Should Teens 17 and under be allowed to do business- Cast your vote now.

**alexsimon** · 03-10-2008, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by DotComGod

Ok, to be clear, anyone with an account now and under 18 would not be effected..

The new system, if we find one, would give current members 30 days to get verified.

All new members would be forced to verify.

-=DCG=-

Great decision.

**thevirtual** · 03-10-2008, 12:36 PM

Not sure if new new rules should be introduced because of a scammer who claims to be under 18. The same member also claimed to not be directly involved in the scam... Yet there is a whole thread of people threatening legal and other actions to be taken against member and even posting personal information even thought the member is supposedly a minor.

I think the focus should be on getting rid of the "Snow Bill" not adding new limitations on domainers in a similar way by addressing issues that are not part of the major problem.

**tristanperry** · 03-10-2008, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by DotComGod

Ok, to be clear, anyone with an account now and under 18 would not be effected..

The new system, if we find one, would give current members 30 days to get verified.

All new members would be forced to verify.

-=DCG=-

That gets my vote

That's the fairest method *Nods*

**acronym007** · 03-10-2008, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by thevirtual

Not sure if new new rules should be introduced because of a scammer who claims to be under 18. The same member also claimed to not be directly involved in the scam... Yet there is a whole thread of people threatening legal and other actions to be taken against member and even posting personal information even thought the member is supposedly a minor.

I think in some ways the focus should be on getting rid of the "Snow Bill" not adding new limitations on domainers in a similar way by addressing issues that are not part of the major problem.

This rule is not a limitations on domainers, it is another step in our evolution to professionalize our business. We cannot ask congressmen and women to hear our voices if we don't police ourselves. We must be better too, we have to get away from certain practices that have harmed our industry and do a better job of showing a better image to world and media. it's not all on the Snowe Bill. Do you think a congressional member will make a decision based on a 16 year olds opinion when his or her voice does not yet count?

Again, there are wonderful people in here under 18 and I have learned from them myself. To conduct business with a person under 18 is actually somewhat irresponsible. Let's think about it, do they have permission from their parents, can they use credit cards, can they vote, can they drive to the bank, can they be sued, can they sue, can they sign a legally binding document without parental consent? Too many concern, and I too feel this rule would protect them as well as the elders. They need protection as well as they are listed as minors in my country.

**Acro** · 03-10-2008, 12:54 PM

I wonder if laws regarding legal status are more liberal in Canada than the US?

**GT Web** · 03-10-2008, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by Acroplex

I wonder if laws regarding legal status are more liberal in Canada than the US?

No, if you are not at the age of majority (depends on the Province in which you live - in BC it's 19) you are deemed not to have the capacity to enter into a legal agreement. That being said, there are several other rules in place - it's actually pretty difficult for a minor to take advantage of this law, at least in Canada...

And besides - do we have any cases where I minor has used that as an argument to hurt another member?

**tinner666** · 03-10-2008, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by DotComGod

Ok, to be clear, anyone with an account now and under 18 would not be effected..

The new system, if we find one, would give current members 30 days to get verified.

All new members would be forced to verify.

-=DCG=-

A good decision. Though I voted 'No', I wanted to exclude some that are already here, and I respect them for their handling of sales, demeaner, and advice they've given. No, is for the legal standpoint, per se. I would deal with serval teens here, but I'd WANT to know they are teens, or younger(!), before dealing so I could make a logical, or illogical(?) decision on my own.

Hope that ramble made sense!

**ddaybofb** · 03-10-2008, 04:07 PM

wooohoo I just got verified

**JayB** · 03-12-2008, 06:48 AM

Yes, being 15 (16 Next Month!!) I have done business with many DNF members and have had positive feedback from them all, we should be labeled as people, not because of our age!

JMD

**mikedee** · 03-12-2008, 06:58 AM

Anyone who buys a domain from an under 18 year old can have the domain taken back legally even after many years simply because the agreement was made with a minor. How can the under 18's guarantee that they will not go back on their deal once they reach 18? (hint: it is impossible without using parents/guardians as a guarantor)

**gingeman** · 03-12-2008, 07:37 AM

Excellent resolution to take dnforum another step closer to being a professional marketplace as well as a great source of information and discussion.
Hopefully under 18's here who are honourable businesspeople already will appreciate that this is not a slander on their ethics, but a measure of protection due to the way they are viewed by the law.

Many thanks DCG

**packeted** · 03-12-2008, 08:24 AM

I'd have to go with YES. I sold my first domain aged 15 for $2,000, I'm now 24 and a qualified doctor. I agree that there a legal implications in doing business with under 18s and to be honest it's not something I thought about too much in the past. I do think that if you are doing business with someone under the age of 18 you are entitled to know, but essentially this is down to you as a buyer to find out, take the risk or otherwise let the sale pass.

**NameCharger** · 03-12-2008, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by JMDomains

Yes, being 15 (16 Next Month!!) I have done business with many DNF members and have had positive feedback from them all, we should be labeled as people, not because of our age!

JMD

I voted NO purely from the legalistic standpoint.

IMO, the minute a person is legally given the right/trust to get behind the wheel and drive a 2000+ pound piece of machinery which makes them capable of killing anyone on the road, they should be given every other right as well.

At exactly what age this occurs becomes arbitrary, but you should get my point.

**incka** · 03-12-2008, 06:59 PM

From a legal standpoint if under 18s are banned then you should allow company accounts that they can make instead if they register a company - you can take legal action against a company no matter how old its owner is. When I was under 18 that's how I got around age blocks on other things such as renting a place for my business and signing up to GoDaddy.

**acronym007** · 03-13-2008, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by incka

From a legal standpoint if under 18s are banned then you should allow company accounts that they can make instead if they register a company - you can take legal action against a company no matter how old its owner is. When I was under 18 that's how I got around age blocks on other things such as renting a place for my business and signing up to GoDaddy.

That's not entirely true because in many states you cannot enter a contract or establish a company under 18. So the same dilemma applies. You cannot take action against a company where the minor is owner since the minor cannot legally own a company?

**peaches017** · 03-17-2008, 02:05 AM

I did multiple $xx,xxx deals, some without Escrow with buyers knowing I was only 16 or 17 at the time. I think it really depends on how you build your reputation more than anything. I'm over 18 now though.

**simon johnson** · 03-17-2008, 07:05 AM

A few points:

* 18 is the more widely accepted "legal age".

* Worst case scenario and a teen runs off with someones $$$ / domain - it can be very difficult to take action against them.

* It's virtually impossible to verify a users actual age.