4 ms·

> This experience left me convinced that Namecheap is holding onto domains to make a profit. I'm curious if anyone else has had similar issues with Namecheap an

by gist 4y ago

> This experience left me convinced that Namecheap is holding onto domains to make a profit. I'm curious if anyone else has had similar issues with Namecheap and if there are other trustworthy registrars to consider. If you have any recommendations, please let me know. I'm in search of a reliable and safe option for domain registration. 'Make a profit'. God forbid a business does something to 'make a profit'. Entirely unclear why people seem to believe that domain names are something of a public trust and should go by different rules than any other object or item a private company can profit from. I've noted this attitude literally since the 1990's with public comments about domain names or registrars. There is nothing at all wrong, illegal or unscrupulous with a domain name registrar - if a domain is not paid for by their customer - with the registrar holding that domain to auction it or sell to another party. And in fact many if not most registrars do a version of this (Godaddy as only one example). ICANN allows this as long as the contract that the customer signed or says has this possibility pointed out. ICANN does require domains that are not paid for deleted but doesn't prevent a registrar from deleting the domain from the customer account and then taking possession of the domain in order to resell it. (Prior info refers to .com .net .org .info and other common tld's).

ratorx 4y ago
This is definitely unscrupulous. It would be illegal if domains were a regulated market. This seems basically like the definition of frontrunning: > purchasing a security based on advance non-public information regarding an expected large transaction that will affect the price of a security Domain searches are not public info. Domain expiry maybe, depending on how the expiry is handled (open auction where registrar bids vs registrar getting a unfair advantage and buying the domain before it becomes accessible to anyone else).
- gist 4y ago
  > This is definitely unscrupulous. However it is not unscrupulous. Business and making money in this way is not unscrupulous. There is nothing to guarantee also that if the domain were not taken by a registrar it would be available to purchase at a nominal registration cost. It might not be for sale at any price. > It would be illegal if domains were a regulated market. Why does that matter. It's not a regulated market. That's like saying 'if it was illegal it would be illegal'. > Domain searches are not public info. There is nothing to indicate other than someone says something on reddit that the registrar front runned (what is being implied) even happened. As typical someone says something and everyone assumes all the facts are correct (ie someone searches and registrar says 'oh I will now grab that domain someone wants it!'.) > Domain expiry maybe, depending on how the expiry is handled (open auction where registrar bids vs registrar getting a unfair advantage and buying the domain before it becomes accessible to anyone else Except we don't know that is what happened here.
  - ratorx 4y ago
    > It might not be for sale at any price Sure, the domain could be unavailable because someone else wanted it. However with front running, the registrar does not want the domain in isolation. They want to domain purely because you are likely to want it based on the fact that you searched for it. The primary difference is using non-public data (your search) to make the decision to buy (which is part of the front running definition). > Why does it matter If the law was perfect at all times, it would never change. It is not a tautology because there are things that WOULDN’T be illegal even if the market was regulated as heavily as other ones. Pointing out that this is behaviour that is penalised in other situations is not useless. Precedent is the fundamental basis of many legal arguments. The rest of your comment is about the truthfulness of the OP. For the argument I was making, it doesn’t matter. I was disagreeing with your original comment (which was that this general behaviour is not wrong). The morality of the general behaviour and whether Namecheap actually does it are two completely separate points.

by gist 4y ago

ratorx 4y ago

This is definitely unscrupulous. It would be illegal if domains were a regulated market. This seems basically like the definition of frontrunning: > purchasing a security based on advance non-public information regarding an expected large transaction that will affect the price of a security Domain searches are not public info. Domain expiry maybe, depending on how the expiry is handled (open auction where registrar bids vs registrar getting a unfair advantage and buying the domain before it becomes accessible to anyone else).

gist 4y ago
> This is definitely unscrupulous. However it is not unscrupulous. Business and making money in this way is not unscrupulous. There is nothing to guarantee also that if the domain were not taken by a registrar it would be available to purchase at a nominal registration cost. It might not be for sale at any price. > It would be illegal if domains were a regulated market. Why does that matter. It's not a regulated market. That's like saying 'if it was illegal it would be illegal'. > Domain searches are not public info. There is nothing to indicate other than someone says something on reddit that the registrar front runned (what is being implied) even happened. As typical someone says something and everyone assumes all the facts are correct (ie someone searches and registrar says 'oh I will now grab that domain someone wants it!'.) > Domain expiry maybe, depending on how the expiry is handled (open auction where registrar bids vs registrar getting a unfair advantage and buying the domain before it becomes accessible to anyone else Except we don't know that is what happened here.
- ratorx 4y ago
  > It might not be for sale at any price Sure, the domain could be unavailable because someone else wanted it. However with front running, the registrar does not want the domain in isolation. They want to domain purely because you are likely to want it based on the fact that you searched for it. The primary difference is using non-public data (your search) to make the decision to buy (which is part of the front running definition). > Why does it matter If the law was perfect at all times, it would never change. It is not a tautology because there are things that WOULDN’T be illegal even if the market was regulated as heavily as other ones. Pointing out that this is behaviour that is penalised in other situations is not useless. Precedent is the fundamental basis of many legal arguments. The rest of your comment is about the truthfulness of the OP. For the argument I was making, it doesn’t matter. I was disagreeing with your original comment (which was that this general behaviour is not wrong). The morality of the general behaviour and whether Namecheap actually does it are two completely separate points.