domain that I use for email" and not squatting? Can't the squatters just say something along those lines?

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#24

Post by anonsivalley652 » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:46 PM UTC

rasengan wrote: post #15

Switching away from ICANN will have a larger effect than a petition. If you don’t support centralized authority over the DNS root, you can vote with your computer for a new DNS root controlled by the commons [1]. [1] https://www.handshake.org

There has to be a common namespace, even if it's controlled by a different entity that's transparent, fair and non-profit. Fragmentation of the namespace breaks the internet. Starting a parallel namespace doesn't address the core problem: the privitization/commercialization of names, registrars and the meta-registrar were all extremely bad ideas because publicly-traded companies are selfish, omnicidal and suicidal. All non-country TLDs should be run at actual cost by one entity that is a nonprofit. No more commercial registrars or meta-registrars; per-country registrars can do whatever they want. If people want to auction-off, buy or sell domains in a marketplace, that's their business. Let's not not solve the problem by avoiding it with phony solutions that cause more problems. Petitions won't work either.

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#25

Post by franga2000 » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:48 PM UTC

jefftk wrote: post #23

kerkeslager wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it be an undue burden to require people like you to put up a page saying, "This is my personal domain which I use primarily for email."? Can we just agree that nobody is posting the full proposed set of rules on HN, and nobody is trying to take away your domain? Every time this solution to domain squatting is proposed, someone counters with your objection as if it's a huge problem with the idea, but it just isn…

How do you write rules that allow "this is my personal domain that I use for email" and not squatting? Can't the squatters just say something along those lines?

If the squatters have to do that, then their squatting has no value to them. The point of squatters is to eventually sell the domain and if all the domains look "in use" (so no parking allowed), the amount of people sending offers will fall.

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#26

Post by lazysheepherd » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:49 PM UTC

foo101 wrote: post #8

StavrosK wrote: post #6

I kind of want the price to increase, to combat domain squatting. That said, I'd much prefer it if the money went to some charity instead of the ICANN.

Squatting can be easily prevented by reclaiming domain names without refund when the domain names have not been used or used illegitimately for more than a fixed threshold period of time. Parking pages or any other use that intends to work around the restriction can be deemed illegitimate use.

How hard do you think it would be for those people to automate setting up basic template websites for all of domains they are hoarding?

If we were to apply this, as with any poorly thought-out rule, only legitimate users will be affected. Anyone proposing an "easy" solution to a complex problem should think twice before speaking.

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#27

Post by lucb1e » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:51 PM UTC

rovr138 wrote: post #13

Hamuko wrote: post #4

No one likes a price increase, but 30% increase to ~$10/year over four years is not making my blood boil.

I’m not opposed to it if needed. This part is the one that convinced me it shouldn’t happen right now, > $7.85 of your registration or renewal payment goes to Verisign. The actual cost to Verisign to provide the expensive infrastructure and the management of the registry has been estimated at between $2.50 to $2.90 per domain name per year. Other registries have said they can offer the same services for cheaper. I’m…

> I’m wondering why the ICANN wouldn’t simply go to another company

Do also consider the cost of change. I don't know if it's worth it, and it might be worth it just for keeping the 'market' competitive, but this is another factor.

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#28

Post by anonsivalley652 » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:52 PM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #6

I kind of want the price to increase, to combat domain squatting. That said, I'd much prefer it if the money went to some charity instead of the ICANN.

The term "domain squatting" is a dishonest pejorative; they're not squatting if they're paying for it, like everyone else. In most countries, people are free to buy houses and then not occupy them. Telling other people what they can or can't do with their property isn't democratic, it's fascist. If you can offer someone enough money to sell you an underutilized domain, that's fine too; if they ignore you, that's their prerogative also. People are free to buy as many properties as they can afford; it's called freedom. Try it sometime. :)

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#29

Post by tehabe » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:55 PM UTC

Domains are the virtual realestate on the web and we are all just tennants and not owners. So there need to regulation for this "market" against domain hoarding and price hikes. Sadly the US government doesn't care.

Re: Let ICANN know if you support .com price hikes

#30

Post by anonsivalley652 » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 1:55 PM UTC

skrause wrote: post #11

foo101 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Squatting can be easily prevented by reclaiming domain names without refund when the domain names have not been used or used illegitimately for more than a fixed threshold period of time. Parking pages or any other use that intends to work around the restriction can be deemed illegitimate use.

> Parking pages or any other use that intends to work around the restriction can be deemed illegitimate use. My personal domain doesn't even have an A record in the DNS, only an MX record because use it for all my email. By your definition that would be an "illegitimate use" and I should lose my domain...

Yep. Busy bodies and control freaks shouldn't be allowed anywhere near power because they will abuse it and subject others to their fascist views. People should be allowed to do whatever they legally please with their domains.. it's their property, so long as they continue "leasing" them.