[dtobias]

Given this recent item about GoDaddy suspending domains without notice based on a complaint:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/26/1542218

What is Dreamhost's policy on similar issues regarding domains registered with them? Do they enforce any TOS regarding what the domain is used for (or allegedly used for) and suspend or remove domains without prior notice, as GoDaddy does? I'm asking because I have some domains registered through GoDaddy and I'm thinking of switching them in protest of their actions, but want to know if DH is actually a better place to put my domain registrations in that regard.

(Not that I'm doing anything with any of the domains that I think is remotely a violation of either GoDaddy or Dreamhost's TOS, but I just dislike on principle a registrar acting as judge, jury, and executioner like that.)

-- Dan

[moua]

DH host websites as long as they are legal.

I can't answer in the name of DH, but if there is a webpage with a big security flaw (with hundreds of username and password) it' normal to (at least temporary) disable this website.

When you have to act fast, you can't wait for a court or a juge to ask for it.

---
Get $97 Off with promo code :97USA choose your plan

[Raz2133]

Quote:When you have to act fast, you can't wait for a court or a juge to ask for it.

I disagree. While I can understand why a *host* might take down a site that contains objectionable or illegal content, I don't really think a *registrar* should be disabling domains because of content, unless ordered by the relevant authorities to do so. In my opinion, GoDaddy has set a dangerous precedent here.

As for DreamHost, I think the best option would be to contact DreamHost themselves and ask for their position on issues such as this.

Mark

--
Save $50 on DreamHost plans using PRICESLASH promo code (Click for DreamHost promo code details)

[rlparker]

Quote:While I can understand why a *host* might take down a site that contains objectionable or illegal content, I don't really think a *registrar* should be disabling domains because of content, unless ordered by the relevant authorities to do so.

My feelings exactly! The host has certain responsibilities, in the U.S., under DMCA, and I expect they will be presented with takedown notices from time to time. A registrar taking it upon themselves to "take down" a site (even for the "safety of the internet" to paraphrase the abuse guy at GoD*ddy) is just not right - there is no "process" or oversight except what they feel is appropriate, and I don't think they should have that power.

--rlparker

[nathan823]

I believe there must be come rules about this.

Save $97 (max discount) on dreamhost plans by using promo code: 97CRAZY.

[Shonky]

I agree with Raz2133 and rlparker, I don't believe it is the registrars place to be disabling domains, any issues should be directed to the company hosting that domain, since that is where the objectionable/illegal content if any is located. This is not a good precedent GoDaddy have set imo.

---
Web Hosting Review | Hot Product Directory

[Raz2133]

Quote:A registrar taking it upon themselves to "take down" a site (even for the "safety of the internet" to paraphrase the abuse guy at GoD*ddy) is just not right

I just hope that all the negative publicity over this particular case will result in some concrete guidelines on exactly what a registrar can and can't do, if such guidelines do not already exist.

I think that many of the people siding with GoDaddy in this case have 'missed the point' entirely. Allowing registrars to arbitrarily take down domains for content reasons is a slippery slope. I don't think anyone would seriously argue that the content in this particular case should have remained accessible, but it was not the registrars responsibility to remove it.

I mean, where do we draw the line? Will we see future cases where domains will be taken down because they contain content offensive to a particular government / company?

Mark

--
Save $50 on DreamHost plans using PRICESLASH promo code (Click for DreamHost promo code details)

[seiler]

But are there any examples of DH stepping in as a registrar and changing nameservers? They'll suspend hosting accounts, just like every other host out there... but GoDaddy basically hijacked the domain name, as a registrar.

Having said that, I've used Godaddy for years (still have domains there) and never had any problems.

--------------------------------------------------------
Save up to $96 at Dreamhost with ALMOST97 promo code (I get $1).
Or save $97 with THEFULL97.

[rlparker]

The discussion/situation you linked is not similar at all. In the linked situation, the *host* suspended operation of a site they felt had been compromised. In the situation the OP was posting about, a *registrar* disabled a *domain name*.

While the "results" may appear to be the same, there is a world of difference in the decision making process, and the various constituents' responsibilities and potential exposure.

--rlparker

[genesteinberg]

Quote:The discussion/situation you linked is not similar at all. In the linked situation, the *host* suspended operation of a site they felt had been compromised. In the situation the OP was posting about, a *registrar* disabled a *domain name*.

While the "results" may appear to be the same, there is a world of difference in the decision making process, and the various constituents' responsibilities and potential exposure.

--rlparker

Indeed, the way GoDaddy handles such matters impacted me personally, which is why I went to DreamHost.

Here's a link to an article I posted on the subject, which explains it all:

http://macnightowl.com/newsletter/2007/0...4/#godaddy

By the way, after just about a month, I can say that DreamHost smokes GoDaddy when it comes to performance, even though our bills are a mite higher now.

Peace,
Gene Steinberg
Co-Host, The Paracast
http://www.theparacast.com