> Of course the plaintiffs didn't listen when it was pointed out the even if
> they
> did have ownership/control of bogus names, it would not put one single $
> back into their RSU account, so their argument was rendered moot from the
> start ...
> but they keep clamoring ... and tilting at mythical windmills.
>
> Cheers,
> Eric Ross
> QuickNames.com
That's not the point.
The point is that since RSP's cannot do anything if the transaction is
fradulent, OpenSRS will become a *target* for script kiddies and other such
nefarious characters.
If word gets out that one can *still use their domain name* if one registers it
through XYZ, then i think that a significant amount of people are going to abuse
it.
Every ICANN accredited registrar will make chargebacked/fradulent domains
useless because it sets an example (assuming that they can't get a refund, which
I believe is an incorrect assumption). The fact that OpenSRS-registrars can't do
this puts OpenSRS-registrars at a significant disadvantage from a risk point of
view.
Is it a disadvantage? Yes. Is it a cost of doing business? Perhaps. But it would
be nice if the folks at OpenSRS could address this and give RSP's the power to
combat fraud.
Cheers,
-- +-----------------------------------------------------+ | Raj Dutt rd@voxel.net | | CTO, Network Administrator 518.330.7597 | | Voxel Dot Net, Inc http://www.voxel.net | +-----------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:35:28 EDT