For Sale url.com stolen!

Originally posted by zealot
These stolen domains were expired and some of them were going to be dropped. We would have had chance to register them.

So, all of us are victims too.

Get it?

I'd love to see you argue that in court.

btw, nameinvestor said these were not expired.

 

You will understand me better after WLS will be approved by ICANN.

 

the WLS has no impact on the law - so can you please explain the legal basis for your point that the fact that you might have been able to register the domain makes you a victim of theft?

Also, if the thefts are occurring pre-deletion - then the WLS wouldn't even come into play.

 

[DomeBase]

Originally posted by zealot
These stolen domains were expired and some of them were going to be dropped. We would have had chance to register them.

So, all of us are victims too.

Get it?

It is really tough to get legal action when the benefit is concentrated and the harm is dispersed... particularly when there is uncertainty or randomization involved.

An analogous situation perhaps was the .INFO roll out, in which some people played by the rules and put in requests for names in the Land Rush period... and other people got ahead in line (cheated) by submitting fake trademark information in the Sunrise Period. Although there is no doubt that people in the Land Rush period were collectively cheated out of their opportunity to register those names fraudulently taken in the Sunrise period, it was very, very tough to make a legal case because no one individual was certain to have gotten the name in Land Rush. Thus, there was no legal action initiated. Concentrated benefit, diffuse harm and uncertainty.

Although I am not an expert in domain drops/transfers -- my hunch is that the situation with these transfers/drops is even more complicated than the .INFO because there is a continuum of grey areas in terms of what is ethical and legal. If it is a matter of some people getting upset because other people were faster and smarter (in an ethical manner), then this is not stealing or a cause for sympathy. However, if it is a matter of some people getting upset because a clear law or ethical rule has been broken, then both sympathy and action are warranted. For my two cents, it is probably hard for people responding to this post to figure out which of these two perspectives is correct without more detail.

When I wrote up my study estimating what percentage of .INFO Sunrise registrations were bogus, I went into great detail explaning *how* I detected and defined registrations that were probably bogus so that my readers could understand and act accordingly. Some people have said that my report and methodology influenced Afilias' decision to challenge as many as 25% of the Sunrise regs. Probably if I had just said "people are cheating and stealling names" without explanation, my report would have been less effective in getting action.

Anyway, sorry for getting long winded. My point is that there is no need for heated words here. Additional explanation of the criteria for identifying "theft" will help folks determine whether this is a case of being upset with someone else "playing the game quicker" or "cheating."

Hope this helps.

 

[bidawinner]

Thank you domebase for the excellent summary of the situation.

I am sure you are correct ..you would have been less effective..

So in other words you felt it important to show who, what ,where and when and it tended shroud you with credibility..

nice approach wish others would learn by it...