*** Here Is A List Of Some Of The Best Domain Name Resources Available ***NEW YORK, NY – What if you had to have a legitimate use for each and every domain name you have registered in your domain account? What if every single domain name you owned had to be associated with a business website which served its own purpose? It’s not happening yet, but it could happen.
Every once in a while people ask me what I think are coming challenges for domain owners and I always have the same answer; regulation.
If you follow what happened in the 1-800 Toll Free Numbers business, new regulation could present significant challenges for domainers. I bring up the 1-800 model a lot these days because its scenarios typically represent how I like to predict the likelihood or un-likelihood of GTLDs becoming the “premium” of website addresses, which I do not feel will happen until some day when (877) and (866) are considered premium phone numbers – which again, will likely be never.
The toll free calling process began in the 1950’s but it was not highly used until 1966 when the area code (800) was created. Originally a human operator had to connect the number for callers but AT&T effectively improved the system, automating it in 1982, where callers would immediately and automatically be redirected to a business which had registered to use the (800) number through what is called a Resporg (responsible organization – sort of like a domain registrar).
It took thirty years for (800) numbers to run out and in 1996 new three digit area codes were created (sort of like what is happening now with gTLDs). However, (800) is still the “premium” number everyone wants although there are plenty of alternatives available (again, much like gTLDs).
The following alternative toll free area codes where created to ease the (800) shortage:
- Area code 888 (in 1996)
- Area code 877 (in 1998)
- Area code 866 (in 2000)
- Area code 855 (in 2010)
- Area code 844 (in 2013)
Area codes 833, 822, 880 through 887, and 889 are also currently reserved for future toll free use.
Vanity Phone Numbers (originally “Phone Words”)
Back in the 1980s and 1990s vanity phone number popularity exploded when businesses realized that “Phone Words” could be used to help consumers remember their phone numbers in marketing campaigns such as radio ads where replacing the digits of a telephone number with the numbers’ corresponding letters were much better and represented special meanings such as 1-800-FLOWERS, 1-800-MATTRESS and 1-800-GOT-JUNK for example.
By 1996 there were no more (800) numbers available and new toll free area codes were created.
So what does this have to do with domain names?
Today, the hoarding of toll-free telephone numbers is prohibited by CFR 2010 Title 47 section § 52.105 Warehousing (guidelines for the registry) and § 52.107 Hoarding (guidelines for the consumer) which states, in part:
- Toll free subscribers shall not hoard toll free numbers.
- No person or entity shall acquire a toll free number for the purpose of selling the toll free number to another entity or to a person for a fee.
- Routing multiple toll free numbers to a single toll free subscriber will create a rebuttable presumption that the toll free subscriber is hoarding or brokering toll free numbers.
Could this happen to domain names?
The first provision above 1) would mean that you could not own multiple domain names if you were not using them, 2) would mean that you could not purchase domain names with the sole purpose of selling the domain name to someone else and 3) would mean you could not purchase alternative domain names and redirect them to a website.
I’m not going to get into the “Warehousing” provisions as they represent similar provisions and rules, but for the Resporgs themselves. These are also designed to eliminate hoarding or holding too, but at the “registry” level. However, warehousing is already forbidden on the registry-end according to the Registrars Accreditation Agreement (RAA) (3.7.9).
Provision 52.107 was implanted by the Federal Communications Commission in and around the year 2002 from what I can find online, roughly six years after the 1800 numbers began to run out. There are currently over 125 million .com domain names registered according to Verisign (325 million total), with every dictionary word and near every short meaningful combination taken. With that said, it seems “the writing is on the wall” for some sort of regulation to deter the holding or “Hoarding” of domain names at some point.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has concluded that hoarding, defined as the acquisition of more toll free numbers than one in-tends to use for the provision of toll free service, as well as the sale of a toll free number by a private entity for a fee, is contrary to the public interest in the conservation of the scarce toll free number resource and contrary to the FCC’s responsibility to promote the orderly use and allocation of toll free numbers.
Since this regulation was created by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), not by ICANN (The Internet Corporation for Names and Numbers) – the body that typically makes the “rules or the road” for domains – this brings up the whole “Net Neutrality” debate. Reclassifying high-speed Internet service as a telecommunications service makes something like this very plausible to consider, if not in the past, with the Internet being strictly an Information Service, but in coming years – now that it is a telecom service.
- Could the FCC adopt some form of restriction or regulation on Internet domain names now that the Internet is a telecommunication service?
- If not the FCC having authority, could the FCC pressure ICANN to implement some sort of regulation on domain names?
Either way, whether created and implemented by the FCC or by ICANN, or both, that wouldn’t make much difference; it’s the rule itself – if it were ever to be created.
Now I am not saying that this is going to happen, but I am bringing up the possibility that it certainly could happen. Sometimes trying to forecast what could happen in the future can be done by simply examining what has happened in the past. If it were deemed necessary for regulating the holding or hoarding of toll-free numbers, why not eventually the holding or hoarding of domain names? It’s certainly worth at least thinking about it because it is better to have a plan of action rather than to be caught totally off guard.
The internet was created in 1983 with the very first domain name being Symbolics.com, registered on March 15, 1985, just about thirty years ago. If history were to repeat itself, it would be right around now where a significant concern would form for the control on registration and use of web site addresses (of course for the good of the consumer).
What say you? Do you foresee coming regulation related to the “Hoarding” and “Brokering” of Internet domain names?
About The Author: John Colascione is Chief Executive Officer of Internet Marketing Services Inc. He specializes in Website Monetization, is a Google AdWords Certified Professional, authored a ‘how to’ book called ”Mastering Your Website‘, and is a key player in several Internet related businesses through his search engine strategy brand Searchen Networks®
Interesting analogy but the FCC can’t regulate the world & there is no shortage of names as there is with 10 digit toll-free numbers phone numbers. Thousands of domains drop everyday, millions each month. It would be tough to argue that we’re running out. Also, domain names have been bought and sold all along, not just recently. But, always good to have someone watching your back, like the Internet Commerce Association.
Great post!
I can already imaging the lawsuits from domainers with multiple domain names worth in the range of xx,xxx – x,xxx,xxx – xx,xxx,xxx… to fight such a law from ever happening.
What about the domainers that have invested in hundred’s or thousands of domain names. What going to come of their investments do they loose it all?
Think the difference is 800 numbers have a finite amount and that the number remaining was dwindling quickly, unlike domains where the combinations are unlimited.
Secondly who would push for such a change for domain names? Large corporations often own thousands/tens of thousands. Even politicians often own multiple unused domains.
As far as coming up with a “plan of action” why would people plan for unlikely events like that. What if there was rules about hoarding cars, realestate or beanie babies? Should plan plan for all these unlikely events?
@Snoopy
If so, creating the alternative area codes could have solved the problem by itself.
Who pushed for Domain Tasting provisions?
The ICANN $0.20 fee was implemented to deal with Domain tasting.
And as far as registry warehousing,
the Registrars Accreditation Agreement (RAA) currently does not disallow this practice.
Food for thought; hoarding/brokering on the consumer side next?
I don’t know if alternative area codes solves it John, because everyone wants 800 numbers, and even if you create others they are still limited to 7 million numbers each. It is not like the domain name system where the current limitation is so large the I can’t even calculate that number myself (approximately 37 to the power of 63).
Nobody hoards domain names just because they are domain names, it isn’t like 800 number or some of the issues that were happening with IP address a while ago. The number are just too large, supply is near unlimited. Of course there is always going to be a lack of valuable .com domains, but the situation facing 800 was people taking absolutely everything regardless of quality until nothing at all was left.
Re: Domain tasting fees, they don’t negatively effect anyone important politically, it is something easy to bring in. Try telling Google or Donald Trump they can’t store unused domains though, that has little chance of ever becoming a law.
You did NOT think though what you typed, you said there are 125 MILLION domain names, true so many more could be registered.
Error #1 you made….
800- has only 9,999,999 possible combo (7 Digits), many of which are “not possible” so lets say each 800, 888, 877, etc. 10 Million to make it easy.
There is only 50,000,000 available with 5 prefixes or 100,000,000 with 10 prefixes. Much different than domain names.
Total domain names POSSIBLE using JUST 7 , 26 Chars, 10 digits, and _ (underscore) = so 7 to the 37th power =
18,562,115,921,017,600,000,000,000,000,000
That many domain names ….
A easier way to write it is: 1.85621E+31
I guess if you had numerical analysis, calculus in college or some form of basic algebra in the 7th grade you would understand the numbers part I just presented.
The possible (and mostly WORTHLESS domains) have not been registered.
Point #2:
Powerful companies will tell you to ____ ___!
Microsoft is a major “hoarder of domains” with over 20,000. 90% of which are NOT used and will never will be used.
Do you think Microsoft will say, ok will we delete 16,000 unused domains … YEA RIGHT …
That is two examples of what you missed with simply thinking about the regulations you described will not happen.
What will probably happen if you live in the USA with “THICK WHOIS” a person will be tied to each domain for law enforcement to track back to a responsible party.
From ALL whois now you will see a NEW line added in the past year called ID:
Every ID is blank for now, after THICK whois is done, they will start to back track each domain to a “person” to sue if there is “bad use” of the domain.
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: Domain Administrator
So if you “park” the domain and the parking company allow a advertiser to somehow download “malware” to a end users computer, they know who to chase down … not the advertiser the domain/website OWNER.
That will hurt business …
This is like planning for when an asteroid hits your house: POINTLESS.
“Now I am not saying that this is going to happen”
Exactly.
End of discussion.
@Konstantinos,
I will be sure to point you back to this article in five years 🙂
(if it does) – would suck for industry. Not looking for it to happen, just thinking about if it did.,
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/meteorite-hit-suburban-calif-house/
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/04/24/meteorite-connecticut_n_3144668.html
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Another-meteorite-hits-house-in-Conn-4505488.php
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/5511619/14-year-old-hit-by-30000-mph-space-meteorite.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/714528/METEOR-SMASHES-AUSTRALIA-space-rock-queensland
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/meteorite-strikes-alabama-woman
… you just never know.
Like I said: pointless.
A very interesting question to ask however. I wonder what big companies like Facebook, Google, Amazon and the rest will do with those thousands of domains that they own and direct to their main websites. I don’t see it happening. There’s big money to fight such regulation before it even gets to a discussion table.
That sounds good; hope so,.
Assuming only the US does this, it would do nothing but stun the economy. The overseas market would boom and we’d be cut out of all that money. Not likely. The only way I see this ever becoming possible is if ICANN implements it as a policy, and historically as far as I know, they seem disinterested in putting an end to domaining.
I think this would actually be a good thing, because it would free up many domain names for use on proper sites. Domainers or companies who owned premium domain names worth a lot of money could easily circumvent this by putting up a simple unique website on each domain. Companies who own typos of their own domains and redirect these to their own website could be exempted.
I know many people who want to create websites are very frustrated by the current situation.
And this is probably the only reason it would ever happen. If you read (above) the comments from the FTC on their reasoning for implementing such rules when it came to the 800 numbers, it is a clear indication that the intent to protect what it “contrary to the public interest”
Would never happen, it would hurt first and foremost, ALL the Registrars. It would be a bad business model for GoDaddy, enom, others, etc, their lawyers are the ones that would plan for this type of worst case scenario first, large investors second (Google) and business rights activists third. Registrars are all in the business to make money on any domain and extension, that they could possibly sell you, and then on top of that, sell you services hosting, privacy and on and on. They count on breakage, that’s why so many domains drop, that’s the domain industries form of breakage – the “drop”…., oh, and then there is the “drop” business making money…. lastly, if I am not mistaken, ICANN loves their cash flow too….
I would suggest we all carry on and worry about something else.
Nobody here has pointed out that the toll-free anti-hoarding provisions have been a total failure.
One company controls over 1.7 million 800 numbers alone. These numbers are the best vanity toll free numbers available. Their value is estimated at over. $1bn. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PrimeTel_Communications
The anti-hoarding provision didn’t prevent hoarding. What it did prevent was allowing them to sell any of their numbers, leaving this situation where they own a huge proportion of the best numbers.
@Sam,
I had noticed it does not seem to be enforced; there was only once instance where PrimeTell was forced to give back a number after a suit was filed; and then settled. Strange, but you’re right. Enforcement seems extremely weak for some reason.
The FCC does not consider what PrimeTel is doing to be “hoarding” as legally defined due to various telecom technicalities. (Basically, they are considered to be “using” the numbers by putting up their phone sex ad recording)
FCC does (sometimes) enforce the prohibition against selling them but you are allowed to lease them and other large owners of vanity numbers do exactly that.
If this regulation were applied to domain names, large domain portfolio owners would simply have to meet some minimal standard of “use” for their names and they’d be in the clear. It’s pretty hard to regulate the difference between a “real website” and a parking page.
I do not think they have any trouble doing this during a UDRP proceeding. 🙂
Was going to bring this fact up, but you hit it on the nail. The toll free regulations are a complete joke. Just like the war on drugs created more drugs, this regulation has created a monopoly in the billions of dollars just from hoarding toll free numbers that are mostly unused or used for porn.
For the domain story, the goods is in the fact this same company is a massive porn company, probably largest in the world, seriously. They own tons of domains too, Escorts.com which got seized in a raid many years ago because they were running an escort biz on the domain – not exactly the smartest use of the domain.
They get these #’s and unlike dropping domains, you have to be a resporg to get a # on your own that is dropping and if it’s a good # and this company or another company wants it you have a 0% chance of getting it.
the Toll free # business is one of the most corrupt industries on the planet, right behind the democratic party.
Please apply your mind before starting examine a hypothesis or any thought because it is obevious than no such laws can be made and no economist want that . One thing I make sure in date 07 feb 2017 you can cheak domain prices and availability any middle domain might be available at a good price but on 7 feb 2019 it can’t be found as world is going digital and African countries some Asian countries mainly china taking part in this. More buisness will be online and domain market may touch sky . A.k.gupta
Something that is already happening with the newer domains is the outrageous practice and implementation of charging sky-high renewal fees. I purchased a .rent domain almost a year ago. And, although my registrar was running a special low-price deal at the time ($1.88 per domain) to attract potential interest, it will now cost me $60.00 to renew it. And, it’s not just my registrar or .rent domains that have implemented this strategy. So, even if we never see this type of draconian regulation, the powers that be are already setting up toll booths at all the exits to cash in regardless of whether you’re coming or going. He who owns the gold, makes the rules, or something like that.
@Scott,
And think about those with .cars, .car and .auto – they’re $2,100 to $2,800 (depending on where you register them)
Like nothing I have ever seen before.
Yikes, don’t you think that money would have been better used for RENT?
I have to agree with you, the government (well the Australian one) does try to regulate everything. I can see a time when they set limits. Or even a domain tax, like a land tax. One that they can not just control the qty they can also make money off it.
It’s a legitimate concern, even if it is relatively unlikely. Ships carry life jackets; and the crew trains for evacuation, though nobody onboard expects to sink.
Most industries are vulnerable to meddling from on high, which is why they hire lobbyists to ward off clumsy regulation and advocate for beneficial legal provisions. Never underestimate the stupidity of politicians.
Domainers have their own lobbying group – whether they know it or not and whether they contribute or not. That’s the ICA (Internet Commerce Association). People like Phil Corwin and Nat Cohen pay close attention to contracts and regulations that might impact domain owners.
I’d say we’re unlikely to see restrictions on how many domains a person can own – not because of the ICA primarily but because of lobbyists acting on behalf of big domain industry corporations such as registrars and registry operators. Big players like Verisign, CentralNic, GoDaddy, et al. would stand to lose a HUGE amount of business if domain ownership were limited in this way. They’d put up a big fight and spend a lot of money buying influence with congress. Which is, of course, the way democracy works in practice. Elected officials listen to money; for, without it, they can’t campaign and lose their jobs to better funded rivals.
The risk is highest, I’d say, with ccTLDs. Government officials or regulators at the registry level in countries like India or Mexico or the Philippines might one day decide to dictate how many domains a person can own. Big companies devote most of their lobbying budget to their bread-and-butter countries – e.g. the USA. Elsewhere, the domain industry perhaps lacks the lobbying power necessary to apply the brakes to foolish overreach.
Don’t see it coming any sooner (if it ever does in the first place!)
You’re comparing domains with your toll free numbers? (phew..) Domains are not your toll free numbers which they f*ked up and couldn’t turn into better business model. Get a life, man. Domains are real estate of the world, not just US. It’s already a billion $ industry now, will hit trillions in a decade or so.
It’ll take many years for new gtlds to come to mainstream. Dot Com, Net, Org are kings, princes, and pricesses so far.
BRING IT ON!
God howd id love to see the government tell me i cant own my 3,000 .coms!
They may regulate it saying i cant buy and sell them , but they cant keep me from buying thousands of them to develop a business and sell it.
Please – id like to see them try that!!
Haha
Thoughtful article! Anyone saying it is pointless to think about negative possibilities is an idiot. I do not think this will happen but is is sure damn possible.
You disgusting male pigs cannot continue to hoard as you do and this article gives us perfect legal ammo against you parasites. Look at all your pathetic justifications for your sleazy hoarding, because you are probably too stupid to do anything else. I want a domain name that someone has been hoarding since 1998 and want to bilk me just to get access to it. And they are located in Cayman Islands. We all know who these people are and it is a matter of short time before we put you out of business.
Sleazy LOSERS.