Difference between revisions of "Domain Resale Code of Ethics"

From HypertWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 13: Line 13:
*Do we want a binding contract to enforce the stated use of the sold domain, so as to prevent reselling to the highest bidder? Or would it be better to find some other way to punish fraudulent purchasers, e.g. a blacklist?
*Do we want a binding contract to enforce the stated use of the sold domain, so as to prevent reselling to the highest bidder? Or would it be better to find some other way to punish fraudulent purchasers, e.g. a blacklist?
==Issues==
==Issues==
*Once we have a code which seems reasonable to most people, how do we get domain resellers to adopt it? A number of tools suggest themselves, though I'm sure there are some I haven't thought of:
*'''Enforcement''': Once we have a code which seems reasonable to most people, how do we get domain resellers to adopt it? A number of tools suggest themselves, though I'm sure there are some I haven't thought of:
**A banner which only conforming sites may use (much like banners provided by other trust-enhancing services)
**A banner which only conforming sites may use (much like banners provided by other trust-enhancing services)
**A whitelist of resellers known to follow the spirit of the code
**A whitelist of resellers known to follow the spirit of the code
**A blackist of resellers known ''not'' to follow the spirit of the code
**A blackist of resellers known ''not'' to follow the spirit of the code
==Comments==
==Comments==

Revision as of 13:55, 3 July 2005

In the face of the rising tide of Domain Name Squatting, which deprives all but the best-funded enterprises and individuals of the use of uncounted thousands of domain names, I hereby propose a code of ethics for reselling domain names. Comments and suggestions are welcome.

Rules

These seem like some pretty definite should-be rules:

  • The sale price should not be in excess of twice the amount invested in the domain's registration (i.e. the initial registration plus renewal fees).
  • The seller may make efforts to ensure that the domain will be used as the home for a site that is substantially useful, rather than just being resold to the highest bidder.

Some maybe-should-be rules:

  • The sale price should not be in excess of the total amount invested in the domain's registration, or $100, whichever is less.

Notes:

  • In the early days, when InterNIC was the only domain registrar, initial registration for all TLDs was $100 ($50/year, two years' initial registration required).
  • Do we want a binding contract to enforce the stated use of the sold domain, so as to prevent reselling to the highest bidder? Or would it be better to find some other way to punish fraudulent purchasers, e.g. a blacklist?

Issues

  • Enforcement: Once we have a code which seems reasonable to most people, how do we get domain resellers to adopt it? A number of tools suggest themselves, though I'm sure there are some I haven't thought of:
    • A banner which only conforming sites may use (much like banners provided by other trust-enhancing services)
    • A whitelist of resellers known to follow the spirit of the code
    • A blackist of resellers known not to follow the spirit of the code

Comments