[someotherperson]

It's a criminal outfit masquerading as a domain registrar. They go out of their way to protect blackhats using their services, refusing to adhere to their ICANN requirements of blocking users or domains registered through Namecheap that carry out major scale phishing and fraud. So much so that, with blackhats, it's the domain registrar of choice. Stolen credit card? No problem. SMS scams? Sounds good!

Do a WHOIS the next time you come across a phishing website or receive an SMS with an odd link. And then disappoint yourself with the complete lack of care when trying to report it to Namecheap's support.

Their CTO or whoever considers this form of enabling crime to be 'free speech' or suggesting registrars shouldn't 'police' or something equally as stupid when it was raised on HN a few times.

[nojs]

As a non criminal, this is a major selling point for me. I for one do not want to lose my entire business because I offended someone or failed to moderate a comment or whatever. And it’s smart business for them too - stay out of the censorship game as long as you can, because you can never win.

[someotherperson]

Yes of course until the CEO popped up and unilaterally banned all of Russia[0]. Or when they banned a crypto related domain on a single tweet[1] then unbanned it when people said WTF [2].

Blocking actual exploitative malware is a legal obligation, not "censorship." If they had a TOS that says "do whatever you want" then sure, but in this case they're just violating their TOS too.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30504812

[1] https://twitter.com/Namecheap/status/1489485337885921284

[2] https://twitter.com/Namecheap/status/1489504958596714499

[0des]

You realize a lot of their staff is pretty much next door to that conflict geographically right?

[ghusto]

> ... It's a criminal outfit ...

Refusing to police does not mean "they go out of their way to protect blackhats", it means they sell domains and know their place.

[someotherperson]

Refusing to adhere to your TOS, ICANN guidelines and legal obligations by turning a blind eye to international crime rings isn't knowing your place, it's exploitation and has horrible ethics regardless of how it can be perceived.

Knowingly taking money from criminals, likely stolen, is almost certainly a criminal offence.

[ghusto]

I'm sure if you were to provide them with evidence of your allegations they would take actions appropriate to their obligations. What you want them to do is that work _for_ you, which they are not obliged to do, as far as I know.

[someotherperson]

I (and many others) have provided full evidence and it's not actioned. Or I would give 20 domains with 20 subdomains -- all from the same circle, same time of registry, same phishing concept -- and they would only action one and stop responding to emails after.

Don't assume what I want them to do. They have been spoonfed the information and their Eastern European support staff/legal department doesn't care. Then their C-levels come on here and claim nonsense about free speech when quizzed about it.

[0des]

Just because they don't immediately cancel people you have issue with doesn't make them a criminal org. You should check out about libel because this is getting close.

[someotherperson]

I'd like the opportunity to actually have this heard in a courtroom. Although the FBI would probably do most of the talking.

[0des]

Sounds like added value to me