The point that you and William continue to ignore in your
arguments is that the reseller provided you enough proof of
non-payment to suspend the domain, or in reality, to take it
away from the end user for non-payment.
If the reseller has provided you enough proof to take that
action, then the reseller has provided you enough proof to
return the domain to his control. For whatever he/she
wishes to do with it.
Otherwise OpenSRS has stolen the domain from the reseller or
the end user, as OpenSRS has been paid for the product and
refuses to give it to either party. If the reseller did not
provide adequate proof, then OpenSRS stole it from the end
user. If the reseller did provide adequate proof to justify
taking it from the end user, then the proof was adequate
enough to return the domain to the reseller and OpenSRS has
stolen the domain from the reseller.
You are hiding behind ICANN requirements instead of
admitting the truth, that it is easier for you to just take
it away from the reseller since you have already been paid
and have lost nothing in the transaction.
Harsh words? Yes, but the truth is often harsh.
The fact that other Registrars return the domain name to the
reseller in these cases and have not lost their
accreditation proves the point that the contract can be
worded to return the domain name to the reseller without
losing accreditation.
OpenSRS is a good company. It helped make the cost of
domain registration reasonable and it provide the software
to make it workable. I don't have problem with OpenSRS's
price, as a couple of dollars one way or another is not that
important to us. We use domain name registration as a
marketing tool, not a profit center. Nor do I care how much
money OpenSRS makes off the process. That is none of my
businesses.
The only problem with OpenSRS as a company and of it's
management is that you have never decided who your client
is, so you end up harming both parties when there is a
problem instead of making a fair decision and returning the
domain to the proper owner, whether it is the end user or
the reseller, based on the facts of the case.
William is right in one thing. These issues have been
discussed in the past and it is obvious that OpenSRS is not
that concerned about their resellers. So in one way it is a
waste of time.
But that does not mean the issues will not continue to be
raised as long as it remains a problem for the resellers.
We still have over a thousand clients with OpenSRS, so it's
continuing stability is important to us. We would prefer to
have all our clients with one Registrar, as it would make it
easier for us to manage. We are offering incentives to our
clients to move their domains from OpenSRS so eventually we
will have moved them all as their domains renew. Since many
initially signed on for multiple years, it will take time.
We would have preferred to stay with OpenSRS. It would have
been easier for us to do so than convince all our clients to
move their domains to another registrar. And we would have
made more money in the process, as we are not making
anything on the domains that we are moving. But the issue
of charge backs is just to important to ignore.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 8:27 AM
> To: William X. Walsh; easygoing
> Cc: Hostroute.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re[2]: Chargebacks
>
>
> At 02:45 PM 5/11/01 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
> >Hello easygoing,
> >
> >Friday, May 11, 2001, 11:03:25 AM, easygoing wrote:
> > > And yes, William, this is legal. At least two other
> > > Registrars allow this that have been in
> business as long as
> > > OpenSRS and neither one has lost their
> accredition. It just
> > > depends on how the contract is drawn up that
> is on the web
> > > site.
> >
> >Just because they haven't had a rogue reseller
> abuse this yet and get
> >caught with their pants down (thus forcing a
> review of their policies)
> >doens't make it legal.
>
> Right on the proverbial money. This practice
> clearly violates ICANN policy.
>
> We do not wan't to be seen as defending this
> ICANN policy, it is obviously
> flawed on it's own merits. We are working on
> getting better policies to
> support these situations.
>
> And, to be clear, we will *delete* names for if a
> reseller reports them as
> charged back, and we attempt to contact the
> registrant, and they do not
> respond within a certain reasonable timeframe.
> Typically, we do not refund
> past the first couple of days, however we have
> "split the difference" and
> "discounted" registrations in extreme
> circumstances with measurable
> financial impact. We evaluate these incidents on
> a case by case basis.
>
> Regards,
>
> sA
> Scott Allan
> Director OpenSRS
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
