4 ms·

Excellent point about gradual increases in price for additional concurrent domains. That's an elegant solution requiring very little human interaction or machin

• Gustomaximus 11y ago
  On the first point, I'm trying to create an environment where a business cant hire many people to hold a small number of domains. So if you made a rule that holding a domain both grants ownership and negates any other deals about transfer of ownership, this would mean that if someone could only ask me to hold a domain via a trust relationship. That might be fine for a few family members and friends but it would never scale to large amounts. Thinking a bit more on it you'd likely have to split individual vs corporate domain ownership to protect business interest. Charge corporate a x100 multiple for holding domains to avoid someone setting up huge amounts of shelf companies, but companies can also own a small number of domains but at a price where squatting is hard.
  • insoluble 11y ago
    Okay. I see what you meant now. For the most part, domains would be non-transferable, hence directly linked to an entity's identity. In other words, buying a domain would be acquiring a licence to use said domain. 100x sounds a bit harsh. I think that would hurt small businesses (LLCs). Perhaps something more reasonable, like 20x would be sufficient.