X.law - Lawsuit could impact how registries manage premium domains (2.Viewing)

What happens when a cybersquatting lawsuit is filed against a registry-owned premium domain name?
A law firm has filed a cybersquatting lawsuit against a single-letter .law domain, and the outcome could have implications for registry-owned premium domain names.

The X-Law Group, PC, a law firm in California, filed the lawsuit (pdf) against x.law and its owner.

X-Law claims the domain is registered through a proxy, and it doesn’t know who owns the domain name. However, the Whois record for the domain name shows Registry Services, LLC as the registrant.

Read more: Lawsuit could impact how registries manage premium domains - Domain Name Wire | Domain Name News

Personally I think it's a conflict of interest and should be treated as a monopoly on a domain extension.

I think all registrars/registry owners should not be allowed to register or hold domains.

Same thing goes in Canada for TBR, we all know there are large scale holds where registrars keep the domains for themselves. I think those companies should be fined and forced to resubmit the domains to TBR. Seriously, I can't think of a bigger conflict of interest in the domaining space.

PS. I also think GoDaddy needs to be broken up, they literally hold people at ransom with enormous commissions and they have the ultimate control over domain names they don't actually own. In fact I would argue to say they user other people domains to draw you in and then try to sell their own registrations instead.

MapleDots said:

Same thing goes in Canada for TBR, we all know there are large scale holds where registrars keep the domains for themselves. I think those companies should be fined and forced to resubmit the domains to TBR. Seriously, I can't think of a bigger conflict of interest in the domaining space.

Click to expand...

The problem with this is where do you draw the lines, and how could you know and/or enforce it. If revenue canada can't figure out who owns something, how is CIRA going to do it. Some cases (mine) are trivial... but what if it's my wife who holds the domains? A trusted friend? A legal corporation that I control? And I haven't even mentioned offshore yet. At the end of the day, it will come down to trust, and a risk analysis. If you're truly convinced you are getting screwed competing against registrars, then IMHO you probably should "switch ends" and buy or create a registrar.!? But yeah, can't stand GD... always been the opposite of a "friendly registrar".

bmetal said:

If you're truly convinced you are getting screwed competing against registrars, then IMHO you probably should "switch ends" and buy or create a registrar.!?

Click to expand...

It's not about trusted registrars, it's about the ones we know cheat the system, it's pretty easy to tell when you start digging.

CIRA doesn't have the right to open up a registrar's books to see who their customers are, to see if auction invoices are actually being paid for, to see if "customers" are arms length from a registrar, etc... So as much as it seems wrong, I have to agree that it would be too easy to get around any rules enforcement. It would literally require changing the registrar agreement to the point that registrars would be subject to yearly audits by an independent auditor. That would reveal any accounts that don't actually pay their invoices - thus revealing the insider account. But if those "customers" actually paid their invoices, it would be almost impossible to prove beneficial ownership.

One of the two presumed offenders has gone belly up anyways. The one I thought was going down for the count seems to have staggered back to its feet and is once again in the fight, unfortunately.

MapleDots said:

It's not about trusted registrars, it's about the ones we know cheat the system, it's pretty easy to tell when you start digging.

Click to expand...

The only defense is to not bid with them - but its tough when they win something you really want - which is the case for you last week...