Friday, December 7, 2007

GoDaddy Bug or All Systems Normal?

Last week I offered up a couple domains from my portfolio which I feel may cross the line as far as trademark infringement. The idea of giving away these domains to anyone other than the potential complainant kind of defeats the purpose, but from my experience - which is limited - getting these "trademarked" domains to the TM holder can be a difficult process. More on this subject later.

I write now because I transferred a domain to someone this week at GoDaddy and received the standard automated "initiating transfer" and "cancellation" emails. Now, to be honest, I have not done a great deal of transferring using GoDaddy, so I wasn't sure what to expect in the way of email confirmations. However, a third email I received got me thinking - something I don't like to do often. Think that is.

It was a third email from GoDaddy explaining the recipient of the domain had accepted transfer of my domain. However, there were also a handful of other domains listed. These are domains I never registered or held in my portfolio. My immediate thought was GoDaddy accidentally tapped someone elses account and transferred these domains to the same guy I was transferring my one domain to.

Upon discussing this with my wife, we determined the recipient must have had other domain transferring occuring from other domain holders and this list was a master list of domains he was taking in all at once. In other words, the domain recipient was accepting a number of domains from a number of other domain holders.

Why in the hell does GoDaddy send out one master email to the group? - which is what I suspect is happening. Shouldn't they just send out one email to the players involved in the transaction? I now ask the question, is this standard procedure or is this a bug in GoDaddy's system? Has anyone else experienced this?

I will ask around and if the consensus is this is standard procedure, I wont contact GoDaddy for the sake of letting them spend time optimizing what they currently have in place.

No comments: