7 ms·

the solution here in Denmark is very, well - socialdemocratic; The Complaints Board for Domain Names. "A complaint may be submitted by any person who has a suf

the solution here in Denmark is very, well - socialdemocratic; The Complaints Board for Domain Names. "A complaint may be submitted by any person who has a sufficient interest in the outcome of the case. The chairman of the Complaints Board decides whether the complainant has a sufficient interest. The Complaints Board decides whether the registration of a domain name is to be maintained, deleted, suspended or transferred to the complainant or to a natural or legal person appointed by the complainant. In addition, the Complaints Board can confirm, cancel, change or refer back a decision made by DK Hostmaster/DIFO about compliance with the terms and conditions of business (”Terms and conditions for the right of use to a.dk domain name”)." (from the official page: https://www.domaeneklager.dk/en https://www.domaeneklager.dk/en) We've used the board in our business once. When we first started our SaaS the domain name we wanted was already taken by another person who seemed to use it for something genuine. So we contacted him/her and decided to wait. In the meantime, a competitor managed to contact the other owner directly and bought the domain name. He then changed the site into one big ad+redirect for his own competing service. We complained to the board, and presented our arguments(+screenshots). He did the same, and we won. The domain was transferred free-ofcharge to us, and we've owned it since. DK's a small country, and something similar might not work for larger countries, but it does limit the domainparking issue. I'm a big fan of it!

mdpopescu 6y ago
I stole something from someone, but I benefitted so all is good! I fail to understand this mentality. It's extremely common, of course, but I just can't wrap my head around it.
- croon 6y ago
  I'm interpreting (disregarding possible narrator bias) OP as that the person who lost the claim bought a domain unrelated to their business other than it being the company name of a competitor, and redirected all traffic to their own company. Are you interpreting it the same way as me? If so, yes the domain was indeed taken from the person squatting it (but actually worse than squatting, since it took you somewhere else than where you as a consumer wanted to go). And that's something I'm entirely ok with, and in fact applaud.
- pistolpeteDK 6y ago
  "I stole something from someone, but I benefitted so all is good!" Could you elaborate please? Who do you mean stole anything from anyone?
  - IncRnd 6y ago
    The comment literally devoted a paragraph to that.
    - madsbuch 6y ago
      He does not explain the link the parent comment, no. But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal. However, that view on domain is very problematic, as you have to renew it which indicates a right to use under specific terms, even for .com domains. The terms are just different for different domains, which is not too controversial. Private ownership becomes more and more challenged these years. The original comment is set in Denmark. I am also Danish, and I can verify that we have another view on ownership than what you experience in the US.
      - IncRnd 6y ago
        Yet, the poster did devote a paragraph to the topic. That different people draw the line of theft at different places is immaterial to the actual discussion existing in the comment.
        madsbuch 6y ago
        He did not. It might be subtle, but the paragraph your refer to explains his view on the people in question, not the link between domains and stealing.
      - pistolpeteDK 6y ago
        "But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal." - I think you're right, also about the view on ownership. I'd argue that, since there's a limited amount of useful - domain-wise - words in the English dictionary, the number of available domains are bound to run dry faster if domainparking is not discouraged somehow. One might argue that the new TLD's are merely a 'bandaid' on a systemic problem with domains not being released properly, when no longer in proper use.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  "Stealing" and "ownership" are defined by the set of rules (usually national laws) surrounding a thing. In this case, the GP didn't steal anything, they entered a dispute and acquired ownership in accordance with the rules surrounding domain allocation in Denmark.
account42 6y ago
This is absolutely it - domain parking exists only because ICANN allows it.
- Black101 6y ago
  People do that with physical land too... Isn't that much worst? What about sitting on gold, or Bitcoins?
  - madsbuch 6y ago
    Yes, it is bad with physical land which is why governments introduce land taxes to encourage value creating activities on land. Gold and bitcoins are not problematic as holding on to them does not inhibit value creation.
  - tehbeard 6y ago
    Land, Gold and Bitcoins are all commodities. I don't have to care which specific instance of them I have (mostly, land is where it gets funny but that's more secondary effects like transport hubs, taxation, regulations etc at which point it's not "land" it's a location I'm after). A domain name? It's a unique registration on a global index. It's value is in that uniqueness.
    - Black101 6y ago
      If land isn't unique, can I have a piece of land exactly like yours (in the same location)?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - notriddle 6y ago
      Tell that to the farming industry. (Yeah, I know it’s not central to your point.)
  - larsiusprime 6y ago
    There's an entire economic school of thought dedicated to railing against the specific problem of sitting on physical land just to keep it out of use until someone else pays you a higher price: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism
larsiusprime 6y ago
There is a loose analogy between Domain parking and land speculation (though it's not perfect -- you can make more domains, but you can't make more land). Another approach you can try instead of a formal complaint department is to apply a universal "use it or lose it" tax to the asset at risk of speculation, as economist Ramin Shokrizade famously did in EVE Online to oust speculators and solve problems with recessions: https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaminShokrizade/20130405/189984/How_I_Used_EVE_Online_to_Predict_the_Great_Recession.php https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaminShokrizade/20130405/189... What's hilarious is that in doing so, he unwittingly rederived Henry George's Land Value Tax from first principles. Applying a properly sized tax that disincentives holding assets for speculation can actually reduce the price overall, because speculators stop jacking the price up knowing they can HODL forever.
- jeremy_wiebe 6y ago
  Sounds exactly like the empty homes tax in Vancouver!
  - Qub3d 6y ago
    The LVT is this but... more. The idea of a full land-value tax is based on a principle related to universal basic income. In both cases, the argument is that by applying the tax/income to every stakeholder indiscriminately, it removes bureaucratic complexity and motivation to "cheat" the system. Since the effect is the same no matter what, we don't need a huge statute listing what does and does not apply as X.
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      > The idea of a full land-value tax is based on a principle related to universal basic income. And tangentially: seeking a minimal state that exists solely to collect LVT (and possibly Pigovian and severance taxes) and distribute the proceeds evenly as UBI is the basic idea around geolibertarianism.
- teh_g 6y ago
  A bit on the pedantic side, but you can make more land; there are dozens of artificial islands around the world, some of which have resulted from the need for more land. The costs, of course, as well as other considerations (legal...) are of a different scale.

mdpopescu 6y ago

I stole something from someone, but I benefitted so all is good! I fail to understand this mentality. It's extremely common, of course, but I just can't wrap my head around it.

croon 6y ago
I'm interpreting (disregarding possible narrator bias) OP as that the person who lost the claim bought a domain unrelated to their business other than it being the company name of a competitor, and redirected all traffic to their own company. Are you interpreting it the same way as me? If so, yes the domain was indeed taken from the person squatting it (but actually worse than squatting, since it took you somewhere else than where you as a consumer wanted to go). And that's something I'm entirely ok with, and in fact applaud.
pistolpeteDK 6y ago
"I stole something from someone, but I benefitted so all is good!" Could you elaborate please? Who do you mean stole anything from anyone?
- IncRnd 6y ago
  The comment literally devoted a paragraph to that.
  - madsbuch 6y ago
    He does not explain the link the parent comment, no. But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal. However, that view on domain is very problematic, as you have to renew it which indicates a right to use under specific terms, even for .com domains. The terms are just different for different domains, which is not too controversial. Private ownership becomes more and more challenged these years. The original comment is set in Denmark. I am also Danish, and I can verify that we have another view on ownership than what you experience in the US.
    - IncRnd 6y ago
      Yet, the poster did devote a paragraph to the topic. That different people draw the line of theft at different places is immaterial to the actual discussion existing in the comment.
      - madsbuch 6y ago
        He did not. It might be subtle, but the paragraph your refer to explains his view on the people in question, not the link between domains and stealing.
    - pistolpeteDK 6y ago
      "But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal." - I think you're right, also about the view on ownership. I'd argue that, since there's a limited amount of useful - domain-wise - words in the English dictionary, the number of available domains are bound to run dry faster if domainparking is not discouraged somehow. One might argue that the new TLD's are merely a 'bandaid' on a systemic problem with domains not being released properly, when no longer in proper use.
TeMPOraL 6y ago
"Stealing" and "ownership" are defined by the set of rules (usually national laws) surrounding a thing. In this case, the GP didn't steal anything, they entered a dispute and acquired ownership in accordance with the rules surrounding domain allocation in Denmark.

account42 6y ago

This is absolutely it - domain parking exists only because ICANN allows it.

Black101 6y ago
People do that with physical land too... Isn't that much worst? What about sitting on gold, or Bitcoins?
- madsbuch 6y ago
  Yes, it is bad with physical land which is why governments introduce land taxes to encourage value creating activities on land. Gold and bitcoins are not problematic as holding on to them does not inhibit value creation.
- tehbeard 6y ago
  Land, Gold and Bitcoins are all commodities. I don't have to care which specific instance of them I have (mostly, land is where it gets funny but that's more secondary effects like transport hubs, taxation, regulations etc at which point it's not "land" it's a location I'm after). A domain name? It's a unique registration on a global index. It's value is in that uniqueness.
  - Black101 6y ago
    If land isn't unique, can I have a piece of land exactly like yours (in the same location)?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - notriddle 6y ago
    Tell that to the farming industry. (Yeah, I know it’s not central to your point.)
- larsiusprime 6y ago
  There's an entire economic school of thought dedicated to railing against the specific problem of sitting on physical land just to keep it out of use until someone else pays you a higher price: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

larsiusprime 6y ago

There is a loose analogy between Domain parking and land speculation (though it's not perfect -- you can make more domains, but you can't make more land). Another approach you can try instead of a formal complaint department is to apply a universal "use it or lose it" tax to the asset at risk of speculation, as economist Ramin Shokrizade famously did in EVE Online to oust speculators and solve problems with recessions: https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaminShokrizade/20130405/189984/How_I_Used_EVE_Online_to_Predict_the_Great_Recession.php https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RaminShokrizade/20130405/189... What's hilarious is that in doing so, he unwittingly rederived Henry George's Land Value Tax from first principles. Applying a properly sized tax that disincentives holding assets for speculation can actually reduce the price overall, because speculators stop jacking the price up knowing they can HODL forever.

jeremy_wiebe 6y ago
Sounds exactly like the empty homes tax in Vancouver!
- Qub3d 6y ago
  The LVT is this but... more. The idea of a full land-value tax is based on a principle related to universal basic income. In both cases, the argument is that by applying the tax/income to every stakeholder indiscriminately, it removes bureaucratic complexity and motivation to "cheat" the system. Since the effect is the same no matter what, we don't need a huge statute listing what does and does not apply as X.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    > The idea of a full land-value tax is based on a principle related to universal basic income. And tangentially: seeking a minimal state that exists solely to collect LVT (and possibly Pigovian and severance taxes) and distribute the proceeds evenly as UBI is the basic idea around geolibertarianism.
teh_g 6y ago
A bit on the pedantic side, but you can make more land; there are dozens of artificial islands around the world, some of which have resulted from the need for more land. The costs, of course, as well as other considerations (legal...) are of a different scale.