TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

As Many as 5K .Com’s Taken Away by Sealed Court Order by Verisign

199 pointsby ESBostonover 10 years ago

12 comments

grizzlesover 10 years ago
Everything to do with the DNS system is so corrupt and shady. Half the domains dropping in the new GTLD process are &quot;unavailable&quot;, &quot;registered&quot;, etc. We tried to get an <i>exact</i> trademark for one of our companies in the new GTLD system during the Sunrise phase only to be told by Gandi that the new GTLD owner rejected it. We pushed it pretty hard and had a back and forth with Gandi&#x27;s CEO who was pretty much on our side but the new GTLD owner (Demand Media) wouldn&#x27;t budge. We have to sue them if we want it. That&#x27;s what the privatized DNS system has come to.<p>You know who I feel bad for though? Those people who originally registered big corporate brands .COM in the 90s and had their domains ripped from them. That shit is ICANN endorsed nowadays.
评论 #8409173 未加载
评论 #8409556 未加载
评论 #8409770 未加载
评论 #8410330 未加载
jacquesmover 10 years ago
Scenario:<p>A domain is free to register. You register it as per your registrars normal procedure. In some faraway country (say the USA) a bankruptcy court decided that this domain that you just registered was part of the original holdings of the company in bankruptcy.<p>Even though the company (or the receivers) let the registration lapse (presumably because they were not doing too well financially).<p>And so the court will order that domain that you just paid for to be assigned to some third party.<p>That&#x27;s pretty perverted.<p>If there was an unbroken chain of ownership from the moment the original company registered it to the point where the domain was levied during the bankruptcy proceedings I can see the logic of it, but <i>once the company and&#x2F;or the receivers let the domain lapse</i> they technically forfeited it and a judge should not cooperate with them to reverse agreements between two other consenting parties (you and the registrar) in order to re-assign that domain to the pile of assets in the bankruptcy, especially not &#x27;ex parte&#x27; (so without hearing either you or the registrar as to how you came into possession of that domain).<p>Otherwise from now on there is no such thing as a &#x27;lapsed domain&#x27; any more. And in fact, domains would not longer be &#x27;property&#x27;. (I don&#x27;t think they&#x27;re property to begin with and this case is a nice example of why I think they aren&#x27;t even though everybody treats them as such.)
评论 #8409543 未加载
评论 #8409192 未加载
ChuckMcMover 10 years ago
Interesting reading the comments, seems DreamTeamFinancial.com went bankrupt and the domains were seized as part of the assets, even though some (many?) had been transferred elsewhere. I would guess you could get an injunction forbidding the domain seller who was liquidating the names from selling them until ownership was more closely established but it does seem like there is an education gap on domains that are &quot;owned&quot; by a company who then doesn&#x27;t pay to renew them so they simply &#x27;lose&#x27; ownership rather than selling them.
sadfaceunreadover 10 years ago
I&#x27;ll be following this case. I don&#x27;t understand why this would be filed under seal. I&#x27;d enjoy some legal experts comments on the matter.
评论 #8408807 未加载
dlgeekover 10 years ago
This reminds me a lot of the no-ip.com case. Did anyone ever find out how that was resolved? Apparently Microsoft gave back the domains[1], but did they face any payments for damages or censure?<p>[1] <a href="http://www.noip.com/blog/2014/07/10/microsoft-takedown-details-updates/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.noip.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2014&#x2F;07&#x2F;10&#x2F;microsoft-takedown-detai...</a>
评论 #8408481 未加载
sidkoover 10 years ago
Another incident that tells us we need to move towards something more decentralized. Namecoin is an excellent concept and idea, it&#x27;s a pity it is not used and supported more widely.
评论 #8408798 未加载
评论 #8408786 未加载
评论 #8409143 未加载
评论 #8408966 未加载
methodologyover 10 years ago
That&#x27;s a very interesting website. It also features for example analysis of companies and what domains they did&#x2F;should buy. It really shows how there is really an entire economy over domain names, not just in buying&#x2F;selling but also other secondary fields like regulation.
lorddoigover 10 years ago
That situation is just about as maddening as that site&#x27;s scroll behaviour.
gerglesover 10 years ago
While this is obviously a perversion of justice, I&#x27;m not shedding many tears over shady domain landgrabbers losing their &#x27;property&#x27;. It&#x27;s unfortunate (and clearly shouldn&#x27;t have been filed under seal) but the histrionic comments on anigbrowl&#x27;s link about how this is going to kill the domain squatting &#x27;business&#x27; just make me think &quot;good.&quot;
评论 #8408761 未加载
评论 #8408649 未加载
评论 #8408648 未加载
评论 #8408772 未加载
cssandjsover 10 years ago
Well that can&#x27;t be good - my &quot;name&quot; on the web can be snatched out from under my feet?
评论 #8409604 未加载
tobhahnover 10 years ago
I wonder, is David J. Steele the John Steele of Prenda Law or is this just a weird coincidence?
评论 #8409710 未加载
anigbrowlover 10 years ago
Better to submit the original article, per HN guidelines. There&#x27;s a lot of useful info in the comments: <a href="http://www.thedomains.com/2014/10/02/as-many-as-5k-coms-taken-away-by-sealed-court-order-by-verisign-including-some-of-mine/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thedomains.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;10&#x2F;02&#x2F;as-many-as-5k-coms-take...</a>
评论 #8408538 未加载
评论 #8408652 未加载