gbruen at knujon.com
gbruen at knujon.com
Tue Feb 21 04:09:44 UTC 2017
This does not surprise me
On 2/20/17 6:10 PM, Joly MacFie wrote:
> I have just been contacted by the former registrant of fucked.nyc
> He registered it via namecheap.com <http://namecheap.com> on March 3
> 2015 and renewed it earlier this week.
> On Feb 18 2017 he received a msg from Neustar informing him that it
> had been found non-compliant with the "Seven Word Policy" and deleted.
> Neustar advised him to contact his registrar for any refunds they
> might care to make.
> He contacted NameCheap who essentially said "Forgettaboutit'", despite
> him pointing out that at no time had he been notified about, or agreed
> to be bound by, any such policy.
> Here is NameCheap's response:
> /Recently, you contacted our Live Chat support regarding deletion
> offucked.nyc <http://fucked.nyc/>. Feel free to use chat ID
> XQR-359-35382 for reference.
> We wanted to let you know, that we have forwarded a suggestion about
> special notices for .NYC domains to the corresponding team.
> We are really sorry that you faced such a situation and our replies
> were not so helpful. Different Registry companies can have different
> policies in regards of registration their domains and they usually
> reserve a right to change their requirements or delete domains which
> do not meet them.
> This does not happen often, still it is not possible to keep customers
> informed about all the Registry policies or their changes on a contant
> manner, to our regret.
> The amount you paid for the domain purchase was used to register/renew
> the domain at the .NYC Registry. However, the Registry still can
> delete domains without any refund if they do not meet their
> requirements. We are working on improving our performance and
> hopefully special messages on the site can help to avoid such
> situations in future.
> If you have questions or require assistance, feel free to contact us
> at any time./
> The registrant did some further research and surmised that Neustar's
> vigilance could well be due to my Feb 6 letter
> <http://isoc-ny.org/misc/2017-02-06_isoc-ny_dotnyc.pdf> pointing out
> they were asleep at the wheel. It appeared to him the relevant page
> <http://www.ownit.nyc/restricted-reserved> had been hurriedly updated.
> Since, apparently he has other domains that might also be considered
> variants on the 7 words, he got back on to Neustar for some
> clarification, demanded to see a list. 'Guy' at Neustar support
> informed him that nothing of the like existed - that it was decided on
> case by case basis - and to add insult to injury sany deleted
> restricted names might, as policies change, be released and sold to
> the highest bidder without any recourse for the original registrant.
> Thus he writes
> /I have concluded that all of my .nyc domain names (more than 20) were
> registered without binding terms or a policy of any kind on behalf of
> Namecheap or Neustar / ownit.nyc <http://ownit.nyc/>, and I suspect
> that this is a case for a large percentage of sold .nyc domains. Yet
> my domain name was seized for a breach of policy, a policy I was never
> introduced to nor agreed to. If any of my other names are added to the
> list, they can seize it at any time, despite the fact that I've owned
> them for 2 years now.
> /The greatest ethical concern I have is that an entity operating in
> this way reserves the right to put a domain name on the
> reserved/restricted list at any point in time, even if it was already
> sold and owned for 2 years. I was informed by "Guy" at Neustar support
> that there is a possibility reserved/restricted names will be released
> in the future, however they are released back to the public (they go
> back up for sale), not to the original owner. I have many .nyc domain
> names that appear as variations according to their list./
> /Where is the oversight? Who is to prevent Neustar from seizing a
> domain name for a period of time, then conveniently releasing it later
> only to buy it themselves using an alias or through a third party?/
> /It just doesn't seem right. If Neustar was unable to properly inform
> name holders on policy creations, changes, and updates in the past 5
> years on city tax dollars, I don't think they should operate for
> another second. It shouldn't take a committee to generate a "no", I
> think their shady track record in the past 5 years speaks for itself.
> And this being New York City, we deserve better.//
> I've responded to him, noting that 7 word policy is in the City's
> .nyc contract (appears to have been published April 1 2015, and the
> .nyc Acceptable Use Policy (which doesn't mention that policy but says
> they can delete at will) has been public since July 2014. Caveat
> emptor. I noted that Neustar is obligated to file copies of Registrar
> Registry Agreements with the City, and he could FOIL it to see if
> NameCheap had met their obligations. I also opined that, in the
> unlikely event Neustar were to resell a previously deleted name, they
> would be asking for trouble,
> However I think he rightfully raises the wider issue of the right of
> registrants to be properly informed of restrictive gTLD policies
> before they put their money on the line. Is there something like that
> in existing policy?
> And also, to possibly the wider amusement of schoolboys etc, maybe
> ICANN or somebody should perhaps maintain a definitive reference of
> unacceptable variants of the 7 words.
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
gbruen at knujon.com
ICANN At-Large Advisory Council
Author: WHOIS Running the Internet
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NA-Discuss