I first began using Domains By Proxy from Godaddy in 2009 after the strong encouragement from Epik’s Account Representative at Godaddy. In most cases, the product was free, and otherwise near-free at $0.25 per year. For anyone considering Domains By Proxy, I would advise you to steer far clear of it.
Chronology of a raw deal
When I first began using the Domains By Proxy (DBP) product in May 2009, the cost was effectively zero, and the business logic of holding some names via proxy made enough sense that the consequence of trying it was tame enough. The account representative in Executive Accounts also assured me that it could be removed at any time.
On June 21, 2009 , I asked for privacy to be removed on all of Epik’s domain names. It never got done. Multiple reminders later, I was told Domains By Proxy had been completely removed from our domains. Come to find out on March 1, 2010 that only half of the proxies were removed. We now have a slew of domains up for renewal which are protected by DBP — and it is no longer free. Moreover, DBP will assess fees for processing written correspondence sent to the DBP mailing address.
Now the only way we can remove Domains by Proxy is to go through a tedious manual process to remove Domains By Proxy. Across thousands of domains, that is just not an option. Godaddy management knows this full well. According to the Godaddy sales representative, the company deliberately removed the feature for bulk removal of the Privacy product. Are you kidding me?
Moreover, if we remove the Privacy, we also reset a 60-day registrar-lock, making it as inconvenient as possible to transfer a name out before the name either expires or has to be renewed. On multiple occasions, names that would have been transferred out to new owners at other registars were renewed due to some combination of registrar lock or wanting to avoid navigating the Domains By Proxy maze.
Pick your poison: Free Crack or Roach Motel
There is not much debate that Godaddy’s marketing practices are brilliant. They routinely push the envelope for acceptability. The main envelope pushed to date has been one of sexual innuendo. Domains By Proxy goes too far in making it even more difficult to transfer domains out of Godaddy while racking up additional fees for a service of questionable utility.
Now, I am an avid student of marketing models. I have two theories on the marketing model that Godaddy was seeking to emulate when they developed the go-to-market strategy for Domains By Proxy.
Free Crack
The Roach Motel: You can Check in but you can’t Check out!
Godaddy’s unofficial workaround for getting rid of Domains By Proxy
Meanwhile, on this past Friday, the Account Representative in Executive Accounts suggested a work-around. Here are the steps:
1. Create a new Godaddy account.
2. Push thousands of names into the new account — but be careful to leave the WHOIS details the same as this will reset the registrar lock.
3. Call him back to “Merge the accounts”. It may take a day or two.
I should do these steps because Godaddy deliberately removed a feature that makes it practical to remove Domains by Proxy from thousands of domains without having to manually do this one step at a time ?
Bob Parsons: Are you kidding me? Take down your Privacy Wall!
Another problem with privacy is that it makes it more difficult for Aftermarkets such as SEDO to confirm you are the legitimate registrant of a domain you are trying to list in their marketplace. And of course turning off privacy helps if a potential buyer wants to contact you directly (just this month I received an offer via email for a domain which is forwarded to EPIK nameservers and positioned well in Yahoo). I’m not sure how much of the spam email I receive is due to having hundreds of domains with my contact info available to the world but I suppose that is part of being involved in domaining.
@Leonard – Agreed?
I have also wondered if the Google algorithm punishes a domain which has privacy protection. I recently learned that the algo favors sites with a privacy policy and user agreement. It would go to follow that a domain operated by someone who may be hiding behind a privacy proxy would be more difficult to trust than someone with a known and verifiable identity.
I’ve always looked at privacy protection as the equivalent of the ‘extended warranty plans’ sold on ‘non-breakable’ items. Waste of money! (..and need. Initials and a PO box does the same) Of course GD et al, look at privacy protection as the ‘extended warranty plan’ …. that justs keeps on giving!!!
@Rob Monster
“…wondered if the Google algorithm punishes a domain which has privacy protection. I recently learned that the algo favors sites with a privacy policy and user agreement.”
Rob this makes so much sense if it is indeed true.
All of my developed sites have whois disabled as it was free at my registrar and I thought it’d be a good option as if any potential buyers/customers wanted to contact me they could do so via the contact form.
Now, of my four or five developed sites only one has a privacy policy, maybe coincidence or down to my poor SEO skills but this is the only one that receives search engine traffic at present. Food for thought!
Rob,
Forget about your domain’s creation date being set when you move them to a new account. GoDaddy was called out (by me first over a year ago) for putting 60 day holds on any domain that had it’s account info changed EVEN SLIGHTLY. That meant, if you updated your phone number for contact, your domain was put on 60 day lockdown. You can check out the full story about what the “profitable outcome” of this GD trickery was, and how they implemented it and when. (about a few weeks before renewal, when GD sent out their ICANN notices for you to keep your domain whois info updated – soon as you updated them, you couldn’t transfer the domain away, either to a cheaper registrar, or by selling it.)
I’ve written two articles on my blog, but this one is the easiest to read:
https://www.successclick.com/can-godaddy-really-be-the-choice-of-domainers_2008_11_19/
Oh, you want great domain management and FREE privacy? Fabulous.com.
Some years ago I had some domains there with DBP, a dozen or so, but I removed it a long time ago… it isn’t worth the problems.
This is a great post for newbies to learn from. Simply avoid Godaddy like the plague and use a professional registrar like Fabulous, Namecheap or Moniker.
And be sure to transfer out any acquired auction domains as soon as the 60-day lockup expires. That way you don’t have to deal with Godaddy’s sneaky tricks when either renewal approaches, or if you accidently tripped their lockup period.
We had privacy drop from domains with Moniker in different accounts at the same time and with no explanation or apology. I contacted support when I received an alert on one domain and after a couple of days was told that it had to be referred to someone in technical support. No response ever back on it but it did get put back on. I discovered after that privacy had been dropped on the same date for another domain in a different account. I mentioned this on Facebook and had 2 people tell me that they also had privacy dropped on domains on the same date.
Personally, I’ll avoid using privacy protection at a registrar level after this experience (I’ve had issues with other registrars as well). It’s easier to create my own than to risk issues.
Every time I used DBP it creates a new account. I now have several DBP accounts and it is a mess to consolidate them…
@FunkyMark – Yes, that is what I call the Roach Motel strategy. Creates a byzantine maze that is very hard to get out. Theseus and the Minotaur.
This is in 2 parts:
Part 1:
Rob,
GoDaddy is in violation of their “Registrar Accreditation Agreement” since their policies conflict with the “Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy”.
Here are some excerpts from the “Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy”:
“A registrant change to Whois information is not a valid basis for denying a transfer request.”
“A registrant’s objection to transfer is not valid unless it is obtained voluntarily.
This section of the advisory considers the scenario when a registrar requires a registrant to provide consent to deny transfer requests for a certain period of time (usually 60 days) in order for the registrant to update its Whois data.”
“Registrars that have implemented processes that require registrants to consent to deny transfer requests in order to update Whois contact information are not obtaining voluntary express objections and therefore such objections cannot be used as a basis for denying a transfer pursuant to Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy. ”
“To ensure compliance with Registrar Accreditation Agreement requirements, all ICANN-accredited registrars are encouraged to review their domain name registration transfer processes…”
“Specifically, registrars’ processes and documents should be consistent with the interpretations set forth in this advisory regarding Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy pertaining to the Auto-Renew Grace Period and the type of consent required to deny transfers.”
Source:
Registrar Advisory Concerning the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy
April 03, 2008
The purpose of this advisory is to assist ICANN-accredited registrars in understanding that under the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy:
1. Registrars are prohibited from denying a domain name transfer request based on non-payment of fees for pending or future registration periods during the Auto-Renew Grace Period; and
2. A registrant change to Whois information is not a valid basis for denying a transfer request.
The Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (“Transfer Policy”) was adopted by ICANN as a consensus policy in 2004 in order to assist domain name holders in transferring their domain names from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another upon request. The Transfer Policy is available at https://www.icann.org/transfers/policy-12jul04.htm.
1. Pursuant to the Transfer Policy, registrars are prohibited from denying domain name transfer requests based on non-payment of fees for pending or future registration periods during the Auto-Renew Grace Period.
This section of the advisory considers the scenario when a registrar denies a transfer request made by the registrant during the Auto-Renew Grace Period, if the registrant has not paid for renewal.
Pursuant to Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy, registrars are permitted to deny outgoing transfers of gTLD domain names only in the limited circumstances specifically enumerated by the Transfer Policy. One of these circumstances is:
5. No payment for previous registration period (including credit card charge-backs) if the domain name is past its expiration date or for previous or current registration periods if the domain name has not yet expired. In all such cases, however, the domain name must be put into “Registrar Hold” status by the Registrar of Record prior to the denial of transfer.
The Transfer Policy further states that, “Instances when the requested change in Registrar may not be denied include, but are not limited to: Nonpayment for a pending or future registration period…”
In those cases where a registrant has paid all past registration fees, but has not paid for renewal, and the domain name is in the Auto-Renew Grace Period, registrars are prohibited from denying a transfer request, as a registration in the Auto-Renew Grace Period is either a “pending or future” registration, during which time the Transfer Policy prohibits denial of transfers on the basis of non-payment.
While issues related to domain name transfers initiated during the Auto Renew Grace period are under consideration by the GNSO’s Transfers Working Group, ICANN’s intention with this advisory is to provide clarification of existing policy.
Registrars are advised that under the Transfer Policy they may not deny a transfer request on the basis of non-payment of fees during the Auto-Renew Grace Period, unless the denial is based on non-payment for a past registration period. Registrars that impose policies or procedures on their registrants that are contrary to this determination are in violation of the Transfer Policy.
2. A registrant change to Whois information is not a valid reason to deny a transfer request.
A registrant’s objection to transfer is not valid unless it is obtained voluntarily.
This section of the advisory considers the scenario when a registrar requires a registrant to provide consent to deny transfer requests for a certain period of time (usually 60 days) in order for the registrant to update its Whois data.
Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy enumerates nine independent bases that a registrar may rely on to deny a domain name transfer request. Registrant updates to Whois contact details is not enumerated as a valid basis to deny a transfer request in the Transfer Policy. In addition, ordinary changes to Whois data fields are not evidence of fraud and therefore not a basis to deny a domain name transfer request.
Pursuant to Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy, registrars are permitted to deny transfer requests if they have obtained, “6. Express written objection to the transfer from the Transfer contact. (e.g. – email, fax, paper document or other processes by which the Transfer Contact has expressly and voluntarily objected through opt-in means)”. While the language in parenthesis is provided as an example in paragraph enumerated 6 of Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy, this language is instructive regarding what types of express written objections were envisioned as acceptable as a basis to deny a transfer request – only those objections that are provided expressly and voluntarily.
Subsection 3.7.7.1 of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (“RAA”) requires registrars to include language in their registration agreements that obligates registrants to maintain “accurate and reliable contact details and promptly correct and update them during the term of the…registration.” By agreeing to such language, registrants are under a strict requirement to update their Whois contact details when they change. Subsection 3.7.7.2 of the RAA requires registrars to include language in their registration agreements that authorizes them to cancel domain name registrations for any willful breach of these obligations. Accordingly, failure by a registrant to timely update Whois contact details may result in the cancellation of a domain name.
Registrars that have implemented processes that require registrants to consent to deny transfer requests in order to update Whois contact information are not obtaining voluntary express objections and therefore such objections cannot be used as a basis for denying a transfer pursuant to Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy.
Registrars are advised that any express written objections to transfer obtained by registrars through compulsory means, including express written objections obtained before allowing registrants to make required Whois data changes, are involuntary and therefore not a valid basis to deny transfer requests.
Conclusion
To ensure compliance with Registrar Accreditation Agreement requirements, all ICANN-accredited registrars are encouraged to review their domain name registration transfer processes and relevant domain name registration documents to make certain they comply with the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy. Specifically, registrars’ processes and documents should be consistent with the interpretations set forth in this advisory regarding Section A.3 of the Transfer Policy pertaining to the Auto-Renew Grace Period and the type of consent required to deny transfers.
Part 2:
GoDaddy is also violating the “60 Day Rule”.
Policy on Transfer of Registrations between Registrars
https://www.icann.org/en/transfers/policy-en.htm
Revision Adopted 7 November 2008
Effective 15 March 2009
Excerpt:
“Instances when the requested change of Registrar may not be denied include, but are not limited to:
Domain name registration period time constraints, other than during the first 60 days of initial registration or during the first 60 days after a registrar transfer.”
Note that it clearly states: “the requested change of Registrar may not be denied” because of “Domain name registration period time constraints” except as noted (The 60 day rule).
Rob,
If you contact Supervisory staff at GoDaddy and tell them they are in violation, chances are your domains will be released.
I know of others who have complained and were able to get the “illegal” 60 lock removed.
Some time ago while on the phone with a GoDaddy rep I noticed my domain had my last name listed twice.
i.e. Rob Monster Monster
I mentioned that to the Rep and the rep removed the redundancy.
When I went to transfer out that domain, GoDaddy had locked it because of the correction to my name.
I asked for a Supervisor and demanded that the lock be removed.
He refused stating that I had changed the WhoIs.
When I pointed out that I had not made the change but that the GD rep had,
my domain was unlocked.
But I, nor anyone else, should have to go through that.
ICANN requires accurate and updated WhoIs info.
GoDaddy has no right to lock your domains because you comply.
Privacy is an extended warranty – it protects you from spam and potential buyers… It’s my opinion that it’s useless. However its 100% profit for the registrar.
I have to admit I have had better luck with my Godaddy service. They dumped my privacy for me and I never have had an issue with the 60 day bogus lock. They can bypass that anytime if you ask. At least it has never been a problem for me.
@Rob love the title being a fan of Reagan and all…
Also I don’t believe privacy is a factor for SEO. Many domains are leased and the owner has a legitimate reason for privacy from the domains clientèle. I hope that makes sense…
It has been my experience that if I ask or demand someone within the Exec Team at GD to resolve an issue they get on it. I am pretty surprised and disappointed to hear that you have had such poor service Rob.
Luke Webster | DevRich.com
@tricolorro – Excellent perspective.
I have not heard from any representative from Godaddy, but judging from the tremendous number of page views to this blog post, I would say awareness of this issue is now widespread across the industry.
If anyone has been negatively impacted by Godaddy’s policy with regards to privacy or registrar lock, feel free to send me an email at rob – at – epik.com and we’ll keep you posted.
I have had similar experiences. I would never use DBP again. then again, I also found myself this past year having a lot of technical issues at Moniker, specifically a lot of my domains were (some may still be) showing wrong whois contact details for a previous address that i no longer even have listed in the account. this has caused me a lot of aggravation.
also, when i saw the thread post title it made me think of the end of Pink Floyd’s “The Wall” movie. “… tear down the wall!! … tear down the wall!! …”
Rob, why are you still with GD? Use a registrar that cares about domainers, or move over to your own cred!
@Russ – Fair question. We are looking to acquire a registrar but ideally one that can work closely with our dropcatch registry connections. We currently use Moniker for hand-registrations and domain transfers. My experience with Moniker and Don Lyons specifically has been consistently positive. And while I do think they under-performed in the Moniker auction last week in Ft. Lauderdale, as a registrar, I have only had positive expreriences.
One more from 2008:
News: ICANN to smack down GoDaddy transfer-blocking scheme
https://forums.nodaddy.com/index.php?topic=215.0
Wow, that sucks. Rob.. hope this gets resolved for you ASAP and all others who used the go daddy privacy feature. I never used it or any other whois privacy service because it’s hard enough to make a sale without confusing or deterring the potential customer with “whois domain privacy” contact info if you know what I mean. 😛
Roy
Wow, good to know about how they make it so inconvenient and took off the bulk update feature. I’ve had to go manually remove the domains by proxy junk before. It sucks. Thanks for the tip!