Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
ICANN states '“184.108.40.206 In the absence of extenuating circumstances (as defined in Section 220.127.116.11 above), a domain name must be deleted within 45 days of either the registrar or the registrant terminating a registration agreement.”" however in many cases this is not being done by registrars. I am certainly no lawyer but am a loss of who I can talk to to get clarification on the policies and seek to get the domain I want released by the registrar.
The key issue I have is that with the particular registrar in the case I am dealing with they state that they reserve the right to " to: (i) delete the domain name, (ii) renew the domain name on behalf of a third party, (iii) sell or auction the domain name; or (iv) otherwise make such domain name available to third parties" and only after the 12 months they provide as part of their "Domain Name Expiration period" has expired, which in itself would lead me to believe that they are in breech of the requirement to delete the domain anyway as they might just sell it off themselves.
Have any other Slashdotters stumbled across this and how have you moved forward to try to resolve it? Or am I trying to take on a system that is just too large for one little guy to take on? I would certainly welcome any advice on the topic.
If you are curious as to the full nature of what I am facing I have put the full details up on http://www.technicalnotebook.com/asking-the-world/registrars-hoarding-expired-domain-names/"
Link to Original Source
I'm not saying your usage is erroneous. In some contexts it does make sense. This just isn't one of them. When you use language, you need to be sensitive to context, you can't just blinding plug in whatever definition suits you.
Unless you're in politics, of course...
Actually, the best way to fight piracy is to make a product pirates aren't interested in.
now you have steve watching every single thing you do on his computer, you will pay 130$ for service packs, and good luck getting parts or repair on that mac (which has a very high chance of failure within the first year)
Try using Apple HW instead of just bashing it. There are a lot of MB/MBP out there running MS crap because they are so reliable, and actually run software without machinations. Rating a new version of an OS as a service pack is ludicrous. Maybe you ought to actually use a permissions based OS before you run your keys the next time
And we're all eager to enable whatever DRM Microsoft deems to push onto our computers. In the form of 'updates.' Oh joy.
Yes, we're really eager for that, and it's good that the self styled experts at Slashdot agree that it's in our best interest to bend over and smile whenever Redmond chooses to install whatever they wish.