4 ms·

They didn't buy it before the rules were put in place. They launched in 2008 as a company, and the the .edu was restricted to accredited institutions in 2001.

by count 9y ago

They didn't buy it before the rules were put in place. They launched in 2008 as a company, and the the .edu was restricted to accredited institutions in 2001. In 2006, the rules were tightened to restrict even transfer by a previous owner to a non-accredited institution. I've complained to EDUCASE (the .edu TLD contract holder), and suggest others do the same. A for profit, non-accredited non-higher learning organization should NOT have a .EDU. What I sent EDUCAUSE: Hello, The owner of the ‘academia.edu’ domain name appears to be operating in violation of the EDU TLD requirements. The WHOIS record: Registrant: Academia 251 Kearny St suite 520 San Francisco, CA 94108 UNITED STATES Is not an accredited institution according the US Dept. of Education.

bobbyi_settv 9y ago
Where are you getting the info that they "bought" the domain name from the original owner? I was told that one of the founders was a professor or somesuch and he originally registered the name in the 90's but hadn't been using it, so he used it when he started the company. If so, I imagine that involved a "transfer" from his personal ownership to that of the company and that may fall under that 2006 rule, but it it still isn't the same situation as someone "squatting" on a edu name and then auctioning it off to startups looking for a cool name, which is what I think EDUCASE is concerned with.
- count 9y ago
  Dept of Commerce is concerned with ANY non-accredited institution having a .edu. They've simply not leaned super hard on 'grandfathered' domains (there's a ton about specific instances on the wiki entry for .edu). If a professor or somebody bought in May 1999 when it was registered initially (10-May-1999 Create Date), then it existed prior to the restriction. But in 2006, 2 years before Academia the company existed, those rules were put into place prohibiting transfer to non-accredited institutions. So, they're in one of two situations that I can see: 1) The domain was transferred, against the ToS for the TLD, and is invalidly registered, or, 2) The professor still owns it, and the WHOIS information is invalid (it lists the Company as the registrant), which is a violation of ICANN rules for WHOIS information accuracy. Either way, I don't see how they can be legally using it.

by count 9y ago

bobbyi_settv 9y ago

Where are you getting the info that they "bought" the domain name from the original owner? I was told that one of the founders was a professor or somesuch and he originally registered the name in the 90's but hadn't been using it, so he used it when he started the company. If so, I imagine that involved a "transfer" from his personal ownership to that of the company and that may fall under that 2006 rule, but it it still isn't the same situation as someone "squatting" on a edu name and then auctioning it off to startups looking for a cool name, which is what I think EDUCASE is concerned with.

count 9y ago
Dept of Commerce is concerned with ANY non-accredited institution having a .edu. They've simply not leaned super hard on 'grandfathered' domains (there's a ton about specific instances on the wiki entry for .edu). If a professor or somebody bought in May 1999 when it was registered initially (10-May-1999 Create Date), then it existed prior to the restriction. But in 2006, 2 years before Academia the company existed, those rules were put into place prohibiting transfer to non-accredited institutions. So, they're in one of two situations that I can see: 1) The domain was transferred, against the ToS for the TLD, and is invalidly registered, or, 2) The professor still owns it, and the WHOIS information is invalid (it lists the Company as the registrant), which is a violation of ICANN rules for WHOIS information accuracy. Either way, I don't see how they can be legally using it.