I would like to warn current and future owners of .ly domains of a concerning incident regarding the deletion of one of our prime domains ‘vb.ly’ by NIC.ly (the domain registry and controlling body for the Libyan domain space ‘.ly’).
In short:
The domain was seized by the Libyan domain registry for reasons which seemed to be kept obscure until we escalated the issue. We eventually discovered that the domain has been seized because the content of our website, in their opinion, fell outside of Libyan Islamic/Sharia Law.
This is deeply concerning for everyone, but especially .ly domain owners, because it sets a precedent that all websites running on a .ly domain must comply with Libyan Islamic/Sharia Law in order to maintain their domains. This is especially concerning for anyone running a url shortener or hosting user-generated content on a .ly domain.
You may also not know that since June 2010 .ly domains less than 4 characters long may no longer be registered by anyone who isn’t in Libya – which suggests there is tension around foreign owned, high-value, short .ly domains.
The full story:
Our domain ‘vb.ly’ (which was joint owned by myself and my partner Violet Blue) was deleted by NIC.ly without warning or notice on or around September 23rd 2010. We were subsequently told that our domain has been removed to us being “in clear violation of NIC rules and regulations” relating to “text referring to adult content and offensive imagery from [our] main page”.
The regulations for .ly domains are available at http://nic.ly/regulations.php. Aside from the fact that we contest that any adult content or offensive imagery exists on the site (vb.ly is a url shortener), what is more concerning is that there does not appear to be any regulation(s) written on that page that actually pertains to the violation notice we were given.
In other words we felt that the NIC.ly registry was claiming it has deleted our domain for infringements that do not actually form any part of their regulations.
However after numerous emails and escalating the matter to NIC.ly directly, we were told by Mr Alaeddin S. ElSharif (Web services Dept. NIC.ly/Libya Telecom and Technology):
“…clause 3.5 clearly states that: “The Applicant certifies that, to the best of his/her knowledge the domain name is not being registered for any activities/purpose not permitted under Libyan law.”
Pornography and adult material aren’t allowed under Libyan Law, therefore we removed the domain…”
Again, while we contest that there was NO pornography or adult material on vb.ly, I would suggest that there is a far more concerning issue here if domain registries can decide on the validity of a domain registration based on the content of the website that uses it. I would argue that the two are extricably decoupled and separate entities.
An additional concern is that the clause being used here pertains to Libyan Islamic Law which appears impossible to find listed in English.
This incident also follows on from a significant (but sadly unreported) recent decision by NIC.ly that as of June 2010:
“.LY domains that are shorter than 4 characters are only allowed for companies or individuals having presence in Libya.” [link]
Existing owners of such domains may renew but those premium domains are no longer open for registration by anyone who does not have a presence in Libya. Think about that, the domains for bit.ly, owl.ly (another set of url shorteners) and ad.ly (advertising solution), would not be registrable now by foreigners. Previously, any domain available was available to anyone who wanted to register it.
We found this u-turn in registration policy surprising. We wonder whether having seen the ‘mini domain gold rush’ that occured with the .ly domain space, there is suddenly a desire – perhaps even pressure – to have local Libyans control some of the the most premium and valuable .ly domains.
With this already in our minds, we found the following line from the email communication we received about the deletion deeply concerning:
…your domain being removed from NIC.LY records and made available for re-registration for locals
We wonder whether this line suggests that in the back of the mind of the person deleting our domain was the motivation that a rare <4 letter .ly domain would suddenly become available for a local Libyan national to register.
I’m not against Libyans registering .ly domains; instead I suggest that NIC.ly/Libya realized too late the value of these premium domains and now there is clearly back-peddling going on to ensure they don’t all end up in the hands of non-Libyans. Further more, I wonder if there is pressure for NIC.ly to do what it can to recover premium <4 letter .ly domains where possible so that they end up back in the pool only available for locals to re-register Finally, I wonder whether NIC.ly are being pressured to go so far with this that they would even revoke domains for reasons that don’t specifically violate any of the regulations that domain owners agreed to upon registration.
.ly domain space to be considered unsafe
For these reasons I believe the .ly domains should be considered unsafe. Anyone running a business or relying on a website with a one, two or three letter .ly domain should be incredibly cautious. This obviously includes anyone who uses bit.ly, 3.ly, owl.ly and any other similar url shortener.
I cannot see how the deletion of our .ly domain couldn’t happen to the owners of these domains too. In fact bit.ly is hosting many, many links that depict the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), extreme pornographic subject matter, etc.
However, the fact that NIC.ly are asserting editorial control over the content of any website using a .ly domain is perhaps the most troubling to any .ly domain owner and indeed the internet community at large. Not only is it paramount to censorship and doesn’t reflect the decoupled nature of domains vs websites, but it sets a dangerous precedent in the space.
At the time of writing our domain vb.ly is still revoked and our website is offline.
To sum up:
- .ly domains deemed to be in violation of NIC.ly regulation are being deregistered and removed without warning – causing significant inconvenience and damage.
- .ly domains are being deregistered and removed due to reasons that do not correspond to the regulations defined in the official NIC.ly Regulations.
- NIC.ly seems to want to extend their reach beyond the domain itself and regulate the content of websites that use a .ly domain. The concept amounts to censorship and makes .ly domains untenable to be used for user-generated content or url shorteners.
- Libyan Islamic/Sharia Law is being used to consider the validity of domains, which is unclear and obscure in terms of being able to know what is allowed and what isn’t.
- NIC.ly have suddenly decided that <4 letter .ly domains should only be available to local Libyans and this appears to create motivation to recover what premium domains they can to go back into this new local-only pot of domains.
You can read more about this, including copies of email correspondence, over at Violet Blue’s TechYum website.
UPDATE: My partner Violet Blue (former co-owner of vb.ly) has a thought provoking review of the way this story has played out across the media today. Her site is slightly NSFW.
[…] You can read further thoughts and analysis over at Ben Metcalfe’s (joint owner of vb.ly domain) Blog. […]
The problem is that these country specific domains were designed for domestic use only. Quite a few countries specify that to own a domain with their extension you have to be a registered company in that country. .LY doesn’t specify that yet, but could well add that to their rules.
It was always going to be very risky to run a business on a domain like this. .TV has the same risks and perhaps even more money tied into it…
Sorry to hear about your problems with vb.ly but at least it wasn’t a large revenue generating business that’s been effectively switched off. Kudos for raising the issue as I don’t think a lot of people think about this.
Very sorry to hear about this, you two.
It looks like they’ve been going through all the three character and less domains and found reasons to pull then back to Libyans.
Considering that bit.ly links link to just about anything, and no doubt a massive amount of material questionable in their eyes, they might see that taken from them as well – and if that happened, can you image the huge amount of deal links there would suddenly be everywhere?! What a nightmare.
I get my .ly domains through 101domain who seem to be pretty clear about whether or not you have the right to own a domain of a certain locale, but not so much about the content ‘restrictions’.
@Kosso – all of those links will be dead in a year or two anyway. Web 2.0 has no conception of maintaining URLs past the latest reinstall of their blog software.
@Mr Metcalfe – You say “Again, while we contest that there was NO pornography or adult material on vb.ly, I would suggest that there is a far more concerning issue here if domain registries can decide on the validity of a domain registration based on the content of the website that uses it.”
That’s retarded. The Libyan government has complete and final say of everything to the left of the ‘.ly’. They could say “You can’t host or link to or even talk about websites with vowels on them” and they’d be within their rights. The Internet ain’t just for whitey anymore.
How about considering a .com? They work great, and if you deal with a US-registrar, you have recourse if they fuck up your business after you’ve paid them.
I believe you mean precedent, not president. Obama wants nothing to do with this.
[…] Ben Metcalfe blogs that his domain name vb.ly was recently seized by NIC.ly (the domain registry and controlling body for the Libyan domain space) because the content of his website, at least in their opinion, was in violation of Libyan Islamic/Sharia Law. […]
[…] Ben Metcalfe blogs that his domain name vb.ly was recently seized by NIC.ly (the domain registry and controlling body for the Libyan domain space) because the content of his website, at least in their opinion, was in violation of Libyan Islamic/Sharia Law. […]
[…] Ben Metcalfe blogs that his domain name vb.ly was recently seized by NIC.ly (the domain registry and controlling body for the Libyan domain space) because the content of his website, at least in their opinion, was in violation of Libyan Islamic/Sharia Law. […]
so you registered domains in libyan namespace (a country associated with terrorism for almost an entire generation) and now you’re surprised there are problems?
So, you can’t trust the Libyan government. Should we be surprised?
This is another weakness of the many URL shortening services, including home brewed ones. Reliance on foreign TLDs is just as foolish as relying on any other critical infrastructure that falls under a different jurisdiction.
back-peddling?
Perhaps you mean backpedaling.
You wrote: “now there is clearly back-peddling going on”.
I’d have spelled it “back-pedalling”, but I think your version actually describes it better. Thanks for the post, and good luck.
I couldn’t resist: http://bit.ly/9TY6c6
Does this mean that even bit.ly is in danger of losing their domain?
While its an important issue, it has only become so due to lack of foresight. URL shorteners are a pain in the ass to start with – even this article contains 1 shortened link which I’m cautious to follow (does it point to an article about bit.ly hosting offensive material, or to the content itself?). Moving your domain to a registrar in a country whose language you don’t speak and whose laws are difficult to determine is not a smart move, especially when the only reward is one character fewer than a .com address.
Nobody would trust the Lybian government, except the italian tycoon and mafioso, mr. Berlusconi (who recently received Gheddafi with all honors and kissed the dictator’s hand!)
Is bit.ly at risk because they shorten links to nsfw content? There are thousands of bit.ly links to nsfw content in this one Twitter feed alone: https://twitter.com/slutcapades
[…] And Others Risk Losing Theirs Swift.ly” by Robin Waulters for TechCrunch. According to a blog post by former vb.ly owner Ben Matcalfe, domains under the .ly TLD are being evaluated according to […]
URL shorteners are the worst websites in the world and practically serve no purpose except to mask links inside web spam. So I can’t think of a reason to care about one dying.
How’s that any different from a Western government taking down a site or a domain because they think it promotes copyright infringement or child pornography or something similar? If you host a site in a particular country you have to play by their rules, and there’s nothing to say they have to be the same as the rules in your own country. The Libyan action seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Ben – just tweeted your blog post @oppliger
Good article. It’s high impact for thousands of businesses who rely on URL shorteners for tracking. It also could impact hundreds of companies like mine who use the bit.ly API or something similar to help their customers track campaigns, links, etc. I’d be concerned if I were bit.ly, but I’m also confident that there are so many companies relying on folks like bit.ly that even if Libya reclaims their domain suffixes, they’ll rebound with a solution quickly.
Best,
Scott Oppliger | CEO
SocialVolt, Inc.
…and this is why we write our own shorteners for critical services, and host them on our own short domains. Sure, we sacrifice a little fashion, but we gain complete control of our urls.
The same goes for Nudoman/Nunames and the .nu domain, somewhat popular in Scandinavia.
I myself had an attractive and short .nu domain, registered and used according to Nudomain rules for more than 10 years.
However, Nudomain didn’t give any reason for taking back the domain from me, they just patched their billing system making it impossible to pay for that domain.
The current CEO of Nunames, Mr Lars-Göran Forsberg, boasts that “It is entirely appropriate that. .nu choose not to renew a contract”.
We need ICANN to take action on this. Now.
Until then, stay away from crooked ccTLDs like .nu from Nunames and choose regulated domains like .se and .com.
Hell, prior to 2004 it wasn’t even legal in the US to conduct ANY business with Libya, including registering domains. What do you mean it is NOW considered unsafe?
I understand that you feel you have been wronged, but you did kinda fuck up. Maybe an update to acknowledge you made a bad call in the first place (as did bit.ly and others) would make you come across as less of a blowhard.
VB was asking for this decision. No child pornography is allowed on .com and no adult content is allowed on .ly.
For those who think they can get away – there is a price to pay.
Bitly will be used for a while, and many other “ly” sites too.
Can you appeal to or sue before the Internic?
Does the Internic have policy on the line between domain and content?
Does the Internic have a laissez-faire policy on registrar “due process” and fair or effective notice?
Do different rules apply to national tld registrars than to others?
Once Internic authorizes a national registrar, does Internic have any effective power over that registrar? The ability to revoke their authority? The power to duplicate and seize their database? To seize their assets?
I totally called this last year … http://twitter.com/#!/hansenjrmy/status/6767123492
[…] had been operating a web site, vb.ly, with writer and sex educator Violet Blue. Then, he explains in this post: Our domain ‘vb.ly’ (which was joint owned by myself and my partner Violet Blue) was deleted by […]
[…] anda tertarik untuk mendalami kelanjutan masalah ini, anda bisa langsung mengunjungi Ben Metcalfe […]
@Mike
Maybe if you didn’t assume everyone is American (I’m not so US/Libya relations has nothing to do with me) you’d come across as less of a blowhard? 😛
@Phill Wolf
I think you mean ICANN rather than Internic (Internic looked after .com + .net domains).
We’re talking to representatives of ICANN, watch this space.
FYI the US government is trying to do this too:
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5334/135
You might want to rethink what you consider “safe”
Ben,
If you have any success with ICANN, please let us know. My experience regarding the .nu racket is that ICANN doesn’t dare do anything with independent CCTLDs.
_claes
About 3 months ago my 2 partners and myself launched http://www.leaf.ly which is a cannabis strain ratings/review website – think Cork’d for cannabis.
Lucki.ly we made a post on Hacker News asking the community for some quick feedback on our new site…a few commentors warned us about Libya and the .ly domain. After that the domain http://www.leafly.com (which was previously unavailable) opened up for us to purchase…whew! We are really thankful now in light of this terrible news…our hearts go out to you guys at vb.ly.
[…] imagery” and in opposition of Libya’s prevailing Islamic Sharia Law. According to Ben Metcalfe, who owns vb.ly, Libya is also moving to take over any URLs with less than four letters in front of […]
While I empathize with your situation, and I hope you get it resolved, from a devil’s advocate’s position, a registrar is allowed to set and enforce whatever rules they want for whatever reason they want. If the real reason they revoked the domain is more sinister than what they claim (and it seems that it is), even if it’s something like “We don’t like westerners anymore”, that’s their prerogative. Also it seems to me that doing business in or with a country that is known for draconian laws and enforcement there-of, I’m not really sure what you or anyone else expected.
Furthermore, the arguments that the US is trying to do the same are irrelevant. While I agree that they are, and that it is serious f’ed up, it has no bearing on this discussion whatever.
Your warning is valid and timely – but seriously, buyer beware. From a gut instinct perspective, basing your internet presence around a domain hosted in Libya seems like a bad idea, at least compared to more traditional domains. You made a bad business decision – one you might have been able to anticipate. Nevertheless, I sympathize (and Libya might better off recognize whatever clamor there is for “.ly” domains as a business opportunity, and price them – for all – accordingly…)
Hi!
I sympathise with your loss of a registered domain name. However, since .ly is a TLD that belongs to a country, it is only expected that nationals or companies belonging to this country should have access to it’s purchase.
Having said that, deleting your domain without notice is a cause for concern. Especially since http://bit.ly points to a lot of pornographic content among other things.
The internet (especially services that use .ly URL shortening) will cease to function as we know it for a while, if these few domains are reclaimed. More reason to stop using third party URL shorteners.
@Susheel Chandradhas
assuming you mean ‘its expected that ONLY nations or companies beloning to this country should have access to their purchase” which is what I think you’re point is…
Well .ly domains are available to anyone to buy – go check out http://libyanspider.com for yourself. The only new, very recent, rule is that 1, 2, and 3 letter domains can’t be registered by foreign entities – but that’s very new.
I think you miss the point of my post.
[…] Ben Metcalfe blogs that his domain name vb.ly was recently seized by NIC.ly (the domain registry and controlling body for the Libyan domain space) because the content of his website, at least in their opinion, was in violation of Libyan Islamic/Sharia Law. […]
[…] acuerdo con Ben Metcalfe, propietario de vb.ly, el gobierno de Libia cerró su sitio porque su contenido violaba la Ley […]
Oh, I read that as “Domain names ending in .ly may be security compromised” when what you meant to say was “The .ly domain space to be considered Libyan”
It sucks that you lost your domain name but you realize you’re talking about buying a domain name for risqué content from an erratic dictator with a largely conservative religious population, right?
-danny
PWNED!
Lots of Love,
Colonel Gadaffi.
Very sorry to hear about this Ben and Violet.
Brief write-up here: http://tantek.com/2010/279/t1/ly-fail-libya-censors-vbly-predicted
In short – I fully expected this to happen to bit.ly – predicted a year and a half ago: http://twitter.com/t/status/1434708098
I suggest you recreate all vb.ly links on bit.ly with some clever automatic id scheme like for all vb.ly/OLDID links, create bit.ly/vbly_OLDID and let’s see what happens.
[…] and Violet Blue, whose year-old, “adult friendly” vb.ly link-shortening service was abruptly shut down because a lot of those links pointed to content that violated Islamic law. Libyan Net authorities […]
so where is the porn? what kind did you have and where is the new porn site located?
[…] which he co-owned with sex writer Violet Blue as a link shortener for adult-oriented links, was revoked without warning because content on the site did not comply with Libyan Islamic law. The domain was deleted by […]
What up with the PBUH? think that kissing up to religion will get them to be more tolerant?
[…] referencing, as I did in the story, is Brian Metcalfe’s post at his blog and Violet Blue’s post at TechYum about the incident, complete with records and exchanges […]