Maybe I dreamed this. ICANN rule regarding unused domains?

[csdude55]

I would have sworn that ICANN had a rule against domains sitting unused for years, and they would consider reclaiming them.

Did I dream that, or is it real?

There's a domain that my company really needs, I can't grow without it and business has been stagnant for about a decade because of it. An 80+ year old woman owns it; her husband bought it in 1999 and used it for a 1-page site until he died in 2001, and it's just gone to a 404 ever since.

The current registration ends in 2030!

I've sent letters, email, and phone calls, with no response. I'm beyond desperate, so if ICANN has a rule against a 4-letter .COM domain sitting unused for over 20 years then I'd be very tempted to report it.

[phranque]

wishful thinking.

the UDRP is a three part test:
- the domain owner has no rights to it
- you have rights to it
- the domain owner acted in bad faith

it would be impossible to prove "bad faith" considering the stated facts.

[Amrita]

The Biden administration is currently trying to push a law through that would basically make domain squatting not illegal but basically have no rights to names that aren't being used, and they will be reclaimed under some cybersecurity act I cannot remember the name of the bill off hand. The basic summary though is that any domain that is being just held for resale or not with an active site on it can be taken from the owner and given to somebody else, so you may soon have some opportunity to try that but if you are a domain reseller at all then of course that is bad news.

The way I look at it, is that if that becomes law then domain names aren't really worth anything because you will have no secure ownership of your domain if a panel decides somebody else needs it more than you do, at that point why even bother registering one.

I almost forgot, they are also working to end domain privacy so you will be required to put your real home address on the WHOIS and keep it public to maintain ownership of the domain.

[jmccormac]

Some of the new gTLDs had specific regulations on usage and development but that was intended to prevent speculative abuse. Don't think that there are any rules on domain names in the legacy gTLDs (.COM etc) not being used for websites because it would be rather difficult to enforce. Approximately 70% of .COM has no developed websites. It is worse for some of the new gTLDs where usage can be under 10% (>90% unused). Just because a domain name is not used for a website it does not mean that the domain name is unused. It may be a mail-only domain name. It may be used for DNS or infrastructure.

Regards...jmcc

[jmccormac]

There is a US act that covers cybersquatting. ( https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-106publ113/html/PLAW-106publ113.htm )

This is a completely different thing to "domain squatting" which really doesn't exist except in the minds of those who see a domain name that they wanted that has been registered by someone else. The one year renewal rate for .COM is already around 55%. That means that around 45% of first year .COM domain names are dropped. About 8% of .COM is currently on sale on sales and auction websites. That's approximately 12.7 million domain names.

The UDRP process is over 20 years old and many other TLDs have their own variant.

As for domain privacy and WHOIS, the WHOIS system for the ICANN gTLDs is being replaced by RDAP. The response to GDPR by ICANN has effectively ensured that millions of domain names have WHOIS privacy by default. The replacement system has options so that only various elements of information will be published. There are some ongoing debates about whether a domain name has been registered by a natural person and would qualify for a smaller set of WHOIS data to be made available or registered by a legal person (company/business). The latter would have more information provided in a lookup. The problem with this approach is that different countries and jurisdictions have different ideas about what is a legal person. Some of the ccTLD registries like the .DE's DEnic publish no registrant data for WHOIS lookups. And the sheer nutjobbery of the European Union's NIS-2 directive has to be read to be believed. The people formulating that one hadn't a clue about DNS or the impact of that piece of legislation.

Regards...jmcc

[csdude55]

Oh well. After 20 years I could potentially argue that I have a trademark, but she actually has the same last name so that would be unlikely to fly.

I really don't want to take it from an old lady, anyway! But she's seriously hurting my business, I simply can not grow without it. In my last letter I offered a flat $100k USD for it... it's been 3 months, no reply.

I know that the most logical move is to change the name of the business, but that's just not practical, either. I guess I have to try to hang on until 2030 and hope that she or her executors "forget" to renew it.

[Dimitri]

Did I dream that, or is it real?

Yes, your did dream it.

not with an active site

What about domain names used for emails? Or for private or internal use? How can "they" tell.

argue that I have a trademark, but she actually has the same last name

I don't think a trademark surpasses a family name. If someone doesn't have the right to use his or her family name, because a company operates with the same name, this is not right...

But she's seriously hurting my business

Sorry, but I don't think she, or her late husband did anything wrong. Do you mean that, some people searching for your business, are finding her site first, before you ?

offered a flat $100k USD

I believe that with $100k , there are certainly better things to do, than buying a domain name....

[csdude55]

I agree with your ethics, @Dimitri, and that she does have a fair and legal right to it. She hasn't done anything wrong, I agree. But if she's holding a premium .COM for 20+ years just the sake of nostalgia, it's not doing anyone any good. And inevitably hurting someone very important... me! LOL

Do you mean that, some people searching for your business, are finding her site first, before you ?

Not exactly.

I own the .NET version, but can't really market it offline because 90% of the people that see it would ignore (or forget) the tld and look for it as a .COM. They wouldn't find anything, then immediately move on to something else.

Worse, someone could potentially use the .COM version to compete with me, and take advantage of all of my marketing efforts.

We're just in a world where the only marketable domain is a .COM. Imagine if Jack Dorsey could have only gotten twitter.net, and twitter.com took you to a 404 page... they'd have never gotten off the ground!

I've done the math... if I had the .COM then I could spend $100k /month on marketing, and within a year could potentially have a gross revenue of $1 million /month. That's an investment of $1.2 million with a potential 1000% return in 2 years.

I have the investors lined up, I have the strategy and marketing plan ready to go. But I just can't do it without the .COM, so it's all sitting stagnant. It's incredibly frustrating that I'm rotting on the vine over here, struggling to pay the mortgage, knowing that I'm sitting on potential millions. And that the only road block is someone holding on to a domain name for what seems to be for the sake of nostalgia.

[jmccormac]

Or using the domain name for e-mail purposes? Perhaps her family uses it for their e-mail too? That's the problem with assuming that just because a domain name has no website it is unused. While the .COM is the de facto US ccTLD, there's another option. You could, if it is available, register the .US and promote that. However, with only 1.8 million registrations, it is still a very niche TLD in the US market.

Regards...jmcc

[csdude55]

Or using the domain name for e-mail purposes? Perhaps her family uses it for their e-mail too?

It's possible, but if so then they've never posted it online anywhere. I have a Google Alert set up for any reference to the company name (with or without the tld) and have never seen any instance of it being used anywhere.

When there was a site on it in 1999-2001, the email on the page was Hotmail. And the best that I can tell, the current owner (the wife of the name on the original registration) is 91 years old.

I could be wrong, of course, but I would bet pennies to dollars that she's not using it for email. She could be, of course, but the fact that she's never replied to any email, text, phone call, or letter (even when I offered to let them continue using it for email forever at no charge) and it's never been posted anywhere makes me suspect that she has no idea that she even has it.

But admittedly, that could just be me projecting my frustrations out there.

While the .COM is the de facto US ccTLD, there's another option. You could, if it is available, register the .US and promote that.

I actually own the .NET, .US, .CO, .INFO, and .BIZ versions of the domain, but I can't really use them for that same reason: no matter what the billboard says, when they get home they're gonna type in .COM.

At least, a significant enough number of people would type in .COM to be a problem.

And worse, for all I know the current owner might die, and the executor of her estate see an opportunity to compete with me and take advantage of my marketing.

Even worse, I doubt that the investors I've spoken with would be on board with investing in it with these potential obstacles.

[csdude55]

BTW, as for the original topic, I discovered that ICANN does have a policy against it, but only if I can show that the domain was purchased in bad faith:

[icann.org...]

That doesn't apply here, of course, so I'm back to square one.

[Dimitri]

just the sake of nostalgia, it's not doing anyone any good.

I do have a domain name, which is the name of my late mother, and I intend to keep it until my death, I believe that nostalgia is a legitimate reason ....

If it's been 20 years that you are awaiting to earn $1 million / month , and have the money to spend $100 k / mo , then may be you should focus on thinking of a different domain , or business name.

Like for example, John Smith and Co, John Smith Co, John Smith Expertise, John Smith Cool and the Gang, John Smith 55, John Smith Design, John Smith Something, etc... or build something from the letters of your first name and last name. JS and Co, JS Expertise, etc...

Just saying that you are may be wasting too much time, chasing a dream, you might never get, may be it's time to turn the page, and move forward... I mean, it's too bad, if you are missing a potential earning of $900k in monthly profits ...

And in 2030, when this domain name expires, and if this is still legal, it will be automatically registered by companies which are in the business of grabbing every domain name....

[csdude55]

Let me reiterate... I don't personally have $100k to burn, I just have investors ready to go. So everything kinda keeps circling back to this same roadblock.

And in 2030, when this domain name expires, and if this is still legal, it will be automatically registered by companies which are in the business of grabbing every domain name....

Not even a big deal, other 4-letter-2-word .COM domains go for around $50k. And I'd be more than happy to pay that!

[phranque]

BTW, as for the original topic, I discovered that ICANN does have a policy against it, but only if I can show that the domain was purchased in bad faith:

you didn't see the first reply in this thread?

the UDRP is a three part test:
...
- the domain owner acted in bad faith

it would be impossible to prove "bad faith" considering the stated facts.

[csdude55]

I did, but didn't recognize "UDRP" so in one eye, out of the other... LOL

In my defense, there've been a few glasses of Monkey Shoulder whiskey between then and now :-D

[phranque]

i am astounded that you have spent 20 years desperately trying to obtain a domain that is worth millions and have never heard of UDRP.

[csdude55]

If you knew me in person, I can promise that you would be even more astounded at the things I don't know! LOL

But, I mean... if you don't know that something exists, how would you know to look for it and know the acronym for it? I'm sure it seems like common sense to you since you know it, but imagine you didn't know it existed. How would you know to look for it?

[tangor]

I know that the most logical move is to change the name of the business, but that's just not practical, either. I guess I have to try to hang on until 2030 and hope that she or her executors "forget" to renew it.

I'll state the obvious: If it is that important, and you have that kind of money to throw at it, why don't get yourself to her front door (or those who are caring for her) and do a polite knock and make your sales pitch.

There are times that email is simply not enough.

(At 80 perhaps does she read email? Are caretakers may be waiting for her to die? Who knows?)

[csdude55]

I'll state the obvious: If it is that important, and you have that kind of money to throw at it, why don't get yourself to her front door (or those who are caring for her) and do a polite knock and make your sales pitch.

Just to reiterate, that $100k would be investor's money, not mine. So it's not that I, personally, have that kind of money to throw at it, it's that I can get it in the right circumstances.

I've considered exactly what you suggested, but I have a few obstacles:

1. My girlfriend thinks I'm on a fool's errand and makes me feel stupid for wanting to even try.

2. The domain's WHOIS has an email attached with a different domain, and the two domains have totally different addresses (different states, even). So I can't be 100% sure which location is right. If either of them are right.

3. This visit would be money out of pocket, not from the investors. I'm pretty strapped these days, so I'm not sure where I'd find the money for the plane ticket and hotel. If it goes well then it'd be well worth the credit card debt! But with the girlfriend in my ear telling me it's a waste of time and money, it's hard to do it.

But you're right, and I suspect this might be the only move that might work.