UK Charities Second Class To Domain Squatters

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

This thread is starting to feel like Groundhog Day!

Let's hope then people like Mr Cox from Mind.org.uk accept they can't have Mind.uk etc and don't start using some of their charitable resources to sue the new owner

At the end of the day it doesn't matter how you perceive the industry... The charities with the cash will defend their intellectual property rights.

 

[fozfoz is verified member.]

or just go out and buy them, like everyone else has to.

https://www.duedil.com/companies/search?query=424348

Mind.org.uk - Net Worth £9.4M Cash £2.8M

 

[julian]

Come on, tell us what your sneeky ulterior agenda is about this .UK issue, as it keep resurfacing every few months

Let's hope then people like Mr Cox from Mind.org.uk accept they can't have Mind.uk etc and don't start using some of their charitable resources to sue the new owner

At the end of the day it doesn't matter how you perceive the industry... The charities with the cash will defend their intellectual property rights.

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

What a load of bollocks!

Come on, tell us what your sneeky ulterior agenda is about this .UK issue, as it keep resurfacing every few months

I posted a link to an article which I didn't write myself...

Simon Phipps who wrote the article isn't a nobody either: http://webmink.com/about/

Now if you guys can't debate the story itself without putting your tin foil hats on - then that is up to you.

Personally I have nothing to gain from it either way - other than I will be selling .uk registrations to my clients.

 

[SkinnerSkinner is verified member.]

I'll support either the current process OR as an alternative bending over the nominet board and ramming .uk with extreme force up where the sun don't shine.

Charities would be happy, I would be happy, and most others would be happy with the latter, however 9.9m happy, a few thousand unhappy is as good as it gets when doing something no one wants.

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

All I can say is you're very easily impressed.

Yes I know, I'm nuts and you're really smart.

Well I'm not very impressed by your comments Sean or indeed the last time you kicked off at me.

Not sure what your issue is with me however you seem to be a very angry about something?

 

[ian]

I quite like the direct.uk idea but that's another topic

 

[Bluetram]

.org.uk - charities and organisations preferred option.
.co.uk - meat of the matter...end of.
The fat lady has sung.

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

Response from Nominet

You will be pleased to know Nominet has now issued a rebuttal:

UK Charities second class to domain squatters? A response from Nominet
Any charity or registrant can a complaint examined at any time
Published 04:27, 07 February 14

First, charities where there is no .co.uk equivalent, or where they own them as well, can take up the .uk equivalent from 10 June. For the majority (53%) of those with .org.uk registrations, including many of the largest charities in the UK, this will be an option. In the meantime, .org.uk registration carries on as normal. There is no need to wait for any period of time to progress your domain name strategy.

Secondly, there is an implicit assumption that a .co.uk winning the equivalent .uk domain is inherently abusive. In fact, there are many legitimate uses of a domain name - including long established businesses and charities that hold the same strings.

Thirdly, any charity - or indeed any registrant - who feels that another registration is infringing their rights - can have their complaint examined at any time by our well respected Dispute Resolution Service. Anyone that has established usage rights to a term or phrase or character strings has had, since 2001, an independent, effective and low-cost means of contesting registrations which take unfair advantage of their rights. This can deliver a ruling within as few as two months, although many cases are quickly settled amicably through a mediated process. Thankfully the number of cases is very low in the context of over 10m .uk domain registrations, but I would encourage any charities who feel that their brand is being infringed to make use of that process.

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/ma...n-squatters-a-response-from-nominet/index.htm

So looks like charities affected can at least make DRS complaints?

 

[websaway]

You will be pleased to know Nominet has now issued a rebuttal:

UK Charities second class to domain squatters? A response from Nominet
Any charity or registrant can a complaint examined at any time
Published 04:27, 07 February 14



http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/ma...n-squatters-a-response-from-nominet/index.htm

So looks like charities affected can at least make DRS complaints?

I don't think they will be able to sort cases in two months after June
There will be thousands launching complaints because the .uk will be a new registration and easier to challenge.

 

[doma1n]

I can't see how it would benefit a charity any more than the org.uk does.
I can see the charity being a more commercial organisation if it owns the .uk, which of course would be better for job security or additional pay for the employees of a charity.
If it's the commercial aspect of a charity i.e. employment and pay that is the issue then why should they enjoy any benefit over other industries that don't enjoy the benefits of charity status.

Perfectly put. Im not against charities, no way. But some charities pay their bosses
extortionate rates of pay. They believe they are the only ones doing good and that because they are a charity they have all the answers and are always right.
Like I say, Im not against charities, just against some of the arrogance of the people in charge of them.

 

[anthony]

That's just a retort from Nominet to push back at those who feel they have valid concerns about Nominet's decision. One should remember that Nominet were on their side originally, insofar as they proposed 'aged rights'. It is Nominet who have turned tail.

You will be pleased to know Nominet has now issued a rebuttal:

UK Charities second class to domain squatters? A response from Nominet
Any charity or registrant can a complaint examined at any time
Published 04:27, 07 February 14



http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/ma...n-squatters-a-response-from-nominet/index.htm

So looks like charities affected can at least make DRS complaints?

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

It is Nominet who have turned tail.

In this context "changed their minds after two consultations" would be a better description. Turned tail implies running away, which unfairly misrepresents Nominet's approach.

 

[anthony]

In this context "changed their minds after two consultations" would be a better description. Turned tail implies running away, which unfairly misrepresents Nominet's approach.

Two consultations! They never consulted with me, nor with many millions of registrants like me. In fact, possibly 95% of registrants were never consulted.

The feedback they have acted upon has come from a narrow band of members with specific vested interests. There are many Nominet documents over the years that promote its fundamental support for the 'first come first served' principle of domain registrations, so Nominet should have stuck to what was a perfectly fair decision to repect this principle via aged rights, especially as .uk affects every current registrant.

Now there are .org.uk registrants in particular who are voicing their opinions and concerns, and who feel aggrieved by this decision and a lack of direct consultation. Unfortunately for them, no one is going to listen to them now, no one!

The reality is that .uk should never have been introduced anyway.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Two consultations! They never consulted with me, nor with many millions of registrants like me. In fact, possibly 95% of registrants were never consulted.

A number of the people I met in the face-to-face consultations were "regular registrants", rather than from the IP, domainer, registrar communities. Anyone was free (and welcome) to turn up. Equally, the online comment process for the 2 consultations was also free for anyone to have their say.

 

[anthony]

A number of the people I met in the face-to-face consultations were "regular registrants", rather than from the IP, domainer, registrar communities. Anyone was free (and welcome) to turn up. Equally, the online comment process for the 2 consultations was also free for anyone to have their say.

Show me where Nominet engaged with the 9,5000,000 registrants to encourage them to have their say, rather that pointing to a few focussed meetings know only to a narrow band of people who where also up to speed with the consequences for themselves personally?

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

I have a lot to lose with the introduction of direct.uk. I wish it didn't exist but it does and from a purely selfish point of view, we've arrived at something that does the least damage to me and the people I've sold domains to. Given that most people on here are in the same boat as me, we aren't the obvious target audience for your message so why post?

Edwin, was against direct.uk, most certainly the first proposal and he put in a LOT of effort that arguably made Nominet go away and come back with revised proposals. We didn't always see eye to eye especially on the second set of proposals but at least his message and conviction was clear. You on the other hand don't have a clear message which means we can only make assumptions about your motive for posting.

Sean,

Just like you I have been posting on this forum for 10 years.
Not once in all that time have I been questioned why did I post something... until now.

I have no motive, I only have 192 .uk domains on my Nominet tag and most of those are owned by web hosting clients. While you may stand to lose from these proposals I do not stand to lose anything.

I found the article interesting and the rebuttal interesting - in my opinion it was worthy of further debate even though it is not going to change one thing at Nominet.

Now I suggest you look at why your showing such animosity towards me in these threads. In fact "I have a lot to lose with the introduction of direct.uk" is clearly where your anxiety is and that has nothing to do with my view on things at all.

If it's a case of you disagree with what I posted because you're worried about your own portfolio then fair enough - however I don't see why I shouldn't post something just because it might upset your feelings?

 

[anthony]

...The only possible way that I can see for this to be moved forward with any credibility is for a concerted no to direct.uk campaign but I'm not sure enough people care for it to be effective...

I agree Sean, but it isn't going to happen now, as you allude to.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

What frustrates me is that quite a substantial number of people put a LOT of effort into opposing aspects of V1 and V2, yet now we're rehashing everything again as if those debates never happened.

There is no way to introduce .uk so that "everyone" wins. It's impossible, because of the matching strings in different extensions. So, end of that line of discussion.

Given that, there are only 3 paths that can be taken:
A) No .uk at all
B) .uk distributed according to a formula (e.g. .co.uk have priority)
C) Oldest registrant wins

The case for A) was made very vigorously by many people but that view has not prevailed, and the clock cannot be wound back at this stage regardless of how much individuals may want to do so. It didn't happen with MPs being consulted, questions raised in parliament, negative press, and everything that happened during V1 and V2 so it's not going to happen now.

So that leaves B) and C)

Views for both the B) and C) approaches were submitted in "useful" quantities (hundreds) during both V1 and V2.

At the end of everything, Nominet took the B) approach.

So the discussions now are like trying to rewind the result of a football match because around the 23rd minute an important "offside" ruling was misjudged. Just can't happen.

Also: regardless of what the "wider world" had in terms of "say" or even awareness of the matter, every single person who's posted to this thread had knowledge of the consultation process and therefore the opportunity to contribute. If you didn't, that's your own failure - not a failure of Nominet's process.

And if you did put forward your views and they weren't adopted (or they were only partially adopted) that's hardly surprising - even a quick dip into the many published responses to V2 will show there were about as many divergent views as there were submissions!

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

So the discussions now are like trying to rewind the result of a football match because around the 23rd minute an important "offside" ruling was misjudged. Just can't happen.

The match is still being played Edwin... it is not over until the fat lady sings.

While you may have had enough of the debate on here - others are only just finding out about it.

Like this guy Ben Furber (Digital manager for a health charity) having a rant with Nominet on twitter:
http://storify.com/benfurber/my-discussion-with-nominet-about-uk-domains

There is a long way to go yet in all this...

123-reg have just put the .uk pre-order pages on their site:
https://www.123-reg.co.uk/domain-names/register-uk-domains.shtml

That should wake a few people up to the idea!