[ALAC] Fw: Interesting article about parked domains

Sun May 21 19:01:45 UTC 2017

At 21/05/2017 01:48 PM, Andrei Kolesnikov wrote:
>In my previous practice: up to 10% of search 
>revenue went to parked domains (in Russia) in 
>2010 before Google and Yandex changed keywords 
>and reference links measurements, took it down below 1%.

Yes, that is my roughly experience as well - my 
statement was about current search results.

>Expired domains, auctions is a significant part 
>of registrars business. There is nothing wrong 
>when buying good names at extra price. The 
>process of expiration is kind of uniform for 
>gTLD world, however ccTLDs use different schemes.

Indeed, and even the monetization of expired 
domains could help some registrar's bottom lines. 
Which is why we did not push to eliminate it. The 
practice that we found inappropriate was 
sometimes deliberately not letting registrants 
know their names were expiring (or putting no 
effort into it) and then IF they allowed renewal, 
charging high prices for renewal based on their 
monetization experience. Or simply because they 
could. Selling to other bidders once the name was 
truly expired and not renewed is fair game. As is 
picking up dropped names and offering to sell 
them back to original registrant for high prices. 
Unsavory perhaps, but all legit.

Ever since ICANN started, there has been a 
to-and-fro game being played between ICANN and 
registrars with ICANN trying to provide a "safety 
net" (that is the expression that was used) for 
accidentally expired names and registrars finding 
a way around it. The best example is this one day 
in 2003 when ICANN announced that a PDP had 
"restored the safety net" and registrars 
announcing they had found a way to bypass it - 
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2004-09-21-en 
and https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2004-09-21-en.

Alan

>--andrei
>
>Ð²Ñ, 21 Ð¼Ð°Ñ 2017 Ð³. Ð² 10:06, Alan 
>Greenberg <<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>:
>Domain parking is not a new issue for At-Large. 
>We have a long and interesting history related to this topic.
>
>In 2007, there was a prevalent practice among a 
>number of registrars and domainers called 
>"domain tasting" ( 
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_tasting). 
>In short it was a completely legitimate (that is 
>not against any rules) proactive which allowed a 
>domain to be registered and monetized, and if it 
>did not prove profitable, to cancel the 
>registration at no net cost (ie free). This 
>allowed the "tasting" on many millions of 
>domains per month. The practice was also used to 
>some extent for disposable domains for 
>generating spam (it was before phishing was 
>common). If I remember correctly, less than 1% 
>were kept because they proved profitable (often 
>typos of real domain names). The ALAC requested 
>a GNSO PDP to stop the practice. Once the new 
>policy was developed and adopted, it made 
>tasting to expensive to be practical in the general case.
>
>The issue of parked monetized pages also arose 
>when we were requesting a PDP on ensuring the 
>rights of registrants who accidentally let their 
>domain expire. It was common for the registrar 
>to monetize the page at expiration or soon 
>after, allowing them to make some extra money, 
>and also gauge whether the domain was "valuable" 
>or not. If it was valuable, they could 
>take  over the registration (virtually all 
>registration agreements let them do that) and 
>then use it themselves or auction it off. We 
>ultimately decided to not object to the 
>practice, since doing so would impact the 
>registrars revenue stream and would make it much 
>more difficult to achieve the real aims of the 
>PDP. This proved to be a correct analysis. We 
>did ensure that the monetized page clearly said 
>it was an expired domain and told the registrant 
>how to get it back. And made sure the price did 
>not go up immediately due to what was learned during monetization.
>
>Interestingly we also in a few cases probably 
>increased the monetization because it was the 
>practice in some cases to NOT interrupt the 
>domain and monetize it. This allowed the domain 
>to work as if it was still owned by the original 
>registrant until it was too late to renew the 
>registration (generally 30 days) and then the 
>registrar could take it over without any way for 
>the registrant to get it back at a reasonable price.
>
>This is a discussion that we could have, but I 
>think it rather unlikely that ICANN would stop 
>the practice, as it directly goes to how the 
>domain is being used and its content. The only 
>real issue within ICANN's current remit is that 
>in many cases, a parked domain is one that is 
>found by incorrectly typing a URL. A few years 
>ago it was common to his monetized pages through 
>a search engine, but these days the search sites 
>seem pretty good at filtering them out - or at 
>least that is my experience (largely with Google).
>
>Alan
>
>
>
>At 21/05/2017 03:11 AM, Kan Kaili wrote:
>
>>Hi again,
>>
>>This article may have nothing to do with 
>>Google.  Sorry for that ...  (although Google 
>>did provide the platform for these activities)
>>
>>However, it also tells how to make money at the 
>>end-users' expense quite a few years ago.  Over 
>>time, according to some research, this has 
>>already grown into an industry by itself.
>>
>>This is one of the reasons why the At-Large 
>>community needs to look into domain parking.
>>
>>Kaili
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <mailto:ocl at gih.com>Olivier MJ CrÃƒÂ©pin-Leblond
>>To: <mailto:alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2017 2:50 PM
>>Subject: Re: [ALAC] Fw: Interesting article about parked domains
>>Dear Kaili,
>>that article dates from 2010. Google has since retired Adsense for domains.
>>
>><https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/2456470?visit_id=1-636309457565105321-703054909&ctx=as2&rd=1>https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/2456470?visit_id=1-636309457565105321-703054909&ctx=as2&rd=1 
>>
>>Kindest regards,
>>Olivier
>>
>>ps. the author is the owner of GroovyPost which 
>>has nothing to do with Google.
>>On 21/05/2017 08:22, Kan Kaili wrote:
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Thanks a lot for sharing.  Just read the 
>>>article titled "Make Easy Money from Your 
>>>Parked Domains with Google AdSense for Domains".
>>>
>>><https://www.groovypost.com/howto/google/google-adsense-for-domains-review-make-money-from-parked/>https://www.groovypost.com/howto/google/google-adsense-for-domains-review-make-money-from-parked/ 
>>>
>>>This article by Google itself teaches you how 
>>>to make money from parked domains, although at 
>>>the expense of consumers and end-users.
>>
>>I am used to think of Google as "DO NO 
>>EVIL".  Well, maybe not always ...   :(
>>
>>Kaili
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>ALAC mailing list
>>
>><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>
>>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>
>>
>>
>>At-Large Online:
>>
>><http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>
>>
>>ALAC Working Wiki:
>>
>>
>>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>
>
>>--
>>
>>
>>Olivier MJ CrÃƒÂ©pin-Leblond, PhD
>>
>>
>><http://www.gih.com/ocl.html>http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>>
>>----------
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>ALAC Working Wiki: 
>><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC 
>>)
>>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>Content-Disposition: inline
>>X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
>> 
>>1;DM5PR03MB2714;27:7sXV3AmCalKoBN7ReQFVT+9krJSVNT9opo/tHyqla3T79FIXvHX5wkzAUCesK2GUz8NiTRANbzCiJU5pjIOhK/oFhwwpjAjS+8yDSgSzJ+bMP47F8pt4pOGTbSm10pjKpgPT2/22vNaz9/hO9JZIPQ==
>>X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery:
>> 
>>ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000070)(400125000095)(20160514016)(520000050)(520002050)(750028)(400001001070)(400125100095)(400001002070)(400125200095);
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>
>>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>ALAC Working Wiki: 
>><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC 
>>)
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: 
><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>--
>-- {ak}
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20170521/02c139e5/attachment.html>