WHOIS details

For the record, Nominet can only act on these anomalies if (1) they notice something is amiss or (2) they are told there is a breach of the Terms and Conditions/rules of registration.

The rules state that the t/a field should only be used to show a 'trading as' (or trading) name. The rules also state that only a non-trading individual can opt-out of having their address details shown on the whois. This current registration breaks at least two rules and indeed, given the dictionary definition of "none", I'd say the domain name is currently registered to nobody.... effectively making this a non-registration and liable to deletion.

The irony is, if "none" wants to make this right he or she will now have to pay £30 plus Vat to transfer the domain name to themselves. However, they may find it particularly hard to prove their identity is "none".

You're right, it is a joke, a bad one; (though you may have thought so for other reasons) but let's give "none" the benefit of the doubt and say he/she did not understand the process of registration in the first place. I would advise "none" to get in touch with the Tag Holder 123reg immediately to ask what can be done to bring this registration within the Terms and Conditions which apply to everyone equally... er... including "none".

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

Can't he just wait two months for his reg details to be delivered and then change them?

 

Nope. The "registrant field" is sacrosanct. If he/she wants to change it, it's a chargeable transfer. The short answer is this: "A transfer is a chargeable transaction and is considered to be any request to change the legal registrant of a domain name from one legal entity to another". The long answer is here:

However; and this is the crux of the issue; "none" is hardly likely to be regarded as a "legal entity" and this registration is therefore liable to deletion by the registry if they so determine it. Clause 4 and 4.1 of the Terms and Conditions apply: "You have various responsibilities set out generally in this contract. You must also: give and keep us notified of your correct name etc." Clause 7.2 further states; "any identity and contact information you (either yourself or through your agent) send us must be correct." Full Terms and Conditions here.

As an aside, the registrant field is the one field a Tag Holder is currently not allowed to change. This was a very sloppy registration if the registrant actually intended longterm use out of the domain. Like I said previously, the rules apply to everyone equally and if "none" is looking in, he/she best do something to correct the WHOIS now. Skates are optional.

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

Changing of the registrant field is a chargable service and just another way for the joke that is Nominet to screw funds from Joe Public.

When this organistion drags itself into the 21st century with automated, straightforward and free domain transfers will be the day hell freezes over.

 

I know about the transfer process I just thought same owner might be able to change their details, I pity the poor woman that gets married in the middle of holding a domain name, not holding one but er holding one.

Are you able to change registrant status details surrounding business and individual ownership? I shuppose I should shav a looksh.

 

I have no problem with anyone criticising anything (even me) though it would be nice if you did it from a more objective standpoint. That way you won't get guys like me; who believe in fair play for all; criticising back.

Here are the facts regarding Nominet domain name transfers.

The most important field in any registration (.com, .uk, .whatever) is the registrant field. This identifies the person or legal entity entitled to hold the registration. If someone puts "none" in there, it is both self-defeating and counterproductive.

That said, when someone wishes to transfer a domain name from themselves to another entity, Nominet is obliged to apply due diligence to ensure they have received the correct authority from both parties; otherwise you leave a large loophole for usurpers to climb through and steal other people's domain names. One of the most infamous cases being SEX.COM (full story here).

Currently this means the registrant must contact Nominet stating his/her intent to transfer. Then both parties must fill in a transfer form and send a confirmatory letter to Nominet. This takes time and effort on all sides including Nominet, and Nominet charges on a 'cost recovery basis' at £30.00 plus Vat. This is not designed to "screw" anybody; the system is designed to ensure due diligence and the charge is cost recovery.

All of that is the reason why the process cannot be automated or straightforward or free. Hell can freeze over in its own time.

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

For the sake of clarity, when you get your 'Letter of Confirmation' for each domain registration, you get a security code that allows you to go into Registrant's Online (see here) and change trading as, address, and other contact details too. You can also do this via your Tag Holder. However; the only field the Tag Holder cannot change is the registrant field. Nominet (currently) feels this is too sensitive an area for anyone other than the legal registrant to be able to change.

As an aside, there have been discussions at PAB level about how it might be possible to allow Tag Holders to do this but we need to ensure we do not leave any registrant open to usurping or abuse. It ain't an easy one but we're working on it.

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

Millions of domains are transferred on a daily basis at the click of a mouse.

It takes weeks to transfer a .co.uk

The system is outdated, expensive and has held back sales of .uks for years.

 

It dosent matter how much you argue for a need for such a sytem with those costs. The truth is, it is unnecessary. Proven by how millions of .com's etc are transfered.

Infact you could argue it causes more problems.. ive seen lots of domains sold where the buyer was not aware of the need of this. I even had an argument recently with a German chap who thought I was trying to rip him off.

 

Please define "millions of domains" and in which extensions. And what exactly do you mean by "sales of .uks"?

Are you specifically talking from the 'buying and selling of .uk domain names' standpoint? Most "user registrants" don't have the same criteria as dropcatchers or domainers when registering domain names. Should the PAB and Nominet ignore their concerns and wishes? If you think they should; why?

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

It may well be unecessary; I don't argue that the Nominet way is the best way; but for now, it is one of the safest. I would also point out that the legalities of domain name ownership are different in American Law and English Law, and where the click of a button may be appropriate to a .com Top Level Registrar, it may not be appropriate to the .uk Registry. All this has to be taken into consideration.

All that said, I have already stated that the PAB has discussed (and continues to discuss) the options on domain name transfers so it isn't that anybody is stuck in a time warp. Finding a system that doesn't put the ordinary "user registrant" in danger of abuse or usurping is not as simple as waving a magic wand. If it was, it would've been done already.

It'd be nice if the people with the criticisms could give us a clue as to what they believe is better; instead of just saying it's all crap.

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

What me and Firestars said, a move to a similiar system to what .com's use.

Theres many times more .com's then .uk's. You cant say its failed because of sex.com. How many abusive .uk transfers have occured ?

 

James

That is easy, sell domains like property (land) make it a more binding purchase and let the courts decide the rest......With an annual pepercorn payment.....

 

Firestars quote reminds of an email I got sometime ago that made me chuckle.

---------------
The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington engineering mid term. The answer was so "profound" that the Professor shared it with colleagues, which is why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or Endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote Proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law, (gas cools off when it expands and heats up when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following:

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave.

Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell.

With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

2. Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa Banyan during my Freshman year, "...that it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you." and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then, #2 cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and will not freeze."

This student received the only A.
---------------

 

SEX.COM was just an example; I was simply pointing out that usurping happens and is more likely to happen in the .com domain than in the .uk domain.

The current Nominet system makes abusive (registrant) transfers far less likely than in the .com extension and primarily because of the safeguards you seem to be objecting to. Whilst the .COM system may well be quicker, it creates the potential for abuse by the Registrar, Reseller, and Usurper. I know this because I see all sorts of bogus transfer requests each month and if a .com domain is indeed transferred to another registrar it is quite an easy thing to then change the registrant field, but not such an easy thing for the legitimate registrant to get the domain name back again. (I trust you will not argue this doesn't happen; it does.)

All of the above doesn't mean the PAB and Nominet aren't looking for a better and faster solution; we're just looking for a solution that doesn't put ordinary registrants at risk. If and when we find it, it will safeguard yours and Firestars' rights too.

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

Ah, the property argument. The current situation is that domain names are not regarded as 'property' in English Law (case law refers). IMHO a domain name is an intangible (an entry in a database) whereas a piece of land is very obviously 'tangible'. Said with the usual proviso IANAL (I am not a lawyer).

In principle, I might actually be persuaded towards your point on letting the courts decide; though I doubt there'd be any less kafuffle about decisions! But until the Law decides upon a domain name as property, I would suggest it might be prudent to address the system we have, and try to make it more equitable for all concerned. Lest we forget; the courts are not perfect and the costs are often prohibitive to the average person. There were good reasons why the DRS came into being and whilst it may not be perfect either, it was created in the interests of the .uk community as a less expensive way of solving domain name disputes.

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

 

Interesting argument, I would suggest that you go look at many "software" developers anual accounts, there you will see intangible assets...An intangible does have asset, whether that is good will, TM, Copyright etc etc each can be sold as "assets" as a single entity.

Equally it is interesting that you suggest English does not recognise them as property, that is only a matter of time, it would be far more prudent for nominet to recognise this as inevitable and make approriate steps towards this rather than being reactionist

 

Domains are an asset and increasingly so. Whether they're due any more respect within English law is another thing but an asset they most certainly are, if they weren't then you wouldn't have the government keeping hold of domains when a company goes bust. Double standards as usual?

As for land and domain comparisons, the land you own isn't yours to own anyway, equally the same with domain names.

And just to show another comparison, a funny stat I heard was that 90% of the land is owned by 10% of the population and 90% of the population lives on 10% of the land, the same for domains also? :mrgreen:

 

I like it, the infamous ‘top 10%’ analogy it’s always a good un. :mrgreen:

On to a serious note: I’ve had another ‘good’ idea (well, I think I have), so anyway… How about having a system a bit like the ‘Government Gateway’? You get a User ID, a Password and an Activation key, all very safe and secure. You could have the system set so that you could request an Activation Key ‘of sorts’ on Nominet’s Registrants Online, this ‘key’ could then be posted to you and once received entered into a ‘Validate Transfer’ box on the aforementioned R.O. thingy. Nominet could then charge say what, a fiver to cover the admin costs of sending the letter. Job’s a good un, I’d say.

Any thoughts???