3 ms·
> His "product" consists of laying claim to something, then charging a lot of money to someone else for it. Which is the exact same model behind the real estat
by nicksergeant 15y ago
> His "product" consists of laying claim to something, then charging a lot of money to someone else for it.
Which is the exact same model behind the real estate market (excluding property flips).
I hate domain squatters as much as the next guy, but it's as viable a business model as buying up land 30 miles from a big city and waiting 20 years for the value to appreciate and then selling it for a huge profit. How is that any different? Seems to be an acceptable practice in today's society, no one labels them parasites.
- kbutler 15y agoThere are two differences with real estate: - real estate "squatters" provide liquidity for property owners (this is theoretically possible in domains, but I've never heard it claimed to be a common case) - lack of homesteading When "new territory" opened up (in the US), people could be granted chunks of land if they improved the land, making productive use of the property for some time (homesteading). They could then file a claim for the land and have it deeded to them for continued ownership, resale, etc. That initial productive use is lacking in domain squatting. No one has "improved" the claimed domain name or made productive use of it. The squatter has only filed a claim for it, hoping for a profit.
- theguvernor 15y agowhat qualifies as an improvement? links? the ocassional post? a pic of gramdma? who gets to decide? you? or should we have a government agency for that? what if they want it for just email? what if they had plans for it but life happened and they didn't get around to it? if it wasn't a .com would there be all this stink? like i said below a domain is not a physical asset. it's 0's and 1's. it's vapor. the value of that domain exists in peoples minds. it is not like land at all.