

![]() |
| ![]() | |||||||
|
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 (permalink) | |
| Platinum Lifetime Member Name: Dave Zan Last Online: 11-12-2009 09:55 PM iTrader: (1) Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,663
DNF$: 0 Location: Manila | directNIC Demands SlicksNetwork.com Hand Over Model IDs Whew, looks kinda extreme: http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/F....asp?coid=1014 Quote:
tell how this will turn out. This should be interesting.
__________________ Vidi, Vici, Veni! | |
| | |
| Sponsored Ads |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| Platinum Lifetime Member Last Online: 06-21-2007 09:22 PM iTrader: (0) Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 255
DNF$: 283 Location: Fairhaven, Mass, USA
Country: | Re: directNIC Demands SlicksNetwork.com Hand Over Model IDs Other registrar terms are similar.
__________________ If you need billing options and alternatives for your mainstream or adult websites, visit Other Billing Dot Com |
| | |
| | #3 (permalink) |
| DNF Addict Name: Ron Bennett Last Online: 07-14-2009 02:31 PM iTrader: (26) Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,372
DNF$: 7,978 Location: Wyomissing, PA
Country: | Re: directNIC Demands SlicksNetwork.com Hand Over Model IDs Registrars possess domains not registrants. If one wants near total flexibility and control over their domains, becoming a registrar is the way to go about it. For most everyone else, they are truly at the mercy of their registrar - careful registrar selection, having lots TMs, etc can help, but no where near as secure as being a registar themself. In regards to DirectNIC, they really are overstepping their bounds - it's one thing for them to share information about the registrant to authorities, but locking the domains is the wrong way to go; at most they should have simply asked the registrant to transfer out to another registrar. Ron
__________________ Domagon Consulting Services - Business Help and Problem Solving SeedCash.com - sow those economic green shoots. Make An Offer! |
| | |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| TheBest.com Name: George Kirikos Last Online: Today 11:06 AM iTrader: (2) Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,206
DNF$: 866 Location: Toronto, Canada
Country: | Re: directNIC Demands SlicksNetwork.com Hand Over Model IDs You're absolutely correct, Domagon. Under the latest ICANN Transfers policy: http://www.icann.org/transfers/policy-12jul04.htm The only reasons that a registrar can deny a transfer are listed as: "Upon denying a transfer request for any of the following reasons, the Registrar of Record must provide the Registered Name Holder and the potential Gaining Registrar with the reason for denial. The Registrar of Record may deny a transfer request only in the following specific instances: 1. Evidence of fraud 2. UDRP action 3. Court order by a court of competent jurisdiction 4. Reasonable dispute over the identity of the Registered Name Holder or Administrative Contact 5. No payment for previous registration period (including credit card charge-backs) if the domain name is past its expiration date or for previous or current registration periods if the domain name has not yet expired. In all such cases, however, the domain name must be put into "Registrar Hold" status by the Registrar of Record prior to the denial of transfer. 6. Express written objection to the transfer from the Transfer Contact. (e.g. - email, fax, paper document or other processes by which the Transfer Contact has expressly and voluntarily objected through opt-in means) 7. A domain name was already in “lock status” provided that the Registrar provides a readily accessible and reasonable means for the Registered Name Holder to remove the lock status. 8. A domain name is in the first 60 days of an initial registration period. 9. A domain name is within 60 days (or a lesser period to be determined) after being transferred (apart from being transferred back to the original Registrar in cases where both Registrars so agree and/or where a decision in the dispute resolution process so directs)." As none of those 9 scenarios appear to exist here, a transfer dispute would be won by the existing registrant should Directnic refuse the transfer. The ICANN Transfers policy trumps anything that Directnic could put into their registrant agreement. |
| | |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Yahoo! Tests New Search-Engine Ad Model | POLiSH | Advanced SEO | 4 | 04-16-2006 08:58 PM |
| Directnic = Hassle | bidawinner | Domain Registration Discussion | 7 | 09-17-2004 09:18 AM |
| Okay to post under two User IDs? | Watcher | Gold Cafe | 8 | 01-18-2003 12:08 AM |
| preference in directnic & godaddy? | PixelOptik | Domain Registration Discussion | 2 | 12-16-2002 07:40 AM |
| directnic vs godaddy control panel/ +others | PixelOptik | Domain Registration Discussion | 4 | 12-08-2002 09:09 AM |