it’s allowed by ICANN by inaction or by lack of policy rules? or both?

in the case of (another) scam, the “add grace period” (this time practiced by different players), that was exploited for so long, it was a result of inaction from ICANN but also by lack of policy rules that permited the use of this loophole.

in the case of what a registrar can do with expired domains lets look at the following in http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/eddp.htm

”
3.7.5.2 Where Registrar chooses, under extenuating circumstances, to renew a domain name without the explicit consent of the registrant, the registrar must maintain a record of the extenuating circumstances associated with renewing that specific domain name for inspection by ICANN consistent with clauses 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 of this registrar accreditation agreement.

3.7.5.3 In the absence of extenuating circumstances (as defined in Section 3.7.5.1 above), a domain name must be deleted within 45 days of either the registrar or the registrant terminating a registration agreement.
”

i’m sure there will be extenuating circunstances for all the warehousing at Tucows, Dotster, and others.

and if we take as an example two of the most known and reputable (?) registrars, Network Solutions and ENOM, we can read in their service agreements that they do not feel obliged to comply with the Redemption Grace Period that is for instance imposed by Verisign on their managed gTLDs. they are so above the rest of the plain humans that they do not feel that they need to obey to rules, and can make their decisions based on their sole discretion.

to be fair, they, and most of the other registrars, give registrants a grace period to renew a domain after it expires without need of extra fees but this is a poison apple and i’m still today not sure if they can immediatly put a domain in Redemption Grace Period (see Auto-Renew grace period and the (technical) need to keep the domain in the zone for the registrar renew grace period in http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agreements/verisign/appendix-07-01mar06.htm)

all in all this is a big pot of mud that is a direct result of these legal “should”, “must”, “may” that open the door to all kind of dubious practices but that only exists because there are so many “big guys” that are getting big bucks out of all these scams and the “little guy” is allways being pushed around.

This is not a scam, it is unfortunately allowed by ICANN and registrars are able to do whatever they want with their customers domains, auction them off, let them drop or keep them

there is no possible reason for a registrar to keep a domain. none.

it’s even hard to accept the “up the ladder” trend in getting the domains at their early stages of expiration, where it is supposed to exist a democratic and equal opportunity to grab a domain (oh, you don’t have much money to bid? bad luck! go reg fee available domains), but a domain should be put on auction or return to the public when it expires. anything else is a clear conflit of interest and it is incredible how all these scams keep getting bigger until they are so absurdely evident that finally the competent entities take some measures.

you are welcome to contact me offlist (if so, please make sure you CLEARLY identify yourself) and we can see what is possible but at some point you are asking for legislation to protect yourself from yourself.

if you are a real domainer the best help you can get is with your domain management tools to ensure you do not let valuable names expire.

This person
Alex Fenemore
Tucows Park
*TUCOWS Inc.*
96 Mowat Ave.
Toronto, ON CAN, M6K 3M1
http://www.tucowsinc.com

wrote me:
Hello,

Thank you for your email regarding this domain name.

The asking price for this domain name is $499USD.
———

I find this company functioning with malice to request this kind of money for a domain that only cost me 9.99 to begin with. It is unethical. This behavior by Tucows needs to be dealt with. I would like to know who the owner of Tucows is to formally complain. What can be done for legislation to oulaw this practice!!!!