• Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
managed wordpress hosting

Network Solutions-Why You Should Boycott

Matt8

Matt8

All? No, ALL!
NLC
They are registering any domain for 5 days that you search for at their website. Therefore, if you search for a domain at their website, they will register it and hold it for you, so you cannot go to another place to purchase that domain [like GoDaddy, for ex]

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/08/1920215&from=rss



I even tried being flat out offensive with a domain and it was still automatically registered;

Now, I would never condone people doing this sort of thing for humor, but on the off chance you do, it would be interesting to see what you come up with.


Domain Name: F*CKYOUNETWORKSOLUTIONS.COM


Administrative Contact :
Network Solutions, LLC
domainsupport@networksolutions.com
13681 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 300
HERNDON, VA 20171
US
Phone: 1-888-642-9675
Fax: 571-434-4620

Technical Contact :
Network Solutions, LLC
domainsupport@networksolutions.com
13681 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 300
HERNDON, VA 20171
US
Phone: 1-888-642-9675
Fax: 571-434-4620
Click to expand...
 
Does anyone remember when you had to pay $90 upfront, for a domain? Those were the good 'ole days, where not everyone had access to a domain.

Sure, the price drop has definately helped the Internet develop, but this is a new low.
 
This isnt the first time ive heard of registrars doing this, i admit its a new low how much lower could you be..lol
 
GeekRack said:
This isnt the first time ive heard of registrars doing this, i admit its a new low how much lower could you be..lol
Click to expand...
This is so low that it clearly breeches the Australian Trade Practices Act (as it is illegal to prevent a competing business to provide their product to their customers which is exactly what they're doing). It in fact is such a large violation; that I don't see any reason why any competing Australian registrar couldn't take out legal action.
 
Thats just crap that they do that -- its bad enough that they grab those domains that are close to expiring that have a good alexa/PR after it expires.
Just tried it myself with networksolutionssuckssomuch (with all their availible extentions) and did a whois lookup:

Domain Name: networksolutionssucksomuch.com

Status: ok

Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com

Expiration Date: 2009-01-09
Creation Date: 2008-01-09
Last Update Date: 2008-01-09

Name Servers:
ns1.reserveddomainname.com
ns2.reserveddomainname.com

So their stupid move will in the end cost them more if people do it just to piss them off. Their mistake though
 
Last edited:
But as they're a proper registrar they can get their money back if nobody buys it within something like 28 days.. so in fact they lose absolutely nothing.
 
And its totally legal for them to. They are doing nothing against any of their Terms of Service.
 
Also they are lying in there whois searches as I searched for an offensive and random name about network solutions and it said the .co.uk was taken but if you do a search with another whois site it says it's available.
 
GeekRack said:
Because they do NOT have to follow AUSTRALIAN LAW!
Click to expand...
Don't be so sure. They do if they're practices are preventing Australian registrars from registering domains for their customers. Regardless, I was mentioning that fact just to show how low their business practices are.
 
No im positive, If a Australian registrar wanted to bring suite, that means it would be tried and heard in a US court. Meaning US laws would apply not Australian. Now they try to cite the Australian court ruling as precedent but i doubt if that would get to far either.
 
GeekRack said:
No im positive, If a Australian registrar wanted to bring suite, that means it would be tried and heard in a US court.
Click to expand...
What makes you think that? It isn't like the USA has jurisdiction over all TLDs.
Now they try to cite the Australian court ruling as precedent but i doubt if that would get to far either.
Click to expand...
HAHAHAHAHAHA that'd get you laughed out of court for sure!

But seriously; while you may not have exactly the same law as we have I'm sure it is illegal in the USA for one business to interfere with the business of a competitor. For instance, if there were two store-fronts with a shared car park; and each put up signs saying the car park spaces are reserved for their customers only (splitting the shared car park in two); then wouldn't be illegal for one business to park all their company cars in the competitors car park - and then pay their employees to direct traffic away from the competitor’s remaining empty car parks? That would effectively prevent them from doing business because the competitor has taken action to interfere with their business.
 
Meksilon said:
What makes you think that? It isn't like the USA has jurisdiction over all TLDs.
Click to expand...
No we dont have jurisdiction over all tlds, however Network Solutions is a US company meaning they are bound by US law.
Meksilon said:
HAHAHAHAHAHA that'd get you laughed out of court for sure!
But seriously; while you may not have exactly the same law as we have I'm sure it is illegal in the USA for one business to interfere with the business of a competitor. For instance, if there were two store-fronts with a shared car park; and each put up signs saying the car park spaces are reserved for their customers only (splitting the shared car park in two); then wouldn't be illegal for one business to park all their company cars in the competitors car park - and then pay their employees to direct traffic away from the competitor’s remaining empty car parks? That would effectively prevent them from doing business because the competitor has taken action to interfere with their business.
Click to expand...


LOL i guess you just the LEXUS NEXUS of US law right? To my knowledge there aren't any statutory or precendent laws on hand to prevent this type of activity. Actually what you describe in your above post is just good old fashioned competition. Business gets pretty dirty here in the states.

If what you are saying is true then surely Apple would be sued by Microsoft for there commercials and "interfering" with there business...not happening it's business.
 
Last edited:
GeekRack said:
If what you are saying is true then surely Apple would be sued by Microsoft for there commercials and "interfering" with there business...not happening it's business.
Click to expand...
Why? ads are ads; what's illegal (under the Australian Trade Practices Act) is deliberately preventing a business from selling/delivering its goods/services to the consumer. Let me give you an example of a practise that does happen in Australia - and is illegal. Let's say you get Estate Agent A to sell your house. Competing Agent B then goes to your house, enters through an open window while no one's at home - turns all the lights on and leaves all the doors unlocked and leaves. The owner returns home and thinks that Estate Agent A is untrustworthy because they left their house unlocked, and so switches to Estate Agent B to sell the house. Completely illegal activity by Agent B.

It's also illegal, for instance, to require a customer use a competitor's services to complete a transaction. This again happens, but is illegal and will land you in court, and run you out of business. The reason a business might do that is to make the other business to waste their time on less profitable activities, in an attempt to either drive them out of business - or otherwise hurt their profits.

My point is, and remains, that I would never do business with any company (overseas or not) if I believed any of their practises would breach an Australian competition/business law.

Furthermore, while you claim that doing this would not be a breach of Australian law because NS is offshore, the "Interactive Gambling Act 2001" makes it an offence to provide online interactive gambling to a person present in Australia - regardless of whether the online business is Australian or not. You can read the act here.
 
You can't half talk bollocks, if it were truely illegal then ICANN would also be operating illegally as accomplice and facilitator to the crime - do you think they'd risk that!?

It's business get over it. Your livelyhood or theirs, make your choice.
 
Decker said:
You can't half talk bollocks, if it were truely illegal then ICANN would also be operating illegally as accomplice and facilitator to the crime - do you think they'd risk that!?
It's business get over it. Your livelyhood or theirs, make your choice.
Click to expand...

Well ICANN could technically get away with it anyways because ICANN is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, meaning they control all of it anyways. Unless I do not know, every registrar goes through ICANN anyways, right?

Either way, I would say it is unfair, but seeing as the Australian rules and USA rules are completely different, doesn't mean that the Aussie laws would outlaw the USA rules is false, as said in somebody else's post it would be held in a US court, not In Australlia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top