Namejet adds “Shill Bidding Policy” in updated terms of use

Namejet updated its terms of use on August 10, 2017. The new terms include a new section called “Shill Bidding Policy”.

Now the Namejet terms clearly state that shill bidding is not permitted in its domain name auction platform.

There was a small paragraph about fraud in the previous terms:

“5.5 Fraud. Without limiting any other remedies, NameJet may suspend or terminate your account if we suspect that you (by conviction, settlement, insurance or escrow investigation, or otherwise) have engaged in fraudulent activity in connection with our Site.

This section remains in the new terms while the new Shill Bidding section was added:

“5.4 Shill Bidding Policy. Shill bidding is strictly prohibited on NameJet. Shill bidding is the placing of a bid to artificially drive up the price or apparent value of a domain name. Shill bidding may also include placing a bid with no legitimate intention of winning an auction.
Shill bidding by anyone, including a seller, his or her friends, family, roommates, employees, acquaintances or online connections, will not be tolerated on NameJet. You may bid on a domain name belonging to someone that you know, provided that your bid is legitimate and that you do not intend to artificially increase the price or apparent value of the domain name. If you are found to violate this policy it may result in account closure, suspension, cancellation of listings, referral to law enforcement, legal action, and/or forfeiture of fees or other funds collected.
NameJet is committed to providing the best experience for its buyers and sellers and takes possible violations of this shill bidding policy seriously. If you think you see shill bidding taking place on NameJet, please report it to us immediately at report_abuse[at] NameJet will investigate every report received and will take the actions it deems appropriate in its sole and absolute discretion.”

In other changes to the Namejet terms, a section that described an arbitration process for amounts less than $10,000 was removed from the updated terms:

“15.1 Binding Arbitration. For any Claim (excluding Claims for injunctive or other equitable relief) where the total amount of the award sought is less than $10,000, either you or NameJet may elect to resolve the dispute through binding arbitration conducted by telephone, on-line and/or based solely upon written submissions where no in-person appearance is required. In such cases, the arbitration shall be administered by the American Arbitration Association or JAMS in accordance with their applicable rules, or any other established ADR provider mutually agreed upon by the parties. Any judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof.”

Namejet also tries to protect its parent companies of any future litigation by adding the words “parent companies” in section 9.3.

The updated terms are version 2.7. You will be required to accept these terms next time you login to Namejet. The previous version was 2.6 from November 30, 2016.

Read more on Namejet shill bidding here. I am still waiting to hear the results of the Namejet investigation on shill bidding. I will not stop asking for it until I do.


About Konstantinos Zournas

I studied Computer Engineering and Computer Science in London, UK and I am now living in Athens, Greece. I went online in 1995, started coding in 1996 and began buying domain names and creating websites in 2000. I started the blog in 2012.


  1. So what’s their stance on bots? Bot’s are not legal in US regulated online gambling as they gain an unfair advantage in most cases so what about domain auctions?

    “Reasonably ensuring that interactive gaming is engaged in between human individuals only”

    So is their auctions open to non humans/bots or just humans?

      • Probably so but even with extended auctions a bot will beat you most of the time if programmed to bid above said price. The response time is much quicker than a human therefore it will snip the win in the last few seconds.

        “outbid in the last few seconds of the auction where there was no chance to respond”

        I prefer human interaction rather than bidding against some program, NJ if allowed should let everyone know they may be bidding against a bot program vs a human. Although many know this is taking place I’m sure many newbies don’t.

  2. Mark,

    You’re bidding against bots at every auction house. Busy people have to use API to bid. I have a nursery and other businesses to run. I can’t possibly sit at a computer all day and wait to see if someone bid higher than me. An API or bot makes it easy to put in your bids quickly and bids according to your parameters. Everyone would do it if they had the skills to write code.

    Anyone that codes will have a huge advantage over you in every aspect of information and time management.

    • @Shane, understandable but it should at least be within the T&C when running this type of program you have the same rules to follow as per human interaction. And along with the same punishments.

      I’m busy too but proxy bid works fine for me.

      • To clarify no more of this I programmed my bot wrong and it was bidding on my own auctions by mistake. 🙂

      • I completely agree Mark. Everyone should be responsible for their actions. Regardless of how and when you do something against the rules, it’s still your responsibility. Rules are rules and they must be followed. And the auction houses have a responsibility to make sure they are followed. This is not about just Namejet. All auction houses

    • I don’t see anything wrong with using a bot, but just want to play devil’s advocate.

      Why is a bot required, if the auction house offers proxy bidding? Do you solely buy domains if others bid on them?

  3. Bots at every auction, especially GoDaddy re: HugeDomains.
    HugeDomains = Bots!
    Just the way it is.

  4. I have seen my drops at HugeDomains, not too fussed, someone has to pick them up. Just because they list a name does not mean it will sell?

  5. Coding/creating program for anything is a great idea; nothing wrong with conveniently. But create program/coding to advance deviance activities is another question. The rest is history?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.