.UK Announced

[Stephen]

Cybersquatters

PLEASE note this post is NOT aimed at Domainers (of which I consider myself one) but at what cybesquatters, if they exist, may consider doing.

I just thought it may be useful to add to Nominet consideration, on how cybersquatting may have evolved since 2004. (the date of the last .uk review)

Now there are far more tools, knowledge, data and research available to potential cyber squatters.

For them it may be viewed like a business proposition, which may go something like this;

Estimate of 1,000,000 registrants of .co.uk and .org.uk that have websites (or 301 redirects) or use domain for email, that will not for a variety of reasons, including not aware it was happening, obtain the equivalent .uk of their domains.

Register all 1,000,000 domains at £20 assuming no competition for those names, as they are not usually generic. Cost £20,000,000

Contact the owners of the .co.uk equivalent, as it would not be an abusive registration, the client would have no recourse to Nominet, and explain why they need the .uk domains and offer to sell it to them at say £1,000.

Assume 10% of those business agree to buy the .uk (remember we are only dealing with real websites not parked pages), that would generate £100,000,000

An estimated profit of £80,000,000 although totally immoral, and maybe illegal, in my opinion it would be done!

It is know how (PLEASE DON’T ASK ME) they would be able to find those domain names, rank the domain names in likelihood of a sale, which ones took money online, which email addresses they use, the size of the website, the volume of traffic, number of Google adds, ranking for keywords etc. etc.

Although if this was done now to register a .co.uk on a uk businesses which uses .com or .net etc. it would be considered an abusive .co.uk registration by Nominet and although the uk business would have to spend several thousand pounds in legal fees, time and Nominet DRS application fee they would almost certainly be able to get the .co.uk transferred to their business. The action of a DRS would not be possible for the .uk domain as Nominet is the one that just sold it off.

There is nothing you can do to stop this happening with .uk, with the proposal in its current form and even if you try to add new rules, as at the 2 letter auction, with such potential rewards, these people (if they exist) will go to extraordinary lengths and be extremely inventive and mainly within the law.

Rgds
Stephen

p.s. I’m not doing the above.

 

[foz]

Domainindex.com, the domain industry's leading benchmarking, TLD analysis, rating and Domain appraisal service, has announced today that it has changed its rating for .co.uk from AA to B

http://domainindex.com/blog/domaini...net-tld-couk-and-warns-about-couk-and-uk-tlds

Feels like the monetary outlook of Greece. .co.uk becomes an outcast and unwanted extension?

 

[TinkyWinky]

Domainindex.com, the domain industry's leading benchmarking, TLD analysis, rating and Domain appraisal service, has announced today that it has changed its rating for .co.uk from AA to B

This should be amended :

The rating for Nominet should be changed from AA to F (for failing miserably)!

 

[markb]

http://domainindex.com/blog/domaini...net-tld-couk-and-warns-about-couk-and-uk-tlds

Feels like the monetary outlook of Greece. .co.uk becomes an outcast and unwanted extension?

Im sure this is exactly what nominet want. The devaluation of all existing uk domains.

Therefore this makes .uk the most valuable uk domain extension to hold, and they have them all and stand to make a lot of money selling them.

Nominet shouldn't be able to get away with this, they have falsely promoted the .co.uk and got everyone to buy in to it, only to remove it once everyone has invested their money. They have know that they where going to do this for years. Therefore im sure it people who have invested money in .co.uk domains/websites can take legal action against nominet.

 

[TinkyWinky]

Therefore this makes .uk the most valuable uk domain extension to hold.

Not sure that can be assumed - if the underlying reigstry (aka Nominet) is seen to be promoting and championing a new extension that directly undermines all other existing extensions (that just months before it was championing), it doesn't necessarily follow that the new would automatically then assume the AA rating.

If there is complete confusion (which may very well happen with the current proposal) over ownership, legal cases in the background (which there very may well be) all that happens is all .uk extensions will then suffer.

Or do Nominet think they have the ability to control that as well?

TW

 

[websaway]

Im sure this is exactly what nominet want. The devaluation of all existing uk domains.

Therefore this makes .uk the most valuable uk domain extension to hold, and they have them all and stand to make a lot of money selling them.

Nominet shouldn't be able to get away with this, they have falsely promoted the .co.uk and got everyone to buy in to it, only to remove it once everyone has invested their money. They have know that they where going to do this for years. Therefore im sure it people who have invested money in .co.uk domains/websites can take legal action against nominet.

Have you seen the response to this article that Edwin refers to ?
http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/...ne-future.html

The proposal to introduce the .uk seems so profoundly wrong I cannot see it succeeding, and the damage to the co.uk brand is beyond belief. I'm sure Nominet will be discredited and heads will roll.

 

[foz]

Im sure this is exactly what nominet want. The devaluation of all existing uk domains.

It probably didn't even enter their heads that just a consultation would undermine the entire .uk Registry.

Who would bother with .co.uk while this is up for discussion and/or plans to proceed.

Businesses would be wise to pursue .com and build on that.

 

[foz]

Not sure that can be assumed - if the underlying reigstry (aka Nominet) is seen to be promoting and championing a new extension that directly undermines all other existing extensions (that just months before it was championing), it doesn't necessarily follow that the new would automatically then assume the AA rating.

If there is complete confusion (which may very well happen with the current proposal) over ownership, legal cases in the background (which there very may well be) all that happens is all .uk extensions will then suffer.

Or do Nominet think they have the ability to control that as well?

To avoid all the grief I think a great deal will switch to .com

 

[foz]

Have you seen the response to this article that Edwin refers to ?
http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/...ne-future.html

The proposal to introduce the .uk seems so profoundly wrong I cannot see it succeeding, and the damage to the co.uk brand is beyond belief. I'm sure Nominet will be discredited and heads will roll.

What would stop .uk being proposed again in 3-4 years? It will be an itch that remains.

 

[GreyWing]

What would stop .uk being proposed again in 3-4 years? It will be an itch that remains.

An EGM to pass a resolution taking the matter out of the boards hands.

 

[domainseller200]

PLEASE note this post is NOT aimed at Domainers (of which I consider myself one) but at what cybesquatters, if they exist, may consider doing.

I just thought it may be useful to add to Nominet consideration, on how cybersquatting may have evolved since 2004. (the date of the last review)

Now there are far more tools, knowledge, data and research available to potential cyber squatters.

Also it may be viewing like a business proposition, which may go something like this;

Estimate of 1,000,000 registrants of .co.uk and .org.uk that have websites (or 301 redirects) or used domain for email, that will not for a variety of reasons, including not aware it was happening, obtain the equivalent .uk of their domains.

Register all 1,000,000 domains at £20 assuming no competition for names, as they are not usually generic. Cost £20,000,000

Contact the owners of the .co.uk equivalent, as it would not be an abusive registration, the client would have no recourse to Nominet, and explain why they need the .uk domains and offer to sell it to them at say £1,000.

Assume 10% of those business agree to buy the .uk (remember we are only dealing with real websites not parked pages), that would generate £100,000,000

An estimated profit of £80,000,000 although totally immoral, and maybe illegal, in my opinion it would be done!

It is know how (PLEASE DON’T ASK ME) they would be able to find those domain names, rank the domain names in likelihood of a sale, which ones took money online, which email addresses they use, the size of the website, the volume of traffic, number of Google adds, ranking for keywords etc. etc.

Although if this was done now to register a .co.uk on a uk businesses which uses .com or .net etc. it would be considered an abusive .co.uk registration by Nominet and although the uk business would have to spend several thousand pounds in legal fees, time and Nominet DRS application fee they would almost certainly be able to get the .co.uk transferred to their business. The action of a DRS would not be possible for the .uk domain Nominet has just sold off.

There is nothing you can do to stop this happening with .uk, with the proposal in its current form and even if you try to add new rules, as at the 2 letter auction, with such potential rewards, these people will go to extraordinary lengths and be inventive and mainly within the law.

Rgds
Stephen

p.s. I’m not doing the above.

Very interesting theory and quite a worrying thought. Add in the element of domain parking and the £20m cost is soon recouped, as each domain would only need to make £20 in 12 months which, if essentially, Joe Public is 'confused' and types in the .uk domain by mistake is very acheivable !

 

[Marcoose]

It is strongly worth taking the time to read and digest Paul Keating's comment to the article at the following link:
http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs...cs/2012/11/i-have-seen-the-online-future.html

Now that is a quality reply. Thanks for the share Edwin.

I don't understand how anyone after reading that can be pro the .UK proposal in its current form.

It is clear to me now, more than ever, that the ONLY way this can be done is by grandfather rights giving the .co.uk holder the option to rebrand if they choose to.

If it goes ahead, Nominet cannot keep the revenue - they have no right to or need for it. The 50 billion figure suggested must be a misjudgment. Even if 'only' a speculative 100 million was raised on the back of the registrations and auctions, it should be passed on to the government so at least there is some sort of positive outcome from all of this. Of course if this was the case, Nominet wouldn't even be persuing .UK.

In my opinion the Nominet board have been highly negligent by introducing the proposals in the manner they have. How can an organisation with SUCH power over the UK economy even think about bringing this up publicly without THOROUGH research conducted by an impartial, third party company.

I am anti .uk because:

- ... of pretty much everything that Paul argues in the link above.

- The net effect on society and the economy is highly negative. If Paul's analysis of these security improvements are correct (I'm not that technical) then the only thing we have to gain is a more pleasing to the eye and tongue domain extension. Is that worth the cost to businesses and the MAJOR headache it's going to create on so many levels (what percentage of website owners know how to 301 redirect?) This probably accounts for 70% of my negative sentiment.

- It appears to be conducted in a completely fraudulent nature.

(Long sentence alert!)​

Ie releasing the short domains at the convenient time they did, promoting .co.uk - "the place to be", the way they again, conveniently removed all that documentation from their site, the way 99% of .co.uk STAKEHOLDERS are INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES and they aren't even telling them as CONVENIENTLY they have found a way around that, etc. Everything about the initial proposal speaks self interest and pushing .UK through as quickly and quietly as possible.

- Of course I own .co.uk domains, maybe 200. I caught the majority of these over the last 12 months but have made a considerable profit. The most I have paid for a .co.uk that I own is £1100 - the .co.uk version of a .com that I have developed. Even if my remaining portfolio was valued at 0 and I miss out on all .UKs, I have done pretty well out of the UK domain name industry. I am predominantly a developer - all of my main sites are .com.

I say this because although I am part "domainer", the proposal wouldn't effect me that much and I can remain relatively impartial. Despite this 20% of my negative sentiment is for selfish reasons.

My Summary:

IF a government body or knowledagble, impartial party were to conduct in-depth research into the effects of .UK and concluded it really was the way to go then I would have absolutely no problem with it so long as the money was claimed by the government - not Nominet.

However, a small group of potentially delusional people with potential (imo probable) self interests at heart should NEVER be given the power to make such a huge call.

The fairest way to implement it would be grandfather rights. It's not a perfect system - there is no such thing but you can't promote .co.uk as THE extension for as long as they have and then give the new premium extension to an org.uk holder or TM holder from Malta. If they do then everything they have told us has been one big lie. Don't get me wrong, I would love to get hold of the .UK version of some of Tag Name's domains but it just isn't fair.

If only Joe public was aware of the ramifications of this disaster waiting to happen then there would probably be a backlash. Again though, unfortunately for some reason there has been no press exposure so the only way this is going to get stopped is through litigation.

 

[foz]

An EGM to pass a resolution taking the matter out of the boards hands.

Is this consultation a Board initiative or a Policy Stakeholder Committee (PSC) one? or both?

What is to stop the PSC or similar raising it again? All it takes is joe public to submit the concept again at a later date.

Contacting the Secretariat to highlight a topic you feel would benefit from consideration through the .uk policy process.

Is it requested and written into policy, not be questioned again?

 

[GreyWing]

Is this consultation a Board initiative or a Policy Stakeholder Committee (PSC) one? or both?

What is to stop the PSC or similar raising it again? All it takes is joe public to submit the concept again at a later date.

One of the proposals could be a vote that .uk would not happen unless 90% of the membership agree.

 

[foz]

One of the proposals could be a vote that .uk would not happen unless 90% of the membership agree.

Although that wouldn't stop it being raised again?

e.g. discuss, consult and vote. Still puts an air of uncertainty into the community.

 

[micky1]

ive just spoke to nominet about this. i have asked if i can pre register the .uk domain name of my .co.uk. the name said a decision will be made in January and that the .co.uk owners will get first dibs on the .uk. thats great for me, and most other businesses. the rest can be sold and fought over as usual. so if they do that across the board for all 2.3 4 etc names there shouldn't be to much issue apart from raising MILLIONS!

 

[Simon]

that the .co.uk owners will get first dibs on the .uk.

great news. Did you get that in writing?

 

[Marcoose]

said a decision will be made in January and that the .co.uk owners will get first dibs on the .uk.

Umm. Either you're lying or Nominet really needs to educate its staff better on its own proposal.

 

[viceroy]

ive just spoke to nominet about this. i have asked if i can pre register the .uk domain name of my .co.uk. the name said a decision will be made in January and that the .co.uk owners will get first dibs on the .uk. thats great for me, and most other businesses. the rest can be sold and fought over as usual. so if they do that across the board for all 2.3 4 etc names there shouldn't be to much issue apart from raising MILLIONS!

Haha, tell me that's a wind-up?!

 

[TinkyWinky]

One of the proposals could be a vote that .uk would not happen unless 90% of the membership agree.

You could also put in caveat that for all those not voting - they are not included against the %ges. This then allows for the situation where there is not proper consultation and engagement with the membership - as is now I believe.

i.e. it has to be approved by 90% of those actually submitting their votes.

Oh yes and the voting system has to be a level playing field for individual accounts vs registrars.

TW