This has to be Fraud....

[labrocca]

If you find a thread with a problem you should report it and let mod staff handle it. Don't get all worked up over it because believe it or not...the mod staff I believe reads every single thread in this site.

Not much slips by.

WhoDatDog...I tend to agree with you the more I look at it. I am just not all worked up over it. His auction has been closed by staff.

JBH...Are you man enough to admit a mistake? Or are you gonna still argue this one out? I would LOVE to hear an arguement but it's just as good to know your human and might be wrong once in while.

[jberryhill]

The thread I am referring to is in fact in an auction thread.

Well it would have been nice to note that in the original post (prior to editing).

I already said that shill bids in an auction are unacceptable, so I don't see what the issue is.

JBH...Are you man enough to admit a mistake? Or are you gonna still argue this one out?

There's nothing to argue about in the context of an auction, which was not the question originally posed.

Now re-stated as:

Should Shill/Fake Bids be allowed in an auction setting? The answer legally is "No".

That's absolutely correct.

You have a problem with an auction, you go after the auctioneer. DNForum, however, is not a court.

Quite frankly, I've never understood why people don't use their real names around here but, hey, that's just me.

And, Labrocca, one can find any number of dictionary definitions of "fraud". Get a legal definition, and you will most likely find the word "material" in connection with misrepresentation. Fraud does not arise from *any* false statement in connection with a deal, but has to go to the basis of the bargain - i.e. the perception of value which inspired the transaction. If someone is crazy enough to want to offer 10K for a worthless domain name, it doesn't change my perception of the name's value.

Auctions, on the other hand, are an entirely different matter.

[WhoDatDog]

Try not to take it personally Mr Berryhill. In my original thread I stated that it was in fact an auction. I added a link to the thread yesterday, but the fact is that you responded to my question concerning auction bidding. You may have mis-read the post, and if that is the case then it is unfortunate.

I saw the auction yesterday and thought it was outrageous, but not to the point that I would get so worked up over it. So I posted "Where are the offers coming from", and the thread starter replied that there were two offers from another forum and one from DNForum. Instead of calling him a liar in his post, I bid $20. The post was removed and I received an email stating that I incured a Warning Point. So, I started a thread asking if it was Fraud.

It turns out that if in fact the bids were "Phantom", then the sale was fraudulent. So, some positive has come out of this. Whether there is a likelihood of proving the fraud was never the question.

I have no hard feelings toward anyone and I thank you for all of your insight.

Mr Berryhill,

Not everyone uses their real names on message boards because not eveyone is an Attorney who profits from using his/her name on message boards....it shouldn't be too hard to understand.

My original thread stated it was an auction and any editing was done yesterday to add a link; which was before you responded to the post about this auction. Tough to admit, but true. You likely added the auction clarification after you did some research. Anyone who followed the thread can realize that.

[maroulis]

.....edit

[labrocca]

I use my real name (last name of course) so I guess I am making mucho bucks too? haha

Anyways great post as usual JBH. Have you ever considered teaching law? I would think you would do very well at it.

[WhoDatDog]

In response to Smarouli...You might be the joke. Mr Berryhill stated the following:

Quite frankly, I've never understood why people don't use their real names around here but, hey, that's just me.

Not every one uses his or her first and last name as user names when conducting business on the Internet. In fact, Mr Berryhill is in the extreme minority as far as Domain Sales Forums go. Everyone here is trying to make money, but Mr Berryhill is an Attorney and makes plenty of extra money by having his personal information readily available on every post. There is nothing wrong with that, but if you don't see the benefits in his case then you are the joke. He claimed that he doesn't understand why he is in the extreme minority in that regard.

[maroulis]

.....edit

[WhoDatDog]

I started a legitimate thread and you claimed that the thread was a joke. I stated that the joke might be on you if you couldn't figure out why an Attorney who makes money in the domain business would be inclined to use his name as a User Name. I stand by that statement. I buy and sell thousands of dollars worth of domains here each month...sometimes over ten thousand each month. Every one I have done business with so far has been 100 percent honest.....so why would I care if someone else bid 15k in an auction where there were multiple Phantom Bids? I guess that's my problem. To me, the greater issue is the documented response from some people on this thread...that is more disturbing to me, but still doesn't bother me enough to ruin my day. The last time I checked this is a Legal Issues thread. I asked a simple legal question, and I got many responses.

[maroulis]

.....edit

[WhoDatDog]

OK you win...you are a joke. From my post below.

In response to Smarouli...You might be the joke.

There is nothing wrong with that, but if you don't see the benefits in his case then you are the joke.

If that wasn't enough, the trader rating nonsense clinched it for you. I bought a name for 2k and another name for $500, yet another for $1,100, a package of Celebrity names for $1,500 (and 5 names), as well as numerous others....these are off the top of my head and were within the last 45 days I'm sure. Throw in numerous other buys and also the sales, and the number might even be bigger than I stated. Like the Geico commercial says: "You shoulda done your research".

[Domagon]

I'll throw my 2 cents in...

A seller who states they have offers (keyword here being offer), such as $2000, for a domain, but they really don't = unethical, but likely not illegal.

A seller who markets a domain via a formal auction and inflates the price with shill bids = that may be illegal.

I use the word "may", because many on-line auctions may not be legally enforceable in all instances ... for example, in the case WhoDatDog posted refers to Ebay (it appears to be a case about more than just shill bidding, but that's another debate for another thread LOL!) ... anyways, it's possible, that with the right representation that the defendents could have claimed that Ebay wasn't truly an auctioneer...

It's very telling how sedo, Afternic, etc seem to never take much, if any legal action, against fraudulent sellers, deadbeat buyers, scammers, etc ... perhaps some of the reason is they are, at least the last I checked, not registered / licensed as auctioneers.

Ultimately, sales, in particular, domain names, comes down to trust; reputation of each party.

Ron

[jberryhill]

Try not to take it personally Mr Berryhill. In my original thread I stated that it was in fact an auction.

Musta missed that... as stated, you get what you pay for.

Mr Berryhill is an Attorney and makes plenty of extra money by having his personal information readily available on every post.

Not really. Most of my work is for a very few clients who don't participate in forums.

And Labrocca wanted to see me admit a mistake, so here you go:

Go to:

https://www.viewyourticket.com/Ticke...rDE/logon.aspx

Enter citation 1030523432
License No. PC173708

Yup, that's me. And as far as the "tons of money" thing goes, do check out the make and year of the vehicle.

[Domagon]

It's a small world ... I've driven through that particular intersection numerous times.

I'm not a big fan of red-light cameras ... with that said, that picture looks pretty clear-cut. EDIT ... I snipped the skipped yellow blurb - I just viewed the video, it looks pretty convincing.

Ron

[jberryhill]

Nawww... it is on yellow before I even appear in the picture.

But, hey, I don't think that was worth $75. That violation had to be worth at least $10K.

Feel free to try the "pay online" link. I haven't checked out that part yet.

[actnow]

Feel free to try the "pay online" link. I haven't checked out that part yet.

I tried to pay but it wouldn't accept rolls of pennies.

It looks like you will have to pay it.

Are you sure there wasn't a police officer just out of the range of the camera
directing you to drive thru the light. :-D

Incidently, why I don't use my real name?
I'm in the witness protection program.

[maroulis]

.....edit

[labrocca]

You guys are getting out of hand with the sniping at each other. I suggest some post editing and a PM to smooth things out before another mod hits this place with a ton of warnings.

I guess this topic is about dead anyways unless we want to talk about JBH poor driving skills. haha

[maroulis]

poor driving skills or POOR car ? LOL

labrocca agreed I'm NOT going to send PM to him though his on my banned list and will now remove all of my posts...