• Welcome to DNForum.com - Domain Investor Forum, Free Domain Marketplace and a community for 45k+ domain pros
    If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the oldest global domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 45,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, using our free in-house built tools, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.

Offers TEZI.COM GEO domain,meaning inflation in hindi..Prounounceable CVCV

Status
Not open for further replies.
They did not say ANYTHING except the fact sellers are protected under their privacy policy.

As usual. Every time I confront Sedo with some immoral/unethical/wrong stuff that is going on in their auctions or on their site, I always get some random response copied and pasted from their terms of service, if I even get a response at all. Don't get me wrong, Sedo is a great marketplace for selling and buying domains, but they need to step up their game when it comes to customer relations..
 
Originally Posted by cybertonic
They did not say ANYTHING except the fact sellers are protected under their privacy policy.

I'm not sure what they are thinking about (if at all) at SEDO when they present a response like that.

Clearly, privacy for a valid transaction makes sense, however, when fraud is involved (as is apparently the case here), it would seem the privacy dodge has little relevance.

Let's put it another way, here is a hypothetical scenario:
1) I host a site where people can post their comments about companies anonymously.
2) We know the real identity or at least have clues as to who post these comments.
3) We further maintain a privacy policy which keeps our poster information entirely secure.
3) Someone posts a threat like, "we plan to steal money from SEDO by draining their bank account".
4) They go through and make good on their threat and steal the money.
5) Sedo approaches us for more information.

When we send them such a note as in the quote above, do you think:
A) They will say to themselves, "oh, yes privacy is most important, our money is gone, but the safety of the thief is protected, we sure get that".
B) Wow, what a great site to uphold their privacy policy
C) Gee, that's a problem, let's call the company which runs the site to try to find out how we can work together to clean up the Internet and make things better for all participants.
D) Call the *)($*#@$ lawyer now, get a *()(&$#! court order to release that data immediately!

I would hope it would be C, but I would guess D would be most likely.

Privacy policies *are* important for valid transactions, however when privacy policies protect parties clearly engaging in fraud, how can any reasonable person look at the situation as much less than the party enforcing the privacy policy as being much less than a knowing accessory to that fraud?

I think this goes well beyond the scope of good customer service and right to the heart of serious Internet trust issues that must be addressed by those who are representing themselves as trusted platform venues for engaging in good business online.

cybertonic, the quoted answer they sent you is really no answer at all.

-Commerce
 
They did not say ANYTHING except the fact sellers are protected under their privacy policy.

But you said the transaction was completed, you were asked to send the money and you did. And there is a contract. You are entitled to get the seller's info, just ask for it.
 
This is what I thought Theo but they told me they will ONLY give this info to my attorney if I am ready to sue them otherwise they will protect the seller privacy.

=========================================

Theo,

After respond you here your message given me the idea to check on SEDO my past invoices.

BINGO! the data was still present and the seller has now been identified :)

Guess who was the seller?
 
Last edited:
I can't guess but you need to expose them.
 
This is what I thought Theo but they told me they will ONLY give this info to my attorney if I am ready to sue them otherwise they will protect the seller privacy.

=========================================

Theo,

After respond you here your message given me the idea to check on SEDO my past invoices.

BINGO! the data was still present and the seller has now been identified :)

Guess who was the seller?

I can guess too, but I'm very excited to hear who it was now. :)
 
The ones that sold to DomainPlus the domain.
(look with DomainTools.com WHOIS history... they are spanish)
So in fact not the last owner but the previous last owner!


This is really stupid and they have nothing to win doing this.
I guess they received a buying offer and immediately put it at auction with no more control.

How to prevent this?

When a domain is put at auction SEDO should verify the WHOIS to ensure the actual owner is still the same.
 
...they told me they will ONLY give this info to my attorney if I am ready to sue them otherwise they will protect the seller privacy.

cybertonic, even though I would tend agree with what I think is your assessment and the fraud was probably not intentional (after all, people can and do make stupid mistakes or have drops happen and don't notice), I see not reason for SEDO to act this way.

In this case, where an apparent fraud issue (intentional or not) occurred, it strikes me as an insane way for SEDO to want to do business. The privacy argument for this case does nothing to build any trust in either buyers or sellers for their marketplace.

Also, from what I have seen of the SEDO system, it looks like they do attempt to check WHOIS information (which is the right thing to do), however, my guess is that they don't get updated whois data on a regular basis.

pcproffenno, did you guess correctly? ;)

-Commerce
 
The issue is with Sedo and has nothing to do with the current owner.

No more discussion or comment please.

Thanks,
 
Apparently it was an honest mistake as Commerce pointed out the original sellers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom