.US and FOREIGN REGISTRARS

[wordznpics]

Neustar no star, Enom is a (not da) bomb
I found an Australian registrar who had hundreds if not thousands of .US domains registered. When I was told after several attempts to contact the registrar that they wanted $1500, I complained to the authorities. Neustar pointed me toward the conflict resolution via arbitration at $1600, and Enom refused to even enforce their own policy, that requires the registrant to comply with the Nexus requirements and provide full contact information. The registrar's name is Jason Namours, and he changed everything over naming the guy who was originally only his US-based billing contact Brad Norrish. Interestingly, the administrative and technical contact e-mails are still [email protected]. I think it's clear that .US domains are designed for use by US-based individuals and companies, and by foreign based companies which have a substantial US presence. I don't think an Australian registrar with a US billing contact qualifies. But I'm not going to spend $1500-$1600 to get a .US domain: they're virtually worthless when compared to .com domains of the same name.

 

[dvdrip]

Aren't you Canadian?

 

[wordznpics]

As a matter of fact, no. Just plain, old American

 

[DotComster]

Funny thing is that I'm not American - but as a reseller I can sell .US to Americans

 

[Anthony Ng]

>dvdrip: Aren't you Canadian?

LOL! CA refers to California here as oppose to Canada.

Actually, you don't have to be a U.S. resident to be eligible of registering .us domain names.

 

[dvdrip]

Well I know that cause I am from Greece and I sure own a couple of .us!
But not everybody in here knows...

Originally posted by nameslave
>dvdrip: Aren't you Canadian?

LOL! CA refers to California here as oppose to Canada.

Actually, you don't have to be a U.S. resident to be eligible of registering .us domain names.

 

[wordznpics]

If you read the Nexus requirements, it does mention U.S. citizens and corporations, and foreign firms with a U.S. presence. Enom asks registrants to certify they are in compliance, but they do absolutely nothing to enforce or investigate it.

 

[mole]

Originally posted by wordznpics
If you read the Nexus requirements, it does mention U.S. citizens and corporations, and foreign firms with a U.S. presence. Enom asks registrants to certify they are in compliance, but they do absolutely nothing to enforce or investigate it.

I'm sure when push comes to shove they will. Right now, its probably a tickle for them. If .us domains strike gold one day, that's when things will get interesting...

 

[wordznpics]

Yeah, but when push -- arbitration through AAA at $2,000 a pop for a single panelist, more for the 3-member panel -- is so expensive relative to the worth of the domain name, who's going to shove? I'm trying to get regulatory attention on this. Any ideas?

 

[Anthony Ng]

>wordznpics: If you read the Nexus requirements, it does mention U.S. citizens and corporations, and foreign firms with a U.S. presence.

Neustar requires that a foreign entity or organization has a bona fide presence in the States. And that actually refers to regularly perfoming lawful activities such as selling goods, providing services and even attending conferences!

http://www.neustar.us/policies/docs/ustld_nexus_requirements.pdf

In other words, almost anybody is eligible.

 

[wordznpics]

Would you mind letting me know where you obtained your information on the legal definition of presence?

Do you actually think that if I attend a conference in France, I have established a business presence or residence there?

Do I have a residence, do I have a business license, do I pay taxes, do I transact business, do I have property or maintain a lease?

THAT is what determines business presence or residence under most systems of law I'm aware of.

 

[wordznpics]

BO'NA-FIDE, [L.] With good faith; without fraud or deception. (Websters 1828 International)

Someone claiming to be compliant with the Nexus requirements but doesn't really, doesn't really fit with this definition either.

 

Perhaps this will help. From the usTLD Nexus Requirements published on the NeuStar website.

Nexus Category 3
A foreign entity or organization that has a bona fide presence in the United States of America or any of its possessions or territories.

-Applicant must state country of citizenship.

-Applicant must also (1) regularly engage in lawful activities (sales of goods or services or other business, commercial or non-commercial including not-for-profit activities) in the United States; or (2) maintain an office or other property within the United States.

Category 3 Nexus Certification

Prospective Registrants will certify compliance with Category 3 Nexus based upon substantial lawful contacts with, or lawful activities in, the United States.

Factors that should be considered in determining whether an entity or organization has a bona fide presence in the United States shall include, without limitation, whether such prospective usTLD domain name Registrant:

-Regularly performs lawful activities within the United States related to the purposes for which the entity or organization is constituted (e.g., selling goods or providing services to customers, conducting regular training activities, attending conferences), provided such activities are not conducted solely or primarily to permit it to register for a usTLD domain name and are lawful under the laws and regulations of the United States and satisfy policies for the usTLD, including policies approved and/or
mandated by the DoC;

-Maintains an office or other facility in the United States for a lawful business, noncommercial, educational or governmental purpose, and not solely or primarily to permit it to register for a usTLD domain name.

-t

 

[wordznpics]

This is the key: does a foreign-based domain reseller with only a U.S.-based billing contact qualify under Nexus Category 3:

Prospective Registrants will certify compliance with Category 3 Nexus based upon substantial lawful contacts with, or lawful activities in, the United States.

Factors that should be considered in determining whether an entity or organization has a bona fide presence in the United States shall include, without limitation, whether such prospective usTLD domain name Registrant:

-Regularly performs lawful activities within the United States related to the purposes for which the entity or organization is constituted (e.g., selling goods or providing services to customers, conducting regular training activities, attending conferences), provided such activities are not conducted solely or primarily to permit it to register for a usTLD domain name and are lawful under the laws and regulations of the United States and satisfy policies for the usTLD, including policies approved and/or
mandated by the DoC;

-Maintains an office or other facility in the United States for a lawful business, noncommercial, educational or governmental purpose, and not solely or primarily to permit it to register for a usTLD domain name.

I don't think so. Unless they can demonstrate They're in some other business than selling (or prior to selling, registering) a usTLD (or other TLD) domain name, they don't fit the Nexus requirement.

 

[Drewbert]

>I'm trying to get regulatory attention on this. Any ideas?

Join the ranks of people attempting to remove ICANN's power.

 

[wordznpics]

In this study of domains, one aspect they studied was the registration of .US TLDs by non-U.S. based entities.

"According to Neustar's Director of Policy and Business Development, the .US registry is and ought to be "a national public resource" (cite, PDF). In this context, evaluation of .US's registrations to date may properly examine registration trends with an especially detailed level of scrutiny. Registrations like those of Silver Back Corp of Antigua and Barbuda (834 .US domains including all-animalsex.us and alyssa-milano-naked.us) may come into question for disputed compliance with .US nexus requirements. In addition, while the resale of domains is permissible under .US registration rules, those who register hundreds or thousands of names for the purpose of resale may also find their actions controversial."

These two tables have some interesting info:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/dotus/usage-share.html

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/dotus/US-topregistrants.html

This second table shows that the registrant I mentioned previously, Bradley Norrish, was one of the top registrants fronting for a foreign presence.

He is a reseller who claims to be developing these sites, yet nothing ever appears. Interesting...