|
Aussie Domain Name Scammers At It Again Copyright © 2002 to Aardvark Net News |
Aardvark actively encourages other sites to link to its pages.
Dateline: 11:15am, 24 April, 2002, updated at 12:35pm
Despite having tried its scams in New Zealand before
and, as a consequence, losing its status as a registrar for the .nz namespace,
ING have returned for a second try.
A mass (snail) mailing which is delivered under the name
Internet Name Protection
Pty Ltd, advises unwitting domain name holders that "failure to protect and
register your domain name/s will likely require more money and resources to
recover your domain name/s from a domain name hijacking or cyber-squatting case."
Although more carefully worded than the company's first attempt in August of
2001, the latest direct mailing clearly attempts to scare domain name owners
into registering other variants of their name to avoid having their email
stolen, having their website traffic stolen, facing cybersquatters, and
preventing trademark infringement.
Not only is ING using their usual scare-tactics to try and sell companies
domain names they may neither need nor want, they're also charging up to
four times as much as other registrars to do so.
Analysing a sample of the letters forwarded to Aardvark appears to indicate
that ING has once again used a copy of the
Domainz database and
has performed some data-matching with data extracted from other top-level
domain databases.
This has enabled them to identify which holders of .nz domains have not
registered the corresponding .com or .net domains. Their pitch tries to
scare prospective customers into purchasing those names at an inflated
price through ING's service.
It would appear that, having been lost its registrar status for both .nz and
.au names, the company is now using a third-party to handle its registrations
for these top-level domains.
Aardvark is aware of several recipients who are considering laying complaints
with the NZ Commerce Commission, the Kiwi equivalent of the ACCC, over ING's
latest mail-out.
UPDATE 12:05pm
UPDATE 12:35pm
"We've fielded around 300 calls resulting from this so far today" Locke said,
adding that recipients of the letter should simply ignore it.
|