September .uk drop discussion

[signature]

Any insight/updates on the 3DWEB stuff?

I don't expect them to drop, they will be renewed, same with ones on SIGN TAG.

 

[WalkinDude]

Not being funny, what's the short version of this fasthosts carry on. I might bid on some names but not if it's going be a hassle further down the line.

The whole thread is worth a read.

As for 'hassle' down the road, the more people think like that the cheaper the domains in question will be which ironically will make them more attractive as a punt. Would be interesting to see what a prime domain with a potential asterisk next to it goes for at Auction. I'm struggling to imagine a no bidders scenario even where there is knowledge the domain may be compromised.

In reality, one would have to consider what if nothings done? This will compel people to bid regardless.

Reminds me of this in terms of potential complexity and likely outcome:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Waco_shootout

2015. Bandidos and Cossacks motorcycle gangs end up in a carpark shootout over the right to wear 'Texas' badges on their leather jackets.

9 dead, multiple injuries, hundreds of witnesses. 320 individual weapons seized at the scene, 192 bikers arrested, 106 individual bikers indicted and taken into custody on felony charges ranging from Murder to Weapons Possession. Video and Photographic evidence.

Outcome. Zero convictions. DA managed to successfully prosecute zero cases. 130 bikers have pending Civil Compensation Claims against the Police and DA for infringement of their Civil Rights.

If enough people do the same thing at the same time the act itself can magically become lawful due to the cost of doing anything about it.

...

 

[dee]

have there been any premiums sold on so far at auction ? Or indeed any at all ?

 

[LCHappy]

Would this be true for questionnaires and png which were both dropped and re-caught? I presume there are many more out there also.

We wouldn't have a problem bidding on them if they appeared at auction.

 

[DJ]

The following alerts triggered for domain names in your watchlist at dropped.uk;

Detected Description Old value New value
taxes.uk
15-Sep-2020 TAG changed LIVEDOMAINS to NAMESCO

 

[webber]

The following alerts triggered for domain names in your watchlist at dropped.uk;

Detected Description Old value New value
taxes.uk
15-Sep-2020 TAG changed LIVEDOMAINS to NAMESCO

fi.uk TAG changed 14-Sep-2020 LIVEDOMAINS NAMESCO
masks.uk TAG changed 15-Sep-2020 LIVEDOMAINS NAMESCO
masks.uk TAG changed 15-Sep-2020 NAMESCO 123-REG
helptobuy.uk TAG changed 15-Sep-2020 LIVEDOMAINS NAMESCO
taxes.uk TAG changed 15-Sep-2020 LIVEDOMAINS NAMESCO

 

[Sam]

@Siusaidh Can you confirm that you didn't source your Charlie.uk through this method? I think it's important seeing as many are considering voting.

I spoke to Leon I know him well he didn’t sell this domain to anyone

 

[LCHappy]

I spoke to Leon I know him well he didn’t sell this domain to anyone

Can't be, Suzanna said she didn't obtain it through this method. I would expect a NED candidate to be candid with their answer. If through some form of clever wording we have been misled then that is shocking. It has been 3-4 days for her to do some checking about who she bought it from.

If she din't buy it from the owner then that is very poor form.

 

[webber]

I don't think definitive conclusions can be reached by us here on forum – we don't have the full picture.
There is information which only the rightful owners and Nominet would have access to.
All we can do it highlight something that looks extremely suspicious and demand Nominet look into it and take action.
I understand this was reported to the police and media, so it would be shocking if Nominet tries to cover it up or ignore it

 

[StudioVision]

Does anyone else find it abit weird that it's now 10:45 on Tuesday and Nominet haven't mentioned anything regarding this? Not a surprise, but weird

 

[Siusaidh]

Wow. Guys you do not know the facts, and Nominet and Fasthosts do. Totally. Everything is documented (thank goodness). I am completely secure about things, and indeed Fasthosts have conceded that. Wizard, Leon should contact Nominet and Fasthosts. They have the facts. Honestly, it's all I'm saying. If Nominet thought I had acted wrong they wouldn't let me be elected I assure you, and that would be right, but anyway what benefits me is not important . The whole system needs review. It's all I'm saying and you have to think what you will.

 

[LCHappy]

did you but it from the owner or not?

 

[super-whois]

Any suggestions on who we should now vote for? Bering in mind we can change our votes!

 

[Murray]

If you're just a member of the public then the "fasthosts told me it's ok" line is fine, how would you know any better

If you're a registrar and participated in this you have no excuse you agreed to Nominets t&c

 

[LCHappy]

If you're just a member of the public then the "fasthosts told me it's ok" line is fine, how would you know any better

If you're a registrar and participated in this you have no excuse you agreed to Nominets t&c

Especially as this is 4 days old now and it is clear what has gone on. Even if you were duped into buying it, to not hold your hands up and give the name back in those 4 days is low.

 

[ian]

If you're just a member of the public then the "fasthosts told me it's ok" line is fine, how would you know any better

If you're a registrar and participated in this you have no excuse you agreed to Nominets t&c

It depends, so for example, if you personally requested some domains from Fasthosts and made it clear they are not yours but would like to take ownership of them during their expiry/suspension, providing you don't then move them to your tag for change of registrant, technically a contract is between you and Fasthosts only (of which Fasthosts own terms, whilst contrary to Nominets, allow them right to do this), and Nominet have no part to play. Where Nominet do have a part is if complaints are made to them, they are compelled to investigate Fasthosts, not that of the individual.

I suspect Fasthosts will argue that the domains were part of the ROR release; registered pre-ROR, not claimed by the deadline and therefore whilst the domains are in the registrants name, they had to request transfer to their account, otherwise Fasthosts would retain control to do as they please. Obviously if these domains were actually showing in owners accounts, that may be different, but for all we know, the contact information assigned to these might have been Fasthosts until transferred. Speculating of course.

 

[Murray]

, the contact information assigned to these might have been Fasthosts until transferred. Speculating of course.

How could FastHosts register domains to themselves when the RoR was to .co.uk owners? couldn't .uk only be registered with the .co.uk registrants details?

 

[armistice]

I suspect Fasthosts will argue that the domains were part of the ROR release; registered pre-ROR, not claimed by the deadline and therefore whilst the domains are in the registrants name, they had to request transfer to their account, otherwise Fasthosts would retain control to do as they please.

Fasthosts can't argue that because they did not obtain explicit consent in the timescales required.

 

[LCHappy]

How could FastHosts register domains to themselves when the RoR was to .co.uk owners? couldn't .uk only be registered with the .co.uk registrants details?

Yes it had to match or Nominet would bounce it

 

[Murray]

Fasthosts can't argue that because they did not obtain explicit consent in the timescales required.

Yes and also "Reserved .uk domain names which were not registered by 25th June 2019"

So registrants had until 25th

Fasthosts were registering them 11th and 12th (maybe other days not sure)

But well before the deadline the registrant could still have registered their corresponding .uk if they so wished