Registrar Conference has been postponed

[Stephen]

Have been asking Nominet for date of next Registrar meeting

Today via Nominet forum the reply was posted

Hi. Sorry for the delay in replying.

Our .uk Registrar Conference has been postponed. Significant changes in the commercial team structure combined with the current status of the consultation on second level domain registrations have not allowed us to develop what we believe would be an appropriate programme for such an event at this time. We don’t currently have a future date planned but will give as much notice as possible once a date has been set.

Meanwhile, the next .uk policy forum is planned for Wednesday 2 April 2014 and we will send out invitations nearer the time.

Finally, as mentioned, our next Board meeting will take place on 29 October.

__________________
Phil Spray, Nominet.

and no 2013 annual .uk policy forum meeting

 

[Edwin]

Gives them more time to beef up their hotel security detail?

 

[bb99]

One wonders whether the annual opulent dinner for the top registrars will also be postponed :|

 

[RobM]

Guess they want to make sure that there really is zero confidence in the namespace.

 

[monaghan]

One wonders whether the annual opulent dinner for the top registrars will also be postponed :|

Of course not, can't skip the jolly

 

[Stephen]

top 20 2013 meetings?

One wonders whether the annual opulent dinner for the top registrars will also be postponed :|

I have asked this question on the Nominet forum about top 20 registrar 2013 meetings and I will let you know when they answer?

 

[Stephen]

change the country ?

Gives them more time to beef up their hotel security detail?

Also they may change the country the meeting is being held in, as one of the 4 round table .uk meetings was held in Durban, South Africa!

There is a IGF meeting in Bali soon, they might tag it on to that?

 

[Stephen]

Buenos Aires, Argentina

Maybe the UK registrar meeting for 2013 can be added to:

ICANN 48 | Buenos Aires, Argentina | 17-21 November 2013

http://buenosaires48.icann.org/

 

[Stephen]

Answer from Nominet about Top 20

One wonders whether the annual opulent dinner for the top registrars will also be postponed :|

This is the answer from nominet posted on the Nominet forum;

Hi there,

Hopefully the following answers are helpful.

Has there been any top 20 registrar meeting with Nominet this year?

Key partners (registrars with the highest numbers of registrations of .uk domains) are invited to twice yearly meetings to discuss topics relevant to them. This year we held such meetings on 14 March and 8 October.

Was there a 2013 annual .uk policy forum event at all?

Due to the volume of work in supporting three policy consultations and other key projects, we have not been able to develop an appropriate programme for a .uk policy forum in 2013. We are looking forward to holding this event again next year.

Thanks.

Phil.
__________________
Phil Spray, Nominet.​

 

[Stephen]

Save the date - 5 March 2014: ‘The changing UK internet landscape’

Save the date - 5 March 2014: ‘The changing UK internet landscape’

Finally now announced, all day event.

http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/events/events-meetings/uk-registrar-conference

Pleased that it is all day event and that you have provided a lot of notice for people to try to add it to their diaries.

However I'm disappointed that it is not before the final release in February of .uk details, it means to me Nominet are more going to provide information on what is happening rather than ask for comments to help shape what should happen!
This goes past the .uk consultation, it relates to Nominet have gone down a path far from its 2 .uk proposals and it should seek to gather views on the detail and making the best of .uk before it makes its final announcements.

I have always been for .uk being introduced and in a similar way to its final introduction but I still hope Nominet will actively seek out ways to make the introduction more successful and better for the UK namespace.

I do hope Nominet add sessions to hear from the members about issues and also include a session on the direction of Nominet in expanding its role away from UK domains into the area of supplying many GLTD's as not all agree that is what Nominet should be doing.

 

[Edwin]

However I'm disappointed that it is not before the final release in February of .uk details, it means to me Nominet are more going to provide information on what is happening rather than ask for comments to help shape what should happen!

I think you're pretty much the only person who was still expecting Nominet to take comments! For me, the comprehensiveness and directness of the V3 announcement and supporting documents made it completely clear that "this is what you'll be getting" with just the fine detail left to unveil in February. The consultation part of the process ended definitively with V2, no doubt about it.

 

[Stephen]

Solving a problem before it becomes a problem

I think you're pretty much the only person who was still expecting Nominet to take comments! For me, the comprehensiveness and directness of the V3 announcement and supporting documents made it completely clear that "this is what you'll be getting" with just the fine detail left to unveil in February. The consultation part of the process ended definitively with V2, no doubt about it.

I'm only looking at the fine tuning and getting the best out of .uk.

Below is an example I have sent to Nominet of the detail that would need addressing, if Nominet don't seek such observations on there final V3, then it will not go as smoothly as if they did?

"After the launch date, people will buy a .co.uk and first check the .uk has not been registered they find it hasn’t, they buy the .co.uk and expect to be able to register the .uk under the 5 year rule, once they own the .co.uk.
Unfortunately they find that the current .co.uk owner has registered the .uk in their name and is now transferring the .co.uk which does not have the rights to the .uk?
The new buyer is obviously going to be upset.
Hope that makes sense, there are lots of solutions to stop this from being a problem but I hope you don’t just state that the buyer should ensure there is a contract term about .uk etc. . I hope instead Nominet acts to help prevent the problem from happening."​

I have sent my list of issues/observations about .uk implementation to Nominet policy department and it is up to them whether they take account of them or not.

 

[Edwin]

Your example falls squarely under "buyer beware" - how can Nominet possibly be expected to police that kind of thing? It's not their job to do so, any more than it is to step into the middle of current commercial transactions involving the sale or leasing of domains.

We will be selling domains as "matching pairs" - what others do is their own prerogative, and shouldn't be subject to interference by Nominet since both scenarios (sale of a single name, or sale of the pair) are equally "valid".

 

[Alien]

 

[aZooZa]

I think you're pretty much the only person who was still expecting Nominet to take comments! For me, the comprehensiveness and directness of the V3 announcement and supporting documents made it completely clear that "this is what you'll be getting" with just the fine detail left to unveil in February. The consultation part of the process ended definitively with V2, no doubt about it.

I agree with this sentiment. However I would add that for my own part, I'd be happy for Nominet to have no more meetings, consultations or tweaks for a good while. I'd be happy for them all to stay away on 'jollies'.

 

[Edwin]

I agree with this sentiment. However I would add that for my own part, I'd be happy for Nominet to have no more meetings, consultations or tweaks for a good while. I'd be happy for them all to stay away on 'jollies'.

Absolutely. I'm really, really hoping that the March meeting doesn't get derailed into some kind of post-facto referrendum on .uk V3 - can't think of anything less productive at this point.

 

[Stephen]

cheats and tricksters?

....
I think I understand what you are suggesting, now I've worked through it! You're suggesting that .co.uk registrants that might sell existing .co.uk domain names to secondary market buyers in the future, after .uk has launched, could elect not to mention the .uk, because the matching .uk domain name wasn't yet registered but was reserved for five years, and could choose to register the .uk just before transfering the .co.uk to the buyer therefore retaining the .uk for themselves? Buyer ends up with .co.uk, possibly thinking they would then be able to register the .uk immediately ........ and seller can legitimately claim not to have done anything wrong, because the .uk was never mentioned in negotiations, before potentially being able to sell the .uk to anyone else they feel like?

Thank you your case sums up the scenario I was trying to create.

Nominet have stated they are going to do an awareness campaign and there could be an interest in people wanting to get the .uk.

The point is to protect the buyer of the .co.uk that they ensure both the buyer and seller agree on rights to .uk when the transaction is conducted.

Anybody here would know to ensure that if they bought a .co.uk they would ensure it was clear about ownership of .uk, but anybody new to domains could easily believe they will have the right to the .uk because they will own the .co.uk and when they agreed to buy it, the .uk was not registered.

Some here may say 'buyer beware', I would say we can do better than that.

If that happens the way you have described it, it will bring the name of all domain sellers into the category of "cheats and tricksters as regards .uk", something I would rather didn't happen.

There will be all case of people selling the .co.uk with the .uk, selling just the .uk and selling them as pair, when both parties are agreed on what they are getting from the transaction, there will not be problem.

 

[Stephen]

no obligation

What do you think about this scenario: After the launch of .uk Seller has registered both .co.uk and .uk. Buyer isn't aware of .uk and Seller doesn't mention .uk to Buyer. Buyer purchases .co.uk from Seller. Does Seller have any obligation to mention .uk to Buyer during the negotiations or before the transaction finalises?

I have referenced this scenario because I felt it shared some similarities with your scenario. The question a judge might be expected to consider is "are the Rights to the unregistered .uk domain name part and parcel of the matching registered .co.uk?" If they are, and negotiations and a subsequent purchase of the .co.uk is transacted, even if those Rights are not explicatly mentioned by either the Buyer or the Seller, can a Seller decouple them from the transaction without informing the Buyer during the transaction? A good lawyer might be argue "yes" to the Rights being part and parcel and "no" to the Seller being able to decouple them without informing the Buyer. If, however, the .uk had been registered prior to a prospective buyer enquiring about the .co.uk I feel the .co.uk and the .uk domain names would certainly be considered seperate.

People's thoughts...?

In the case the .uk and .co.uk are both registered at the time of enquiry and sale.

Then I don't think the seller of a .co.uk has an obligation to advise about the .uk being registered. The way Nominet have released .uk.

Domains are sold as is, with no websites etc.

I just hope Nominet can do a good job letting people who are not Acorn members from understanding, how it is all connected.

The other scenario of .uk not being registered will be more common as if the .co.uk is not being used for anything more than a parked page there is little incentive to register the equivalent .uk and incur additional holding renewal costs, until a sales enquiry is received.

Why debate the issue here? it is now up to Nominet to fine tune .uk release without a pre final February announcement meeting of registrars,
here is the only place the issue will be raised.

 

[Stephen]

Or maybe not!

....Why debate the issues here?
it is now up to Nominet to fine tune .uk release but without a pre final February announcement meeting of registrars,
here is the only place the issues will be raised.

Or maybe not!

Seasons Greetings to all.

 

[Stephen]

not left to just solicitors and buyer beware

Since your proposed "absolute pairing forever" suggestion doesn't look like it will be the eventual outcome, given the recent announcements from Nominet, what do you suggest should happen to prevent buyer and seller not mentioning the .uk, a seller negotiating the sale of a .co.uk with a buyer and then registering the .uk themselves minutes before transferring just the .co.uk? I assume you don't think it should just be left to solicitors and buyer beware?

100% Pairing is not going to happen, only tinkering around the edges of the Nominet .uk solution by Nominet themselves is going to happen.

No, I don't think it should be left to just solicitors and buyer beware.

I think that Nominet should try to act to minimize the problem by considering the situation when ;

• producing the marketing / awareness campaign for .uk which Nominet have promised
• building the tool which states which domain has the rights to .uk - having a health warning about buying .co.uk without making it clear about .uk rights
• when a .co.uk transfer of ownership is done - provide details of what the position is of the rights to the .uk equivalent domain before the .co.uk is transferred, so if there is an issue they can go back to the seller before completing the contract

Also Sedo the UK's largest and Domainlore the UK's best domain selling websites may also provide some assistance to the buyer, in communicating exactly what they are buying and what they are not.

If the domain industry is ever going to shake of the image of cyber squatters, then I believe an effort should be made to minimize the effect of the situation described in previous posts.