6 ms·
I kind of want the price to increase, to combat domain squatting. That said, I'd much prefer it if the money went to some charity instead of the ICANN.
by StavrosK 7y ago
I kind of want the price to increase, to combat domain squatting. That said, I'd much prefer it if the money went to some charity instead of the ICANN.
- dessant 7y agoIt actually goes to Verisign, a for-profit company.
- foo101 7y agoSquatting can be easily prevented by reclaiming domain names without refund when the domain names have not been used or used illegitimately for more than a fixed threshold period of time. Parking pages or any other use that intends to work around the restriction can be deemed illegitimate use.
- StavrosK 7y agoI don't see that as very easy, given that there are degrees of parking pages and it can be hard to figure out where to draw the line.
- mopsi 7y agoNot to mention that there are many other uses for a domain, such as email.
- kerkeslager 7y agoYes, but can we agree that one company owning thousands of domains with a "buy this domain for $XXXX" homepages crosses any line that we would draw? The domain squatting problem is so bad, that even just solving the most egregious cases would be a big improvement.
- ryanlol 7y ago>The domain squatting problem is so bad How is the domain squatting problem so bad? You’ll need to expand on this further.
- franga2000 7y agoNot OP, but are you saying you haven't noticed the squatting problem? According to [0], there are only around 1000 single-word .COMs left. [0] https://www.domcomp.com/blog/the-last-coms.html https://www.domcomp.com/blog/the-last-coms.html
- ryanlol 7y agoWhy is it such a big problem that you have to pay more than $7 for a single word .com? Is it just that it feels unfair to you for someone to be profiting like this? I’ve been more than happy to buy domains from these squatters, they’re usually willing to accept prices far lower than the value I can extract from said domains.
- StavrosK 7y ago"More than $7" is disingenuous, since $100,000 is also "more than $7".
- ryanlol 7y agoWhy is it a problem that some domains cost $100,000 or more?
- StavrosK 7y agoDo you also find ticket scalping to be fine? If not, what's the difference with squatting?
- ryanlol 7y agoOf course ticket scalping is fine, many venues go out of their way to enable it. I’ve often benefited from the scalpers by being able to buy last minute tickets. Same goes for domain squatters. You think squatting is bad? Ok. What if my low-effort personal website was “doctor.com” and someone emailed me an offer of $2M for it, should I be allowed to accept that? I don’t think there’s a meaningful distinction to be made there.
- skrause 7y ago> Parking pages or any other use that intends to work around the restriction can be deemed illegitimate use. My personal domain doesn't even have an A record in the DNS, only an MX record because use it for all my email. By your definition that would be an "illegitimate use" and I should lose my domain...
- kuku4 7y agowhat's wrong with that?
- kerkeslager 7y agoWould it be an undue burden to require people like you to put up a page saying, "This is my personal domain which I use primarily for email."? Can we just agree that nobody is posting the full proposed set of rules on HN, and nobody is trying to take away your domain? Every time this solution to domain squatting is proposed, someone counters with your objection as if it's a huge problem with the idea, but it just isn't. Surely you can imagine a set of rules that shuts down a large number of domain squatters but allows your use case.
- ryanlol 7y ago> Would it be an undue burden to require people like you to put up a page saying, "This is my personal domain which I use primarily for email."? Yes, this is a terrible idea. > Surely you can imagine a set of rules that shuts down a large number of domain squatters but allows your use case. Nope, how do you intend to perform these usage audits?
- TorKlingberg 7y agoGood luck defining "legitimate use" in a way the squatters won't get around.
- lazysheepherd 7y agoHow hard do you think it would be for those people to automate setting up basic template websites for all of domains they are hoarding? If we were to apply this, as with any poorly thought-out rule, only legitimate users will be affected. Anyone proposing an "easy" solution to a complex problem should think twice before speaking.
- kortilla 7y agoThis is a very myopic view of what domains are used for. Putting up web pages is certainly a huge use-case, but it’s not the only one (email, server naming, iot naming, network infra naming, etc).
- mekster 7y agoWho is going to define illegitimacy? And how to figure if the domain is not used? Domains aren't all about the web... That's not going to work.
- anonsivalley652 7y agoThe term "domain squatting" is a dishonest pejorative; they're not squatting if they're paying for it, like everyone else. In most countries, people are free to buy houses and then not occupy them. Telling other people what they can or can't do with their property isn't democratic, it's fascist. If you can offer someone enough money to sell you an underutilized domain, that's fine too; if they ignore you, that's their prerogative also. People are free to buy as many properties as they can afford; it's called freedom. Try it sometime. :)
- jasonjayr 7y agoWhile it's true that in many countries it's legal to buy houses and not occupy them, the locals tend to look unfavorably upon this practice, and some municipalities will charge additional taxes for unoccupied properties. Squatting domain names is the same deal.
- anonsivalley652 7y agoThat's irrelevant. Local control doesn't apply to a global, shared resource. And, that mismatched metaphor describes infringement on individual property rights because you can't have it both ways. There can be only one internet namespace if it's to operate correctly, and it can't be controlled by corporations or greedy individuals who think they should get things other people had, and paid for, before them. If you want a freedom, you must give everyone the same freedom, even if they misuse it. That's the definition of a free society. An unfree society digs into peoples lives and makes value judgements about them and tries to control them to their views.
- jasonjayr 7y agoIt becomes a "tragedy of the commons" situation unless there is some regulation of this one shared namespace. Even the FCC has "use it or lose it" rules in place for the limited wireless spectrum. I mean, isn't that what's happening with property in real life? The ones that can afford to do so keep buying it up, and renting it out, and perpetuating the cycle of inequity?
- buboard 7y agoNo the solution is to drop the price by an order of magnitude. Every domain will be squatted, but due to naturally intense competition, they will cost $2. Make squatting unprofitable again. (There is nothing inherently wrong with squatting)