Nic God

[Whois-Search]

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/invalid-whois/

 

[Nic]

Originally posted by Whois-Search
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/invalid-whois/

I AM NO GOD

 

[DotComster]

I looked over some of their 3,000 domains - wortheless - they even seem to prefer dot orgs, net Then coms. They are doing nothing ilegal - just wasteing lots of money.

 

[devolution]

One wonders how much time this bloke has on his hands, feet, nose, head and everything else! It must have taken many wasted months of computer time to compile such a comprehensive list!

Time much better spent looking for, err, domains he could register himself and make money out of!

 

Though not illegal, they are in breach of their contract with their registrar, and may ultimately lose any domain name with invalid contact information should that be formally challenged at the registrar.

-t

 

[uncle]

this guy has been dropping names recently. a lot of them dropped in the last few days

 

[mole]

Has the law that prohibits the use of false contact information been activated for the ICANN gTLDs?

Given that his names have been recorded, this NicGod must be in a real dilemna.

 

There is no law that prohobits the use of false contact information, however it's part of every registrar's contract with ICANN, and subsequently every registrant's contract with their registrar.

Any domain name that is not updated with valid contact information with 15 days of a formal complaint to the registry much simply be DELETEd - which would of course cause it to drop...

-t

 

[fizz]

Originally posted by thewitt
Any domain name that is not updated with valid contact information with 15 days of a formal complaint to the registry much simply be DELETEd - which would of course cause it to drop...

This is gonna make it difficult for the Nic God

 

[eeedc]

Originally posted by DotComster
I looked over some of their 3,000 domains - wortheless - they even seem to prefer dot orgs, net Then coms. They are doing nothing ilegal - just wasteing lots of money.

There names may not be worthless to the original owners who have to pay to get them back and the clicks may be worth $9 barely.

It may or may not be illegal, but it's wrong to attract views with old NOW FALSE links.

Shouldn't links go dead for 30 or 60 days to allow time for Yahoo and other search engines to delete them, and the original owner to notice???????