[secretary.com] stolen domain

[izoot]

Originally posted by izopod


Let's be intellectually honest here, and not try to "flame" this anymore. I think all C0113c70r was trying to do was explain why sometimes you are responsible for the outcomes of events you are involved in irregardless if you had intent to deceive or not.


Peace--

And as far as we know and are seeing ...
Chris is taking responsibility. So why start going into who gets arrested for what and how.

Good intentions or not...its not helping at this point.

 

[izopod]

Originally posted by izoot


And as far as we know and are seeing ...
Chris is taking responsibility. So why start going into who gets arrested for what and how.

Good intentions or not...its not helping at this point.

??? Did I mention anyone getting arrested? I have for quite a few posts mentioned that we should let Hal & Chris work things out. My post above was simply to clarify another member's post.


izopodian philsophy: You can say something over a loud speaker to a group of people, but rest assured there will be one that didn't get the message.

 

[izoot]

Thats what I was speaking of ( the other post you wrote about ), not what you said.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

I heard back from Network Solutions:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Subj: RE: secretary.com
Date: 11/10/2003 11:24:12 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]

Dear Customer,

You are correct in stating that the domain was hijacked, in fact the perpetrator in a large number of cases is a Mr. Chadwick Horn. I would be happy to assist you in this matter. However, I cannot release any proprietary information without a court ordered request.

Sincerely,

Peter

-----Original Message-----


From: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, Nov 8 2003 01:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: secretary.com

Dear Network Solutions,

On or about October 22, 2003 the domain [secretary.com] was transferred out
of my eNom account without notice to me or my consent.

The General Counsel of eNom wrote to me [below] and indicated it was a
hijacking incident, but referred me to you for more information.

In good faith, I paid $8000 for the domain from a person in Halifax, NS named
Chris MacDonald; in accordance with our agreement, I had actually made
payments of $2000 to Chris when the domain was taken from me.

Chris said his partner Chadwick Horn in Richmond, Kentucky was the person who
actually obtained the domain from the original registrant, Mary Gallegos. In
speaking with Mary Gallegos, it appears that Chad and/ or other individuals
may have broken laws including forgery and wire fraud.

Regardless, Chris MacDonald guaranteed good title to me. I am now trying to
get Chris to make good on his indemnifications, warrantees, and promises to me.
I am trying to get Chris to refund of my $2000. To do that, Chris has
requested all proof and evidence of the crime.

Please furnish all details, evidence, and proof.

This is the least I can expect since the domain was ripped from my account
without my knowledge or consent.

Sincerely,
Hal Meyer
Tel: 401-682-2840
Fax: 401-682-2841
+++++++++++++++++

Subj: RE: secretary.com
Date: 11/7/2003 1:04:50 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: [email protected] (Martin Garthwaite)
To: [email protected] ('[email protected]')
CC: [email protected]
('[email protected]')

Hi Hal.

We received information that the domain name was hijacked from its rightful
owner.

Please contact Network Solutions (cc'd on this email) regarding the matter.

Regards,

Martin Garthwaite
General Counsel
eNom, Inc.
2002 156th Avenue NE
Bellevue, WA 98007


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 9:41 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: secretary.com



Dear eNom,

On or about October 22, 2003 the domain [secretary.com] was transferred out
of my eNom account without notice to me or my consent.

I demand an explanation.

Sincerely,
Hal Meyer
eNom ID: halmeyer

 

[mole]

Caveat emptor

 

[Mr Webname]

Dear Customer,

You are correct in stating that the domain was hijacked, in fact the perpetrator in a large number of cases is a Mr. Chadwick Horn. I would be happy to assist you in this matter. However, I cannot release any proprietary information without a court ordered request.

Sincerely,

Peter

This would seem to be the evidence that confirms that the domain was in fact stolen and that "Chadwick Horn" has a great deal to answer for.
I would now expect to hear more from cjmacd and DDent concerning their knowledge of and association with "Chadwick Horn".

 

[WebCat]

a) The domain was NOT allegedly hijacked from NSI, it was eNom!

b) Then WHY is eNom REFUSING to answer DCC's questions?

c) Interesting that NSI won't release INFORMATION without a court order, but eNom will TRANSFER A DOMAIN without one! This is total BS! eNom is hiding it's head in the sand. Apparently NO domain is safe at eNom! First, they transfer it illegally to CHadwick, THEN transfer it AGAIN to NSI!

d) I'm calling eNom to request they transfer a few domains to MY account!

e) WHO contacted eNom and requested the transfer to NSI? And WHAT evidence did they present?

f) Where was the domain sent immediately upon the alleged hijacking?

g) WHY did they not even contact Hal regarding this property before giving it away a second time?

h) Every step of the way, eNom looks worse and worse. I am transferring all my domains OUT of there! But first, I'm calling them and telling them that someone name Yun Yi has stolen thousands of domains from me, and can they please transfer them back to my GoDaddy account?

i) Then I'm buying a large house in the Bahamas. With a boat dock. And a boat.

j) In my poor little cat's opinion, eNom has a LOT to answer for, and is saying NOTHING!

k) Everyone's SAYING the domain was hijacked, but NO ONE has offer ANY actual hard proof! Why? Because only two parties were privy to that transaction- Chadwick and ENOM! And neither are talking. Apparently, getting a domain transferred out of eNom is easy as pie. Getting them to TALK about it is like pulling teeth!

 

[HeavyLifting]

Chadwick Horn tried to sell me a stolen domain for $7000. in other words, he tried to steal $7000 from me. i have contacted NSI to see if i can be of any help in crushing this turd into the ground.

 

[Restecpa]

Originally posted by WebCat
This is not justice, but a complete travesty of justice.

So in your world, if you drive a friend to a party, and at that party your friend committs a crime, YOU are responsible? That is nothing short of insanity!

C0113c70r, I only hope and pray you are NEVER held responsible for the actions of another. Perhaps you do not beleive in the concept of personal responsibility? If so, then heaven help you.

WebCat

I will say it again: To all those who say hes "just a broker" therefore he is not guilty of anything.. Brokers are responsible for any deal they close and accept money for.. If Id buy something from a broker I would hold HIM responsible for anything that might go wrong and not the owner of actual domain as hes not the one who cost me money (indirectly yes, but not directly). So hes the one who has to repay you for any losses that might occur as a result of his (poor) brokering. Its then on him to deal with the other guy to get his money back, as hes the one whos been dealing with him and not you..

THINK ABOUT IT: If a car dealer sold you a second hand car that was later on reported to be stolen, he would have to give you your money back - even though he just sold it to you for some commission and didnt steal it himself. Then it would be on him to get his money back from the actual car thief who he sold it for at first place.. WOULDNT YOU AGREE?

 

[Restecpa]

Originally posted by cjmacd


That’s correct. There seems to be a lot of uninformed speculation flying around here by some of the newer members.

I think I should post to clear a few things up.

Hal is currently trying to obtain documented proof as to the Domains integrity and ownership.
This is important in order for me to get my money back too.
If not I’d be holding a $2000 problem and almost no way of getting the money back without that documentation.

All this he said she said has done a lot of pointing but now actual proof

Hal has assured me that he is working diligently with eNom and NSI to obtain that proof and I humbly thank him for that.

Hal., Thank you

Unfortunately I realize that that could be a long and stressful process as many of you know NSI isn’t really a fun registrar to deal with.

I paid Hal $150 (what I had) not to shut him up and try to let some statute of limitations run out (that’s just plain ludicrous), but to do the honorable thing, and actually make a move toward full resolution.

I accept my responsibilities to him; I made the mistake of handling cash as well. An expensive lesson, but a lesson none the less.

I’d like to thank everyone’s patients and diligence in assisting with this situation, especially to those who have been following this and other threads. And have made informed contributions.

Thanks guys.

-Cjmacd

Cjmacd, I would also like to appologize to you if anything I have said sounded like Im attacking you.. Not at all, all I said was based on the facts provided. And since its clear that you are aware of your responsibility as a broker Im sure this issue will get resolved peacefully. Good luck in getting your money back to both of you..

 

[WebCat]

Restecpa:

All along I've said that IF the domain was actually stolen, then it sheds a whole new light on things. The post you quoted was talking about CRIMINAL liability, not civil.

If the domain was stolen, then I agree Chris has some responsibility to DotComCowboy. All I've been saying is- let's wait to see the proof BEFORE "convicting" the defendant!

 

[.biz]

Originally posted by GeorgeK
The domain never dropped, period. The creation date in the WHOIS at www.internic.net, which is authoritative, proves that.

Given the other questionable names the seller was trying to unload, there's little doubt in my mind that the name was stolen.

:-D Don't forget NetSol is the domain's God. They can do anything with any domains (.com/.net) using a single SQL command.

 

[.biz]

cjmacd,

You are aware that Chadwick Horn has been involved in many doubtful stolen domains and you jump out to defend him in many occasions. This cast a little doubt that you should have investigated in these domains before brokering it.

See the thread below which discussed about the stolen of KS.com by Chadwick Horn and you defended him

http://www.domainstate.com/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=14801&highlight=ks.com

http://www.domainstate.com/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=15155&highlight=ks.com

 

[.biz]

Chadwick Horn (Kentucky) the founder of "BeProud to be Gay!" group

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/beproud/message/53?source=1

???

 

[WebCat]

WOW! I spent the 90 minutes it takes to read the entire thread at domainstate, but it was worth the time

It reveals a LOT about the character and personalities of all the players in this drama, INCLUDING the shadowy figure of Chadwick Horn. In fact, Chadwick Horn (if he is not someone's alter-ego) even has posts in the thread.

For some reason, people at DS seem more willing to expose their dark side. To me, the effect is a little chilling!

If you have an interest in how all this come out, it's recommended reading!

WebCat

 

[mole]

Let's move on and talk about security...

 

[Mr Webname]

http://www.ichad.com/images/pics/drivers_license.jpg

 

[jberryhill]

"To all those who say hes "just a broker" therefore he is not guilty of anything.. "

Nobody said that, with the possible exception of Chris. The point was that the example of criminal accomplice liability has nothing to do with civil breach of warranty liability.

Obviously a broker is liable in the situation where he warrants title in a transfer. The only question here, from the beginning, was whether the domain name was in fact stolen. As noted above, and I have seen this in practice many times, for the two or three dollars that a registrar has tied up in a domain name, it is not as if they always care tremendously about the facts of a disputed situation.

I guess one of the problems here is that not everyone understands the difference between the words "guilty" and "liable". When you are talking about whether someone committed a crime, you are talking about "guilt". When you are talking about whether someone owes you money in a commercial dispute, you are talking about "liability".

The appearance here, and appearances can often be deceiving, is that Chris was conned by Chadwick. That wouldn't relieve Chris of liability for securing the transaction, but it would relieve him of being guilty of some kind of crime. There is no moral flaw in being found liable in a civil context, and it is the reason why perfectly responsible people do things like buying insurance.

But if you can't cover your liabilities yourself, or if you don't have insurance, then you have absolutely no business putting yourself in the middle of transactions that you can't cover.

Goodness gracious, when you buy a new car and there is some kind of mechanical defect, you don't go running around calling the manufacturer "guilty" of crimes against humanity. You get it fixed under the warranty after showing that it was a manufacturing defect.

To recap today's lesson -

"guilty" - the SOB committed a crime and should be locked up

"liable" - something went wrong and so-and-so owes me money

 

[C0113c70r]

Originally posted by DotComCowboy
I heard back from Network Solutions:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Subj: RE: secretary.com
Date: 11/10/2003 11:24:12 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]

Dear Customer,

You are correct in stating that the domain was hijacked, in fact the perpetrator in a large number of cases is a Mr. Chadwick Horn. I would be happy to assist you in this matter. However, I cannot release any proprietary information without a court ordered request.

Sincerely,

Peter

I found this at http://www.m-w.com

One entry found for hijack.
Main Entry: hi·jack
Pronunciation: 'hI-"jak
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: origin unknown
Date: 1923
1 a : to steal by stopping a vehicle on the highway b : to commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint c : to stop and steal from (a vehicle in transit) d : KIDNAP
2 a : to steal or rob as if by hijacking b : to subject to extortion or swindling

One entry found for perpetrate.
Main Entry: per·pe·trate
Pronunciation: 'p&r-p&-"trAt
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -trat·ed; -trat·ing
Etymology: Latin perpetratus, past participle of perpetrare, from per- through + patrare to accomplish, from pater father -- more at FATHER
Date: 1537
: to bring about or carry out (as a crime or deception) : COMMIT

I just wanted to point out to those that still think a crime has not been committed that eNom, as well, differs with you in your opinions. I know, eNom doesn't count for much right now with many of you, but their authoritative weight as a registrar tends to add a bit of credibility to their statement.

--- C0113c70r

 

[C0113c70r]

Originally posted by Mr Webname
http://www.ichad.com/images/pics/drivers_license.jpg

I take it that this is our good friend Chadwick. Thanx for the lesser things in life worth remembering.

--- C0113c70r