Hi James, This works for me because, unlike NSI, this process is respectful of user rights. The only remaining issue is whether the wholesaler has the legal right to seize domains at all. With this proposed Tucows process, there will be no "damages" as the user is exactly whole just as if the domain was deleted (I say "kept" here because user rights have been honored). No harm. No foul!
With NSI, there's a class action suit waiting to happen. As with my client, "but for" the seizure and transfer of his domain it would have been sitting in the "mandatory" redemption grace period and available for him to solely reclaim. In fact, he was only advised to "pay now" and never advised that the domain would be seized and auctioned on March 2rd if he didn't. That's in their unilaterally imposed "fine print." Yet, even this is a short term issue. After a year,in most cases, the user will have agreed to all at the renewal and there will be no contention of rights and responsibilities. With that, Tucows can actually design two programs. One that would be ideal and effect all newly renewed domains (registrants have opted in) and one that emulates the expected deletion cycle for registrants who HAVEN'T opted in, but upon which this is process is imposed. Even if the "redemption grace" period is mandatory, can't it not be a private "redemption grace?" If so, it must be clearly noted as such and the user should be advised if and when it will go into redemption grace. This should be explicit and not just eliminated like it has been with NSI (if only for the fact that they are perfectly willing to accept a $35 dollar renewals the day BEFORE they seize it -- there is no explicit holding period). Best, Loren ------ Original Message ------ Received: 04:41 AM PST, 03/08/2005 From: James M Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Chuck Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Cc: <discuss-list@opensrs.org> Subject: Re: NSI-- What Arrogance! Hi Chuck, We will require winning bidders to commit funds on the domain they won. We will not interpret the registrar grace period as the grace redemption period. The 70~75 days past a domains expiry will still be honored. I owe you folks some info as Russ pointed out (BTW stop holding your breath we don't want you turning blue ;) Here are some time line examples that we are playing with. Day 0 (expiry) domain goes dark, current state (AKA Registrar Grace Period) Day -15 (95% of domains that will be renewed do get renewed by this date) Day -35 Auction! (2 to 5 day auction) (lots of other things are going to happen at this stage as well Day -40~45 Names with no bid get deleted and go into true Grace Redemption (Current state) Day -40~45 Names with a bid get explicitly renewed (Old registrants data stored in escrow, escrow contact info is in the whois Bake for 30 days (AKA fake redemption period AKA Escrow period) -During this time the previous registrant can still "redeem" their name -Secure funds from winning bidder -advise old registrant how much they get from the sale of the name At the end of the 30 day period the winning bidders info will be inserted into the whois as authoritative, they get the keys to the place the name is theirs. This scenario is the one that gets played out if the previous registrant is AWOL during the renewal process and has not explicitly asked for the name to be auctioned. There is another possible scenarios in which the previous registrant will give us the rights to list the name on their behalf (known as free and clear) in which there is a shorter escrow period and the name changes hands more quickly. > (I'm just guessing here because of the apparent unwillingness of anyone at > Tucows to spell out exactly what the plans are.) Its not unwillingness Chuck, if there's a question that I can answer that doesn't give away the farm too soon I'm happy to answer it. > "honoring the redemption grace period is mandatory", > and that whatever you do will "comply with existing policy", yet your > comments imply that names will be sold without being deleted. So does > allowing the registrant the same time period as the current redemption grace > period, without allowing the names to actually enter the redemption grace > period, actually comply with existing policy? We believe it does yes. > If it does, NSI is doing > nothing wrong Under the current state, no we do not believe that they are doing anything "wrong" I'm going to go get coffee now I have a feeling the this post is going to make this a discuss-list day ;-) Cheers, James On 3/7/05 5:56 PM, "Chuck Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: James M Woods [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Chuck, >> >> Don't think about the mechanical bits: >> >>> to enter redemption grace period, a domain name must be deleted by the >>> current registrar. >> >> Think instead about the timeline (30 days) that Redemption offers >> the original registrant (which we do still plan on honoring for those >> who have not explicitly requested the name be auctioned...its all part >> of escrow) >> >> I hope to be able to offer more details soon (like a launch date!) >> >> Cheers, >> >> James > > Does that mean you will be requiring bidders to commit funds to purchase > names that may later be redeemed by the previous registrants (as does > Dotster/Namewinner)? Or interpreting the registrar grace period as > fulfilling the spirit of the 30-day registry redemption period (as > apparently does NSI)? Those "mechanical bits" go a long way toward > providing the new registrant a "clear title" to an expired name. > > (I'm just guessing here because of the apparent unwillingness of anyone at > Tucows to spell out exactly what the plans are.) > > I mean, Ross has said "honoring the redemption grace period is mandatory", > and that whatever you do will "comply with existing policy", yet your > comments imply that names will be sold without being deleted. So does > allowing the registrant the same time period as the current redemption grace > period, without allowing the names to actually enter the redemption grace > period, actually comply with existing policy? If it does, NSI is doing > nothing wrong, since because there is no policy preventing registrars from > deleting names the day after expiry, and in fact at least one does so, and > since the redemption policy only adds 30 days during which a registrant can > recover an expired name, then 36 days would "comply". > > > James M Woods Product Manager - TLD's Tucows Inc. 416.538.5453 Check out my blog at www.warpjam.com
