GoDaddy Follows Qwest With Per Spam Charges
from the how-nice dept
zanek writes "A check of six major Internet Domain Registrars accredited by ICANN turned up one registrar that actually tucks a "per spam" charge into its Terms of Service: GoDaddy. If your domain is associated with a spammer, get your wallet out. Email Battles takes you through normal contract language, then shows you what's way out of line. Aside from this single registrar, we have found only one business this nervy... And you can bet Qwest is paying the price." The Qwest statement obviously refers to their $5 per spam charge. You can understand why these companies put the fees in there, but it's not realistic in a world where machines do get compromised. Shutting accounts down and demanding cleanup makes sense -- but per spam fines seem to go a bit too far.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Monitor your servers...
This is true but it should encourage people to patch and monitor their server. Possibly helping people to not be so lax in their security procedures.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Come on , let's get real here
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Come on , let's get real here
No, it needs to be hanging in a tree where you can keep an eye on it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blind leading the blind
Its irritating to see linux and unix evangelists putting such blind faith into their systems. Nobody is completely secure. (http://www.insecure.org/sploits_linux.html)
Even some networked printers, copiers, routers and network apliances are subject to being hacked and misused.
Do us all a favor and hold your tongue until you know what you're talking about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Come on , let's get real here
That's where the monitoring part comes in. If you seen a spike in traffic coming from your server you should probably investigate immediately. Has my site just become more popular or am I now a slave to a spammer?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Monitor your servers...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Blind leading the blind
True. *nix OS's are, however, more secure than Windows, for a variety of reasons (not the least of which is that Windows is a large, homogenous, and very tempting target).
BSD running on a non-intel-based architecture is about as secure as you can get without paying lots of money.
If you want rock-solid security, get an AS/400 or System 390 server. Even these are not totally secure, however; social engineering can break any computer security.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
time to leave godaddy
just registered another domain with them two days
ago.. those damn EULA are so long now its like
MSFT clickthroughs.. who really reads the whole
thing anymore. shame on me. But I did speak to
a rep there (who had no idea) just to confirm what
if anything I had to do on my end to set my account
up for easy transfer. One really wonders what prick
at these firms hatches these 'revenue' enhancers.
I for one will not take the chance of my umbrella
policy covering a web server (hosted by me or
elsewhere) never being compromised.
[ link to this | view in thread ]