Moniker Finished ?

[David G]

Has moniker finished as the safest registrar after somebody emailed in a complaint and now they have told me they will reveal the identity of myself and remove the whois privacy.......nothing short of a disgrace !

Makes GoDaddy look like a saint.........

They did that to me too several mos ago. An email from monikers legal dept in Calif said exactly that. They intend to send private whois information to the party who complained even without any legal action or merit. When I asked why they did not back down and said it again. I still can't believe they said that. Ironically, the domain did not even have private whois enabled but since the complaining party made an error in saying that - moniker believed it had private whois without even checking. How crazy is that

[britishbulldog]

i would like to express my opinion here, I use more than 8 Regs for my domains. I faced problems with some of them too, But its not necessary to just indirectly ruin reputation of a company like Moniker if you faced a certian issue, i know this issue can be a bit frustrating, i saw all your replies and you seem just wanting to make fusses about moniker, honestly the jrzeygirl was very helpful and told you to contact her directly, but you seems wanting to talk here, and make the problem just bigger.


Thats only my opinion not much

Hey they did not deal with my problem and still have not,your right your opinion is not much and wrong,another saddo blinded by the beauty !

Has moniker finished as the safest registrar after somebody emailed in a complaint and now they have told me they will reveal the identity of myself and remove the whois privacy.......nothing short of a disgrace !

They did that to me too several mos ago. An email from monikers legal dept in Calif said exactly that. They intend to send private whois information to the party who complained even without any legal action or merit. When I asked why they did not back down and said it again. I still can't believe they said that. Ironically, the domain did not even have private whois enabled but since the complaining party made an error in saying that - moniker believed it had private whois without even checking. How crazy is that

Well i'm sorry to say,i seem not to be the only one,maybe moniker is not all that,everybody slaughters GD for every little thing,now it's moniker's time to get some stick where it's deserved.

[Anthony Ng]

I don't see a lot that's wrong with Moniker's position here...

Well, I have seen BETTER service providers. I would say a company with backbone would NOT give away his clients' info *that* easily. First of all, it's about privacy. In Canada, companies which collect personal info have the duty to keep them confidential except in very special circumstances. Some companies only surrender that upon court orders, others upon requests from law enforcement agencies (like the police).

The question is also not about whether there is evidence, which should be left for the court to decide. Companies (and their legal teams) should do their best to live up to their service mandate, and not to easily trade that off when the other party has a lawyer.

I also don't think the OP *has to* respond, or Moniker should intervene and ask him to respond. The OP could well prefer a lawsuit, why bother? Moniker, as a whois privacy provider, has done their job, by delivering any correspondence to the registrant. If the complainant doesn't like that, they could file a lawsuit or ask for court intervention; that's when Moniker has to comply (by revealing the OP's ID).

Well, although I have taken a post-graduate course or two in a law school, I'm not a lawyer, what do I know.

[britishbulldog]

Well, I have seen BETTER service providers. I would say a company with backbone would NOT give away his clients' info *that* easily. First of all, it's about privacy. In Canada, companies which collect personal info have the duty to keep them confidential except in very special circumstances. Some companies only surrender that upon court orders, others upon requests from law enforcement agencies (like the police).

The question is also not about whether there is evidence, which should be left for the court to decide. Companies (and their legal teams) should do their best to live up to their service mandate, and not to easily trade that off when the other party has a lawyer.

I also don't think the OP *has to* respond, or Moniker should intervene and ask him to respond. The OP could well prefer a lawsuit, why bother? Moniker, as a whois privacy provider, has done their job, by delivering any correspondence to the registrant. If the complainant doesn't like that, they could file a lawsuit or ask for court intervention; that's when Moniker has to comply (by revealing the OP's ID).

Well, although I have taken a post-graduate course or two in a law school, I'm not a lawyer, what do I know.

Great shout,I agree 100% with the above............

[Bassel]

Hey they did not deal with my problem and still have not,your right your opinion is not much and wrong,another saddo blinded by the beauty !

Ok i can accept that my opinion is wrong, but can i ask you something? how many days have you been facing this issue?

[britishbulldog]

Ok i can accept that my opinion is wrong, but can i ask you something? how many days have you been facing this issue?

A few hours emailing back and fourth but still no evidence from the guy who made the complaint,basically he just sent an email asking claiming copywright on some pics although no evidence or C&D was provided........

Moniker cannot provide it,they have acted on an email which i could do the same with you to find your private info.......how would you like that ?

see where i'm coming from,i wouldn't have a problem if they a C&D followed protocol but they have not.

[Bassel]

A few hours emailing back and fourth but still no evidence from the guy who made the complaint,basically he just sent an email asking claiming copywright on some pics although no evidence or C&D was provided........

Moniker cannot provide it,they have acted on an email which i could do the same with you to find your private info.......how would you like that ?

see where i'm coming from,i wouldn't have a problem if they a C&D followed protocol but they have not.

I agree, but my point is that you must keep this argument between you and them privately and also you have the right to fight for your rights until you get satisfied, the reason i asked how many DAYS not hours, is that i thought you have been suffering much with this issue, and its time to fight them by exposing this issue.

Hope you get this resolved as soon as possible.

[britishbulldog]

I agree, but my point is that you must keep this argument between you and them privately and also you have the right to fight for your rights until you get satisfied, the reason i asked how many DAYS not hours, is that i thought you have been suffering much with this issue.

Hope you get this resolved as soon as possible.

Thanks mate i tried to keep in private but to no avail,got zero response from moniker then Bari stepped in and still not resolved.

All i ask is produce the C&D and i will comply but they have not because they have not got one and what got me they were threatning to hand of my details to this guy who could be any tom,dick or harry.

Thanks Bassel !

[DTalk]

You presume alot obviously you are moniker's smokescreen,you seem to know a bit to much info,what deal you got with Bari and moniker?

Don't be childish...I couldn't care less about Moniker.


I'm seeing a guy here blaming someone else (Moniker) for not protecting him from his own stupidity.


Deal with the complainer's problem - then he won't have to try to get your details from someone else, in the first place.

Shame you got your facts wrong..if you would of read the post properly in the first place,there was no C&D that's my point

Why do you need a formal C & D to force you to deal decently with someone who feels they've had rights infringed on your forum?

Why do they have to go to such lengths (contact the domain Registrar) to find a way to contact you? Just so they can get some response from you to their complaint on your forum?!?

and the fact is this moniker's small print is a typical GD stunt,people rave about moniker but i bet they did not know the small print of "we can give your privacy info out at anytime with our discretion" and that's nothing to do with the C&D.......and you are happy with this ?

This is in the Moniker T&C? I don't like it, either....But, you could have chosen not to use them. What's your problem? Don't you read?


Moniker gave you 5 days to respond to the complaint? Without giving out any of your details?

They're still protecting you, aren't they?


WHY are you hiding from the guy with the complaint? Why do you yell for C&D's?.....Why don't you just deal with it?


After all....You're screaming 'cos Moniker won't listen to you...But, you won't listen to the guy who thinks he's been wronged on your forum...


Read T&C's you sign....and don't whinge later, if you can't be bothered to.

.

[britishbulldog]

Don't be childish...I couldn't care less about Moniker.


I'm seeing a kid here blaming someone else (Moniker) for not protecting him from his own stupidity.


Deal with the complainer's problem - then he won't have to try to get your details from someone else, in the first place.



Why do you need a formal C & D to force you to deal decently with someone who feels they've had rights infringed on your forum?

Why do they have to go to such lengths (contact the domain Registrar) to find a way to contact you? Just so they can get some response from you to their complaint on your forum?!?



This is in the Moniker T&C? I don't like it, either....But, you could have chosen not to use them. What's your problem? Don't you read?


Moniker gave you 5 days to respond to the complaint? Without giving out any of your details?

They're still protecting you, aren't they?


WHY are you hiding from the guy with the complaint? Why do you yell for C&D's?.....Why don't you just deal with it?


After all....You're screaming 'cos Moniker won't listen to you...But, you won't listen to the guy who thinks he's been wronged on your forum...


Read T&C's you sign....and don't whinge later, if you can't be bothered to.

.

I don't think you are the brightest spark on the planet you need to grow up with your childish response, it's a big wide world out there, no wonder you don't post often.

So o.k i file a complaint about your domain on a privacy with moniker and they give me the details and that's O.K ? although i have provided them with a C&D or any evidence that i am the copyright holder but i just wanna **** your site over because your a competitor......and that's o.k with to you?

I was pointing the shady T&C's out to other people to make sure they don't fall foul of moniker's policies,helping other members something obviously you don't,everybody does the same to GD why not moniker ?

[DTalk]

I was pointing the shady T&C's out to other people to make sure they don't fall foul of moniker's policies,helping other members something obviously you don't,everybody does the same to GD why not moniker ?

I'm not calling you out because you're drawing our attention to info that might help...

And don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that a Registrar ever handing out personal info (without, say, a legal court order) is acceptable, imo.


* I'm calling you out because you're trying to come over as the hard done-by, good guy, alerting us to a problem - but, you don't answer hard questions (see above) that place you in an unfavourable light in the situation, and, that might show you're not such an innocent party in this, either.

You prefer to trash other's reputations, instead - and, I'm seeing how you like it.


* I'm calling you out because you're a hypocrite, who screams 'unfair' when someone doesn't listen to you (Moniker) - but, who (it seems) won't listen to one of his own forum members who complains (it seems) that the forum owner (you) supports copyright infringement....and, won't even reply to them.


* I'm calling you out because you abuse people on a public forum when they try to help you (Bari, from Moniker).....I've seen this Bari help countless people with problems - she certainly tries harder than almost any other Registrar rep.


* I'm calling you out because you didn't read, or understand, a T&C - and, then, whinge when you got caught by it.




Again, I'm with you about Registrars handing out personal info...Any T&C that says they can, is unconscionable, imo.


But if you're going to go beyond just giving us useful info - and you're going to dish stuff out to people - be prepared to get it back.


(Btw, I have no personal interest in either Moniker, or their rep, Bari - and, I couldn't care less what she looks like, either!...lol).


.

[Anthony Ng]

(Btw, I have no personal interest in either Moniker, or their rep, Bari - and, I couldn't care less what she looks like, either!...lol).

Are you sure? Oops! Sorry, nice to meet you, Bari.

[britishbulldog]

[QUOTE=DTalk;1798907]I'm not calling you out because you're drawing our attention to info that might help...

And don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that a Registrar ever handing out personal info (without, say, a legal court order) is acceptable, imo.


* I'm calling you out because you're trying to come over as the hard done-by, good guy, alerting us to a problem - but, you don't answer hard questions (see above) that place you in an unfavourable light in the situation, and, that might show you're not such an innocent party in this, either.

"You clown i never heard of the guy directly he went staright to moniker and he has yet to prove he owns the copywrite,so you say i should take it down on any BS email,now you are talking like a clown"

You prefer to trash other's reputations, instead - and, I'm seeing how you like it.

My thread you idiot and your the one who's trashing it about shit !

* I'm calling you out because you're a hypocrite, who screams 'unfair' when someone doesn't listen to you (Moniker) - but, who (it seems) won't listen to one of his own forum members who complains (it seems) that the forum owner (you) supports copyright infringement....and, won't even reply to them.

"are you blind ? ive already explained numerous times that he has provided no evidence he owns the copywrite,you want me to repeat it again?"

* I'm calling you out because you abuse people on a public forum when they try to help you (Bari, from Moniker).....I've seen this Bari help countless people with problems - she certainly tries harder than almost any other Registrar rep.

"Now you are really talking like a dick,i asked for evidence that this guy owns the copywrite,they couldn't show it to me,Bari told a lie by saying that moniker "NEVER" gives out private info and was pulled my legendryJP about it in an earlier post and she never helped out at all."


* I'm calling you out because you didn't read, or understand, a T&C - and, then, whinge when you got caught by it.

"Now you are talking lie a real twat how many people read every T&C with a domain registrar ? bet you do......my ass"




Again, I'm with you about Registrars handing out personal info...Any T&C that says they can, is unconscionable, imo.


"But if you're going to go beyond just giving us useful info - and you're going to dish stuff out to people - be prepared to get it back.

Hang on jackass i never give no shite you hijacked the thread poking you nose in where it's not wanted,gobbing off a sif you are married to her !"


(Btw, I have no personal interest in either Moniker, or their rep, Bari - and, I couldn't care less what she looks like, either!...lol).

"biggest BS i have ever heard,you have been put up to this clearly from bari or you just fancy the pants of her,you know what she aint gonna be interested in a geek like you LOL"

[Bionic]

You seem to expect the guy complaining to make a full formal complaint with evidence attached on the first email. Did you even ask him for evidence? Or did you just ask Moniker for proof in his initial complaint?

Moniker gives you a chance to deal with the complaint, so their stance being pro active on solving any domain problems seems fair to me.

[Jacksplat]

I hope your not expecting moniker to middle this entire fiasco. Deal with the issue already and if the guy has a solid complaint then be curtious to his supposed property claim. If he's the competition and is just trying to cause you grief then simply open up and challenge him. If your not in the wrong then all should be well.

Privacy registrations protect people for personal reasons. Not for potential illegal activity. We're losing the free-net as we speak because of such issues.

Good luck bulldog, hope it works out. same to moniker, I personally appreciate the stellar service I've received over the years.

[RatherGood]

Call me crazy but shouldn't we be talking DMCA notices here for an American registar? Or is the complainant not even American?

[Jacksplat]

enlighten me, what does someones nationality have to do with it ?

[britishbulldog]

You seem to expect the guy complaining to make a full formal complaint with evidence attached on the first email. Did you even ask him for evidence? Or did you just ask Moniker for proof in his initial complaint?

Moniker gives you a chance to deal with the complaint, so their stance being pro active on solving any domain problems seems fair to me.

You see no disrespect you don't know what you are talking about.you have to follow C&D protocal which needs a dMCA notice this has not been followed othewise for a laugh we could go around making complaints about any domain which has privacy and find out who owns it and you think thats fair ?

Give me a break !

I hope your not expecting moniker to middle this entire fiasco. Deal with the issue already and if the guy has a solid complaint then be curtious to his supposed property claim. If he's the competition and is just trying to cause you grief then simply open up and challenge him. If your not in the wrong then all should be well.

Privacy registrations protect people for personal reasons. Not for potential illegal activity. We're losing the free-net as we speak because of such issues.

Good luck bulldog, hope it works out. same to moniker, I personally appreciate the stellar service I've received over the years.

Thats what i'm trying to find out,there has been no DMCA shown by moniker which could mean it could be you or anybody else on here or in the world i just don't know,look at the above post you cannot just remove stuff because a dick head has sent an email to moniker otherwise the whole privacy thing would fall apart and there would be no point in it,if it all it takes is me to send a BS email to find out who owns the domain.

[ohkus]

Call me crazy but shouldn't we be talking DMCA notices here for an American registar? Or is the complainant not even American?

The DMCA should go to the forum host but lets think about this for a moment. So this person says that bb (britishbulldog) has some copyrighted material on his forum and he wants to get it off.

I never saw if this person tried to contact bb by other means or even through the whois privacy email, if that was stated then I'm sorry. If this was done and bb still ignored things then some fault lies with bb. However if this person just went directly to Moniker and said xyz content is mine and I'll sue if you don't give me this persons details I see a problem there.

This person can file a John Doe lawsuit and then subpoena Moniker for the information or of course they could sue Moniker directly which is one of the dangers with offering whois privacy. I have a severe problem with domain registrars who offer whois privacy giving out details without a court order unless a pattern of abuse has been established. I hope this isn't the case.

BB, you haven't made a good case on this forum and frankly you weaken your argument by posting angry.

Best of luck to all parties.

[Raider]

* Moniker then gives the owner of the domain (BritishBulldog?) 5 days to respond to the complainer, and respond to their complaint - without handing over to the complainer any personal details of the domain owner? Is that right?


* Moniker gives notice to the (non-responding) owner of the domain/forum (BritishBullgog?) that if they don't bother to respond to, and address, the complaint, then Moniker will make available the contact details of the domain owner (via WHOIS), so the complainer can contact the domain owner directly. Is that right?

If this is what happened, I dont see how anyone can hold Moniker liable, especially if it's noted in the T&C.

Years ago, this one guy ripped off some watermarked images off my site, he didn't use private whois so I was able to contact him and after a week he eventually removed them... Now if he had private whois and I couldn't get hold of him, what I hear BritishBulldog saying is; I would have to obtain a court order, which would require hiring an Attorney and paying out of pocket legal fees and court costs, just so I could contact him to remove images that HE stole?.... Is this the way you guys think it should work?