If the EU had a law saying no foreigner could own a house inside the EU, and you bought a house and then renounced your EU citizenship, it would be entirely appropriate that the EU forces you to sell the house or forfeit it.

Why would that law need to exist for something as minor as a domain name? If it was a valid purchase then let them keep it.

I don’t set the .EU rules. But if they established that the TLD can be used only by EU citizens (or whatever the exact criteria are), I see no reason they should not enforce that. This doesn’t appear to be a case where they changed the rules. It’s a case where the rules were clear and it’s certainly not the EU’s fault that the registrant no longer meets the retirements.

From the other side, why should the EU allow someone outside the EU to hold onto a domain that a person within the EU might want or benefit from?

"they should enforce their rules" is a pretty pointless statement in a discussion of whether the rules make sense.

They should let people keep it because it was bought under the correct circumstances and it's very disruptive to rip away a domain name while harmless to let a very tiny fraction escape that way.

I disagree that the rules don’t make sense. The fact that the rules are inconvenient for a small set of individuals who registered a EU domain and live in a country that decided to leave the EU does not mean the EU rules are wrong.

> it's very disruptive

Britain leaving the EU was very disruptive. I don’t see why the EU should alter their rules to accommodate British citizens. It doesn’t seem like responsibility of easing the disruption should fall at all to the EU when Britain created the disruption.

They don't need to alter the rules specifically for them, it should apply to anyone that leaves. Brexit just highlights the existing problem.

Why should it apply to anyone that leaves? You haven’t justified that assertion.

If the intent is specifically to have a TLD for citizens and entities within the government’s scope, why should anyone outside that scope get to keep a domain? That is directly contradictory to the intent.

Governmental TLD’s are not supposed to be vanity domains that anyone can grab. That’s not the point.

How much justification do you want for an opinion?

And having one person be in the right location is hardly a strong binding to anything. It's a basic generic TLD. It's okay if 0.1% 'leak'.

Fair. You are entitled to your opinion, though it seems like you don’t have much to support it.

> having one person be in the right location

This is a strawman. I bet thousands at minimum of EU domains were registered in the UK.

You got that line backwards. I'm saying that a group/company that wants an EU domain only needs one person in the EU. The standards are very low, not something that gains a benefit from strict enforcement.

Yes, I did misunderstand what you meant there.

I don’t know what the EU officially requires.

I disagree, I bought the house legally, no reason to keep me out. Or at least it doesn't seem fair

Fair is relative. Some places do have bans on foreigners owning housing because it drives up the local real estate prices.

No, but if the country where you built your house changes. Then your adress is going to change no matter what.

Also very true. You own the house, the government owns the address.

Fair? No, not at all. Even eminent domain specifies that the seizure be for public use, and the owner be fairly compensated.

You don't really own the domain name though, you rent it from the registar for a fixed term during which you can trade it if you so desire. But it is not something you own, it is a rental with conditions and it can always be taken away. Not saying its fair or not but that's what it fundamentally is and doesn't really map to a fully owned asset.