Proposed ICANN Changes to Make Domain Hijacking Easier

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt () gulbrandsen priv no>
Date: November 11, 2004 8:17:13 AM EST
To: dave () farber net
Cc: ken_i_m () limpinggoose com
Subject: Re: [IP] Proposed ICANN Changes to Make Domain Hijacking Easier

For IP, if you wish, although I'm sure someone else can answer better.

About the new ICANN policy:
> Default yes?  This is the same as automatic "opt out" policies.  Dress 
> them up and spin however, they just are not in the interest of the 
> individual on the receiving end.
>
> What possible rationality is there is justify this policy?

In the past, if you wanted to transfer your domain(s) away from a 
certain well-known registrar, the message from that registrar was often 
lost on its way to you. Since you did not reply to the message 
allegedly sent to you, your domain(s) could not be transferred to your 
preferred registrar, and you had to keep suffering the old registrar's 
poor customer service.

Keep in mind that while the policy applies by default to .com/.net/etc 
domains, it does not apply to all domains. Any domain owner can enable 
a "registrar lock", which prevents that/those domains from being 
transferred until it's disabled again. (In theory, the registrar itself 
should not enable registrar lock on its customers' domains.)

Arnt

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/