[zarzavat]

This reminds me of the business practices of the Austrian NIC. Usually domain names expire if you don't renew them. In Austria, unless you explicitly cancel the domain name by fax, they just roll the registration over to the next year and then send you to collections[1] if you don't pay up.

There's no rule that domain names expire unless you renew them, at least for ccTLDs. It's just a convention. Conventions lead to assumptions, and assumptions can be used to scam people.

In general there's two types of businesses: businesses where you pre-pay (e.g. McDonalds), and businesses where you post-pay (e.g. a sit-down restaurant). If you take a conventionally pre-pay service and apply post-pay pricing to it, you have yourself a perfect scam.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/1bnjus/the_austri...

[nicbou]

This would not surprise me with a German service provider, although it got much better in the last decade.

[noja]

They do that or they did that? (you are linking to a decade old post)

[zarzavat]

Seems like they still do:

https://www.nic.at/en/how-at-works/domain-holder#id105

> I received a letter from the debt collection agency. What can I do?

> If a domain hasn't been paid for despite several payment reminders from nic.at, the domain shall be locked and the open claim handed over to our debt collection agency. As a result, the invoice must be paid directly to the debt collection agency. Please contact our debt collection agency for more information

Like TFA it's hard to tell if they genuinely believe that they are helping their customers by not discontinuing their service, or if it's a scam. I suspect a mixture of both.

[inigyou]

It's both. It's normal business practice in the German-speaking countries (a.k.a. DACH) that would be considered a scam anywhere else.

Basically, in most countries paying money is something that requires continuous enthusiastic consent - if you don't pay, that's the business's problem and they should stop serving you, and they may only recover payment for goods they've already given you and not received payment for. But in DACH, it only requires technical consent - if you signed something saying you'll give them money, then you have to give them that money, and you cannot rescind your obligation to pay, except as provided in the contract or an overriding law.

You went to Austria and did Austrian business with an Austrian company, you should be aware that Austrian rules and norms apply. ccTLDs are not generic, every country is free to apply any rules on their ccTLD!

[zarzavat]

> You went to Austria and did Austrian business with an Austrian company, you should be aware that Austrian rules and norms apply.

The consumer purchases a domain name from their registrar. Neither the consumer nor their registrar are in Austria. The registrar is the one providing the service of registering the domain with the NIC. The NIC can't just say "we have a contract directly with the consumer".

The registrar can write in their contract that "consumer must cancel domain before it expires with the NIC" or "consumer must sign contract with NIC", and if the consumer doesn't do that then the registrar can maybe (depending on consumer and contract law in their jurisdictions) sue the consumer if they don't fulfil the contract of sale. But writing in one contract that the consumer must sign a third-party contract doesn't imply that the third-party contract actually exists. The NIC cannot go after the consumer because they don't have any contract with the consumer.

[inigyou]

When I buy something from an Austrian company through my ISP, Austrian rules still apply and my ISP doesn't have any duty to stop me or warn me.

I agree domain registrars should display a warning. They often display other warnings, like that certain TLDs require verified addresses or that they don't allow WHOIS privacy.

[amarant]

This creates some very uncomfortable cultural clashes sometimes. I remember way back when I was signed up for a service provided by Ms. They did not, as far as I could tell, provide a way to cancel the service, other than to stop paying. Since I had provided them with automatic payments, my bank did not allow me to simply stop paying their invoices, I had to cancel with the provider. I talked to my banks customer service, they refused to help. So I cancelled my account with that bank and moved all the money to a different bank.

Rather more complicated to cancel that service than I would've wished, but hey, I got a better banking service out of the deal, so it's not all bad I guess

[inigyou]

Ms = Microsoft?

Being unable to tell how to cancel something is a different thing. You can contact their support. If they don't have support, or the support refuses, then you contact your bank, with evidence, because it's now an unauthorized payment.

This is separate from the cultural norm that you can only cancel with a certain notice period or by fax.

[inigyou]

There are, in fact, absolutely no US-imposed rules about how a country manages its ccTLD like there are on gTLDs (words).

[rafram]

By "US-imposed" you presumably mean ICANN-imposed.

[inigyou]

Yes? ICANN is part of the US, and has been strong-armed by the US government into imposing restrictive rules on gTLDs even though they appear like they're global.

[rafram]

Any actual evidence that the US government has control over ICANN? I know they used to have an agreement that gave the US some oversight, but as far as I know that ended a decade ago.

[inigyou]

ICANN exists in the US, therefore the US government has control over it.

[rafram]

It's pretty difficult for the US government to tell a nonprofit what to do.