4 ms·

Better headline: pre-launch startup forgets to re-reg their domain after several expiration notices.

by luma 6y ago

gnicholas 6y ago
Apparently the notification emails went to an ex-founder, but the CEO does take responsibility for the error.
- prepend 6y ago
  Yeah, I think it’s the headline that’s wrong and editorializing. The founders statement just explains what happens, takes responsibility, and shrugs.
JakeMakesStuff 6y ago
Eh, I think it was wrong for a large company based on content creation to exploit a mistake from a small startup.
- ryanlol 6y ago
  That’s putting a bizarre spin on what happened here. Are you suggesting that they should have emailed and asked for permission to register that domain which the previous owner did not care to renew? This isn’t exploiting anything, it’s just how domain names work.
  - corobo 6y ago
    Especially a domain "sub.to" I'm honestly surprised another company got it rather than a domain flipper
chrismorgan 6y ago
But here’s the thing: the domain name system is designed to protect you against this, and it looks like Sedo bypassed those protections, approximately selling something that they had no right to sell. I’m pretty sure that if this happened on most registries, they could appeal to the TLD domain authority, win, and have it transferred back, and that Sedo might possibly face real repercussions. It’s possible that .to policies lack these protections. Bad policies are common on smaller ccTLDs. Jamie Pine is saying that the domain went straight from resolving to their site, to resolving to OnlyFans. On mainstream TLDs and registrars that’s not how it works at all: at some point between expiration time and a week later, the domain will switch from your name servers to some belonging to the registrar which will direct HTTP and hopefully HTTPS requests to some kind of “this domain has expired” page, where it will remain for another ~30–60 days before another few days in the Pending Delete status, before finally being dropped. That way, if renewal fails and you don’t receive the emails, you will still notice it if you use the domain at all at any time in at least a month—emails will bounce, the website will be broken, &c. But what happened here sounds like that Sedo abused their position as an aftermarket domain seller to bypass that process and sell the domain name with none of this DNS-based notice at all. It could also be the .to registry that has wacky rules that led to this (in whole or in part), but the strong vibe I’m getting is that Sedo is culpable here, having actively worked against one of their paying customers because they thought someone else might pay them more. I’m not certain whether they’re allowed to do that or not on mainstream TLDs, but the concept of domain tasting was a slightly similar concept (the registrar acting in its own interests rather than their customers’) and that got slapped down pretty hard. If all occurred as claimed here, Sedo has acted extremely shadily.
- johntash 6y ago
  This is my understanding at least. I usually send people this diagram from ICANN when they have questions about domains renewing/expiring: http://archive.icann.org/en/registrars/gtld-lifecycle.jpg http://archive.icann.org/en/registrars/gtld-lifecycle.jpg I guess I don't know if the rules can be different for certain ccTLDs, but generally you have up to 30 days after expiration to renew with no penalty. And then you have another 30 days where the domain is in "redemption" status and can be redeemed/renewed by the original owner (usually for by paying a redemption fee on top of the regular renewal fee.)
  - chrismorgan 6y ago
    That’s a great diagram. I guess what’s described here may fit under that category “pre-drop alternatives”. Wonder how broad the leeway is for them to do what they want.

Better headline: pre-launch startup forgets to re-reg their domain after several expiration notices.

by luma 6y ago

Better headline: pre-launch startup forgets to re-reg their domain after several expiration notices.

gnicholas 6y ago

Apparently the notification emails went to an ex-founder, but the CEO does take responsibility for the error.

prepend 6y ago
Yeah, I think it’s the headline that’s wrong and editorializing. The founders statement just explains what happens, takes responsibility, and shrugs.

JakeMakesStuff 6y ago

Eh, I think it was wrong for a large company based on content creation to exploit a mistake from a small startup.

ryanlol 6y ago
That’s putting a bizarre spin on what happened here. Are you suggesting that they should have emailed and asked for permission to register that domain which the previous owner did not care to renew? This isn’t exploiting anything, it’s just how domain names work.
- corobo 6y ago
  Especially a domain "sub.to" I'm honestly surprised another company got it rather than a domain flipper

chrismorgan 6y ago

But here’s the thing: the domain name system is designed to protect you against this, and it looks like Sedo bypassed those protections, approximately selling something that they had no right to sell. I’m pretty sure that if this happened on most registries, they could appeal to the TLD domain authority, win, and have it transferred back, and that Sedo might possibly face real repercussions. It’s possible that .to policies lack these protections. Bad policies are common on smaller ccTLDs. Jamie Pine is saying that the domain went straight from resolving to their site, to resolving to OnlyFans. On mainstream TLDs and registrars that’s not how it works at all: at some point between expiration time and a week later, the domain will switch from your name servers to some belonging to the registrar which will direct HTTP and hopefully HTTPS requests to some kind of “this domain has expired” page, where it will remain for another ~30–60 days before another few days in the Pending Delete status, before finally being dropped. That way, if renewal fails and you don’t receive the emails, you will still notice it if you use the domain at all at any time in at least a month—emails will bounce, the website will be broken, &c. But what happened here sounds like that Sedo abused their position as an aftermarket domain seller to bypass that process and sell the domain name with none of this DNS-based notice at all. It could also be the .to registry that has wacky rules that led to this (in whole or in part), but the strong vibe I’m getting is that Sedo is culpable here, having actively worked against one of their paying customers because they thought someone else might pay them more. I’m not certain whether they’re allowed to do that or not on mainstream TLDs, but the concept of domain tasting was a slightly similar concept (the registrar acting in its own interests rather than their customers’) and that got slapped down pretty hard. If all occurred as claimed here, Sedo has acted extremely shadily.

johntash 6y ago
This is my understanding at least. I usually send people this diagram from ICANN when they have questions about domains renewing/expiring: http://archive.icann.org/en/registrars/gtld-lifecycle.jpg http://archive.icann.org/en/registrars/gtld-lifecycle.jpg I guess I don't know if the rules can be different for certain ccTLDs, but generally you have up to 30 days after expiration to renew with no penalty. And then you have another 30 days where the domain is in "redemption" status and can be redeemed/renewed by the original owner (usually for by paying a redemption fee on top of the regular renewal fee.)
- chrismorgan 6y ago
  That’s a great diagram. I guess what’s described here may fit under that category “pre-drop alternatives”. Wonder how broad the leeway is for them to do what they want.