A domain can now say it is for sale, in DNS
49 points by shaunpud 2 hours ago | 20 comments

comrade1234 24 minutes ago
Something I've wondered... if you publicly say that a domain is for sale and someone has a trademark for it would you automatically lose in arbitration?

Around 1998 I registered a domain. Sony registered a trademark with the same name a few years after that. Someone on a Gmail account asked if he could buy it - I later found out he worked for Sony. I told him no - it's for a game I've been working on. I went on a vacation for a month and when I got back there was a fedex package filled with documents from Sony saying I'm violating their trademark and they'll take the domain.

I got a lawyer and he told me that I shouldn't offer it for sale as that would show the arbitration board that I don't need the domain. But he also told me that in order to fight the trademark it would probably cost a couple of hundred thousand dollars. So I could keep the domain but not use it for commerce...

In the end I ended up selling it to Sony but through my lawyer - I never stated it was for sale. But this was early on for domains and I wonder what the process is like now.

reply
collabs 22 minutes ago
Are you allowed to share how much (roughly) you sold it for?
reply
comrade1234 20 minutes ago
Not too much... $30K plus all legal fees I had paid.
reply
franga2000 17 minutes ago
[dead]
reply
Tiberium 37 minutes ago
reply
ricardobeat 11 minutes ago
Thank you, for a moment I wondered why a specification was being written by AI.
reply
layer8 8 minutes ago
It’s interesting that domains apparently are still such a big business, despite how browsers have been deemphasizing URLs and domain names, and given the prevalence of apps.
reply
thelastgallon 8 minutes ago
This is probably the only item that can sold without saying, "Used, Like New"
reply
Tiberium 32 minutes ago
(Not quoting the article directly due to HN's auto AI filters)

In "Common mistakes" this article first says not to add this record if you're not actually planning to sell the domain, then says that the record doesn't oblige anyone to do anything, that feels quite weird to me.

reply
zinekeller 19 minutes ago
This probably means that meeting the minimum price does not guarantee that you would be able to buy it due to other (probably opaque) criteria. For example, the seller might not want to sell to you/your company in particular, but is open to other people/companies.
reply
sokoloff 17 minutes ago
I can have something for sale without an obligation to sell it (depending on offer terms, including price).
reply
TZubiri 18 minutes ago
Interesting, a binding bid might be more useful than this proposed no-op slop.

TLDs like .online actually have a registrar-based dynamic pricing system based on internal rules, like domain size, presence in word lists, plurality, etc... And their distribution of available to taken names is quite good. It's different, which is already good, no one needs yet another TLD with the uncreative allocation system of copying the .com, we need variety, and I feel a binding DNS based offer system might make for a aftermarket-based continuation of the successful .online experiment.

But if the offer is not binding, then it's just an advertisement, no consideration, no contract, unlikely to amount to anything materially different than a 'domain for sale' HTML pages. In fact, if the HTML page has a buy now button, it's effectively an offer that can be accepted just by clicking the buttons and inputting cc info, so it's even better than a non binding DNS record.

Also, let's stop using TXT for everyone, why is everyone such a pussy about actually using record types? Do we really need every tool to be compliant out of the box? What's wrong with forcing vendors that want to be compliant to actually write like 20 lines of code and formally implementing support for the feature?

reply
sokoloff 15 minutes ago
> why is everyone such a p**** about

We can do a lot better than using non-inclusive language like this. There are better ways to express the underlying concept.

reply
mentos 22 minutes ago
“This domain is somewhat worn.” -UO joke
reply
riddlemethat 35 minutes ago
Wonderful. Another tool for domain campers. Just what standards bodies should be spending time on…
reply
spicybright 23 minutes ago
I don't get the point, if someone is selling a domain the only content on the site will be advertising that. And you can bet people will forget to delete or not update the record as needed, making it kind of useless.
reply
rhplus 16 minutes ago
A parked domain would potentially make more money hosting AI generated “content” to improve its SEO and passive ad revenue. That’s why invested interests have pushed for this side-channel “For sale” sign.
reply
dietr1ch 27 minutes ago
This is what really sucks about domain names
reply
TZubiri 25 minutes ago
my slop detection instinct is so good that I can tell it's slop before even clicking the link. I precogged the neon colors of the website, the pill modals, the 'it's not X, it's Y', the emdashes...
reply
progval 10 minutes ago
It's indeed written by Claude, like most of the website: https://github.com/jdevalk/specification.website/commit/99b1...
reply
noman-land 21 minutes ago
From now on it's the publishers who have to solve a captcha.
reply