Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] two real-world examples of PEDNR problems

[Helen <helen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Definitely!
And I wonder if anyone else has seen the problem with registrants who 
think they "own" a domain name.. that they registered a number of years 
ago for a one year term.
A suprising number of registrants do think they own domain names.
Quite possibly this is one of the reasons they do not think renewing is 
all that important until they actually notice things like their domain 
being auctioned off.
Will this lead to ICANN mandated renewal notices that state "If you fail 
to renew your domain within x number of days it may (or not) be 
auctioned off".
You know, this might actually work?

Best, Helen
www.DotAlliance.com


On 16/01/2010 8:11 PM, James M. Bladel wrote:
> Agree.
>
> The first case presents a concrete example where an RAE missed more than
> "adequate opportunity" to renew and redeem an expired name.  And the
> second is a good example of an auction service protecting&  preserving
> rights of the RAE to redeem.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] two real-world examples of PEDNR problems
> From: "Tim Ruiz"<tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, January 16, 2010 12:17 pm
> To: "Mike O'Connor"<mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "PEDNR"<gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Not sure thee are PEDNR type problems Mike. In the first case it looks
> like the name went all the way the through the renew grace period and
> redemption grace period before they woke up. If someone ignores or
> doesn't renew until the name becomes available again, that's a different
> issue.
>
> In the second case, SnapNames' process worked for the RAE. When they
> realized it had expired they were able to renew and recover the name. So
> no recovery problem there, right?
>
> Tim
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [gnso-pednr-dt] two real-world examples of PEDNR problems
> From: "Mike O'Connor"<mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, January 16, 2010 9:58 am
> To: PEDNR<gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> funny how you get "attuned" to things when you're working on them. here
> are a couple of real-life examples.
>
> this first one is a great example of the degree of confusion that
> exists. the city of Morehead, Kentucky lost their domain on the drop --
> and they're accusing the buyer of cyber-squatting.
>
> http://www.themoreheadnews.com/local/local_story_015125424.html
>
> in a second example, the domain kat.com was pulled from a SnapNames
> auction -- bidding had reached $20k. i'm guessing here -- i bet the RAE
> woke up and got their name renewed post-expiry, thus short-circuiting
> the auction.
>
> http://www.thedomains.com/2010/01/15/kat-com-is-pulled-out-of-snapnames-com-monthly-auction-with-a-high-bid-of-almost-20k/
>
> food for thought.
>
> mikey
>
>
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone 651-647-6109
> fax 866-280-2356
> web www.haven2.com
> handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google,
> etc.)
>
>
> .
>
>