i believe a class action law suit against VeriSign
breaching it's contracts as a registrar would be promising,
as there are up to one million domains they illegally refuse to release.
surely they wait until their WLS has been forced upon us.
but someone needs to coordinate, and OpenSRS,
while having all required resources, sits silently...
kind regards philippe
--- *** ---
>Good luck. I'm still waiting for a domain to be freed by NetSol that
>expired in April of 2001. I even paid for the SnapBack service figuring
>the domain would be released soon (paid in June I believe). I don't doubt
>that the one year SnapBack subscription will expire before the domain is
>released.
>
>I think it's great that Verisign can add scams on top of scams.
>
>--
>Dave Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>+----------------+-----------------------+--------------+
>| Active Effects | www.activeeffects.com | 416-515-1599 |
>
>On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Tony wrote:
>
>> Any news on the NSI hoarding issue since the lawsuit?
>>
>> I have a client who wants a domain expired last October.
>>
>> Will it do any good to contact NetSlo?
>> I see that for $69.95 with SnapNames we might have a chance at getting it?
>> Is that how it really works? As soon as a SnapNames order is placed the
>> long-expired
>> domain 'suddenly' gets released by NSI?
>>
>> Tony
>>
--- *** ---
At 4:38 Uhr +0100 22.3.2002, Philippe Landau wrote:
>Subject: Re: Registrar Domain Hoarding
>
>VeriSign registrar is holding about half a million expired domains like this.
>their illegal cybersquatting is covered by the registry, ICANN and US DOC.
>one hand washes the other and money is flowing abundantly to the insiders.
>the consumers and domain registrants are paying the bill.
>
>kind regards philippe
>
>ICANN and Verisign in Alliance to Reinstate De-facto NSI Dot Com
>Monopoly in Return For Financial Support of ICANN
>http://www.cookreport.com/10.02.shtml
>
>http://mediafilter.org/caq/internic
>Every president since Nixon has had at least one SAIC insider in his cabinet.
>http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/03_23_98-1.htm
>
>ICANN Closes Most Popular Comment Forum; Auerbach sues ICANN
>http://ICANNwatch.org/
--- *** ---
At 2:17 Uhr +0000 3.1.2002, Abel Wisman wrote:
>Re: Verisign Attempting Cash Grab over Expiring Names
>
>it is indeed an example of how verisign
>tries to get her clutches back on the complete market, ...
>It is also long since proven that THE registrar not deleting domains is
>verisign, keeping some domains blocked for no apparent reason for over 2
>years, but in order to "clip" the competition that grows steeper by the day
>and before these registrars realize the value of their registered and nearing
>deletion domains, they come up with this ....
--- *** ---
At 1:24 Uhr -0800 24.3.2002, George Kirikos wrote:
>WLS is a "Waiting List Service" for expired domain names that Verisign
>has proposed. Verisign would charge registrars $35/yr wholesale to be
>first in line for a name. If the name expires, the WLS holder would pay
>standard registration fees as well. If you're familiar with SnapNames,
>it's the same concept as a SnapBack, however no others would be able to
>attempt to get the name (i.e. like NameWinner, and other expired domain
>name services). Also, if the name is renewed, the $35/yr wholesale is
>non-refundable.
>
>At one time, WLS was proposed as a solution to high registry load, but
>Verisign has since admitted that the current system (where registrars
>compete for expired names in a "batch-pool") has completely solved all
>issues of registry load. Now, WLS is being positioned a new revenue
>source for Verisign.
