GoDaddy cautions that India's efforts to combat fake websites might have unintended consequences.

      The largest seller of domain names, GoDaddy, claims a court order in India may compromise internet safety. The company is contesting new regulations aimed at curbing fraudulent websites that impersonate well-known brands. GoDaddy warns that the proposed solution could endanger millions of legitimate website owners, not just in India.

      This ruling originated from the Delhi High Court. In December, the court prohibited over 1,100 websites pretending to represent famous companies. Subsequently, a judge implemented extensive measures that tech experts argue fundamentally alter internet governance. GoDaddy has submitted a challenge to these measures before a larger bench, as revealed in unpublished documents reviewed by Reuters, which initially reported on the matter.

      Three notable changes have emerged. Domain registrars can no longer provide default free privacy protection. They are required to provide a buyer’s contact information to anyone demonstrating a “legitimate interest” within 72 hours. Additionally, the regulations disallow any address that only slightly modifies a protected brand name.

      GoDaddy’s primary concern revolves around privacy. The company contends that eliminating privacy by default will make the names, addresses, phone numbers, and emails of ordinary website owners publicly accessible. This, according to them, exposes individuals to “foreseeable privacy and security risks” like stalking and harassment.

      Europe figures into this issue as well. GoDaddy argues that the order conflicts with India’s own data protection laws and the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), both founded on the principle of privacy by default. Farzaneh Badii, a researcher in New York focusing on internet governance, stated that Europe redacted such details because their publication can lead to harassment and phishing attempts. "Those affected will include journalists, activists, small business owners, and private citizens," she remarked. "The brand impersonators will be unaffected."

      The global implications of the ruling are another concern. Domain names function on a global scale rather than a local one. GoDaddy claims this ruling could require it to monitor web addresses worldwide to comply with the demands of a single national court.

      India has legitimate grounds to address internet fraud. Last year, the government recorded 2.4 million cyber-fraud complaints costing around $2.4 billion. Home Minister Amit Shah reported that a person becomes a victim of cyber fraud every 37 seconds, warning that it could escalate into a “national crisis.”

      Over 20 companies, including Amazon, McDonald’s, Microsoft, Xiaomi, and Colgate-Palmolive, were involved in bringing the case. The December ruling labeled these fraudulent sites as "engines for large scale deception." The Indian home ministry informed the judge that registration information should be easily accessible for investigative purposes.

      This stance aligns with a broader trend. New Delhi has persistently pressured global platforms like Meta, X, and Google to tighten content moderation policies and to appoint local grievance officers. Companies such as GoDaddy, Arizona-based Namecheap, and Netherlands-based Hosting Concepts have all filed appeals against the ruling.

      GoDaddy’s most pointed argument focuses on the prohibition of variations on brand names. For example, they argue that the term “McDonald” originates from Scotland, and banning all variations would effectively grant a monopoly over a common surname.

      The situation complicates mathematically. Protecting “HUL,” the Indian subsidiary of Unilever, would conflict with 118 English words containing that string, including “hulk.” GoDaddy claims it is “virtually impossible” to register a domain using an English word that does not relate to any trademark.

      Enforcement of the new rules is also proving challenging. Despite the December ruling, Reuters discovered a fraudulent McDonald’s franchise address still available for purchase through GoDaddy India for around $10.

      GoDaddy regards these directives as “commercially destabilizing” and has suggested that domain registrars might “exit India,” which is one of their largest emerging markets. A larger bench will hear the appeals on July 16. The outcome may have significant repercussions beyond India, influencing who can maintain privacy on the open internet and who cannot.