Right, but it would not affect the core protocol in any way.
Once a .eth name is registered there is nothing anybody in the entire world can do to forcefully revoke that registration, not the ENS core team, not any of the ENS Foundation Directors, and not even the ENS DAO has the power to do that. Courts can make whatever orders they want but they will not be able to force that to happen.
The DAO does have the power to change tweak certain parameters of new registrations though, like the fee structure for 3/4/5+ character names, etc. It requires a DAO vote with holders of the decentralized token from all across the world, but that could be done. So maybe we can think about what, if any, Registrar Controller changes could be made to further discourage squatting.
Terms of Service with rules on name squatting could also be drafted and ratified by the DAO, but that would ultimately be nothing more than a social construct with absolutely no way to enforce them on-chain.
The group behind the domains, Ethereum Name Service, is also against the practice. āWe are explicitly anti-squatting, and we have been for years. We think people saying, āIām gonna get the celebrity and brand dot-eth names, and Iām gonna hold out for millions,ā we think thatās dumb,ā Brantly Millegan, the director of operations for ENS domains, told Intelligencer. āItās just extortion ā itās just pure extortion.ā
@brantlymillegan I would put that anti-aquatting stance into a policy. My .02.
100%. And I am personally against the practice as well.
If we can think of ways to deter such practices, Iām definitely all ears. Just wanted to make sure weāre on the same page, in the sense that the core ENS protocol is decentralized and permissionless, which means that there are things that are possible and things that are not. For example, forcefully revoking a registered domain is not possible by anyone in the entire world. The protocol simply does not care, even if you have 1000 court orders. But other tweaks to the Registrar Controller could certainly be made!
Well lets talk about the registry controller. In the same way that you prove you own a DNS name to register it in ENS, what if you had to prove brand/personal identity with 1 or more other methods until you reach a threshold. this would require some AI, but its possible. Twitter, Facebook, Github, Google handles could all be leveraged. Tweet @ensnames some code to verify your identity/brand ownership. Or post some code on your facebook page. It wouldnāt solve all the existing problems, but it would get arid of a bunch of new ones. Especially if ENS wants to be serious about DID, which I believe it should. I think honestly ENSās greatest asset is the ability to register DNS names. That at least gives brands and identities some remedy and a way to use ENS until the .eth squatting problem runs its course. I think .eth has plenty of baggage right now, and I certainly hope the baby does not get tossed out with the bathwater.
Great news that the guy trolling his ENS squatting on twitter is another scammer.
This is worth considering:
Its pretty much was I was contemplating above. Its essentially what brantly.eth did, but really ENS DAO should own elonmusk.eth, until Elon comes along to get it. Unstoppable seams to have baked this in from the outset. You have to prove who you say you are to register a reserved nameā¦
@fhirfly.eth
Being that your Ethereum Domain is āfhirfly.ethā, I suppose --based on your posts, I am assuming you have the legal rights to use āfhirflyā however you choose. Would that be aa accurate statement? Iām just curious. You donāt have to respond if that is your choice.
Owning a name is not identity theft. Itās just owning a string on the protocol. ENS is not like other companies, which generally are built under certain countryās laws. ENS is a global protocol. There are multiple people named elon musk in the world. There is no clear owner.
Identity theft is a well-defined crime and you can talk to a lawyer to understand what does/does not apply better.
@accessor.eth I actually do have a permissioned right to use the name fhirfly. I asked for it because I respect otherās IP. Fhir is a registered trademark of hl7 international. I have no idea who registered fhirfly.com. I could dispute their registration of the name with ICANN, if I was so inclined.
I was just curious, is all. Iām not here to go after anyone.
Twitter usernames are beyond the control of the Ethereum Name Service et. al, entities affiliated with ENS.
Twitter is a publicly traded company on the stock exchanges where the shareholders and the board administration are able to vote on policies and the companyās future. I suggest that If you have aa issue with Twitter, contact them.
If you want to see a change, you could write a proposal as outlined in the ENS DAO Documentation. If there is a general consensus of support, it can be voted on.
I get your sentiment but to be honest with out going into to much of a long winded monologue your point is sort of mute. Any company that has their .com can utilise ENS to its full capacity with their .com as you mentioned before. This means that if they want to use ENS they can absolutely do so FREE of charge. All they have to do is make sure their user-base are paying attention to .com instead of .eth seeing as ENS is an NFT used for identity management and can be linked to a domain but is not technically a domain throwing around old web 2 lawsuits saying that ENS is going to get sued into the ground is very unrealistic and silly.
I would suggest we donāt conflate the terms āownā and āregisterā. Also I never said it (āregistrationā) was identify fraud. But registering someone elseās name could be used to aid and abet Identity fraud.
The best argument on this thread is that the market will ultimately take of this problem. The extortionists will not likely succeed. I donāt envy @brantlymillegan for owning elonmusk.eth. He couldnāt give it to me for free. Just the same I donāt envy whoever owns amzn.eth. The value of it is $0 to me, because the costs/risks of holding it outweighs any benefits I can derive from it.
The only possible benefit someone can gain from registering someone elseās brand or a false identity is through fraudulent means. Its spam/trolling at best. Phishing at worst.
And yes, as I said above, the saving grace here is that DNS names can be registered in ENS. This gives brands a way to utilize the system until the .eth squatting problem resolves.
It goes to the owner of the domain nameās wallet. Sorry for the delay, I have take a break from ENS, after spending a considerable amount of time on it.
Good luck with suing an autonomous organization. It can just get new directors. Perhaps itās unwise to be a director, but even if successfully sued it doesnāt remedy anything.
It was always intended to leave open the door to disputes. The ENS DAO can vote to do anything it wants including moving to a third contract with different provisions. The ENS stabbed everyone in the back who registered names in 2017 by introducing names with renewal fees, and absurdly short grace periods. It was hinted that 7 character or more domains would not face renewal fees, but that ended up not being the case. Most people thought shorter names and brand names held back would be used to finance ongoing operations.
Just the same I donāt envy whoever owns amzn.eth. The value of it is $0 to me, because the costs/risks of holding it outweighs any benefits I can derive from it.
Had to think for a second there on that one. I read it as amazing.eth. Someone is selling amazon.eth. Amazon.com has no legal claim to amazon.eth. They will have to pay up if they want it. Trademarks have scope, so unless you are trying to compete (and admittedly Amazon has hands in a lot of pies), you will be fine. Itās an English word with many uses.
In hindsight, the ENS should have held back the top 2,000 domains for companies in the world and a selection of trademarks to give them the right of first refusal for the first 10 years or so. It is in the interest of everyone that brands build on the ENS. I donāt think most people like squatters, itās just the nature of the game these days. You snooze, you lose. It was entirely obvious in 2016 to any company that Ethereum was something they needed an advisor on. After 2017, they had yet another chance. Then in 2019 they have no excuse not to have registered.