Clearly the line would have to be imperfect, but it’s a perfect-is-the-enemy-of-good situation. I’d write the rules as follows: The cost of domains increases st

Clearly the line would have to be imperfect, but it’s a perfect-is-the-enemy-of-good situation. I’d write the rules as follows: The cost of domains increases steeply as you acquire more, so nobody ends up with hundreds of domains. You have some grace period from the date you buy it to make something “real.” Use it or lose it. Renewals would be painful or even just disallowed if you haven’t built something “real” by the end of the grace period. Defining “real” would be tough, but I might look to the app stores for a model there. Even a conservative line would be an improvement. If it doesn’t point to a server, that’s bad. If it points to a web page that isn’t substantively different from your other pages (or just from other pages at all?), that’s bad. Questionable cases would be resolved by looking at all your domains (if you have two domains in clear use, a third that’s borderline will be judged differently than three hundred borderline domains). Anyways, the point is that even imperfect rules (that surely have their own issues) would be an improvement. Hell you could even just cap the number of domains someone can own at twenty or something and still have an improvement.