If you own any vacant land please fill up a quick claim deed to have it transferred to me so that I can build a home on it. If you paid monies for the land I am very sorry because I want it for free so I can provide highest and best use of it. Domi, your statement is utter nonsense.
__________________ Sign up as a Beta user atBands.TV Bars.tv Punk.tv Cabo.tv Rwanda.tv, Bulgaria.tv, Sri-lanka.tv Cleveland.tv, Minneapolis.tv, Oakland.tv, PaloAlto.tv, StPetersburg.tv, Scottsdale.tv, SanAntonio.tv, Alabama.tv
The bid has nothing to do with this debate. Anyways that was Handled between me and the seller. How is he a legitimate domainer? what is he doing other than hoarding domains for his own personal game?
Hoarding anyone is allowed to reg as many domains as they like there are no restrictions or limits. So who appointed you to tell others how the internet is run ?
He certainly does have a legit business: it's an investment. If he owned a corner of the gold market, and was sitting on that investment, would you take it from him because you wanted to make jewelry?
Well you stated your opinion as fact, that what he was doing was not what the internet was created for. When there is no one reason, there are no limited 100 reasons. The fact is the registering of domains is perfectly legal and legit. NO opinion that is a 100 % complete fact.
..... welcome to the world of DOMAINERS! Where people make a business out of owning MORE than one domain. Whether this be for the sheer thrill of owning them or they develop their assets, is secondary. Which gets to point that if you own more than one domain that's not immediately developed, you're also hoarding them for the your personal game. Just a little "nudge" to think before making accusations
If you own a piece of land, it's yours. In Texas you're entitled to enforce your property line with violence if need arises. If you rent an apartment, no landlord can evict you if you pay your rent on time and you're otherwise in compliance with regulations. No matter the point of view - whether you own a domain or merely rent it, IF you're paying your annual dues and don't violate any laws, it's no one's fair game to take. If one applies the concept of generic abbreviations onto the domain concept, it should be even less possible to steal someone's assets as there's no valid reason.
Or, point in case: www.gmail.de - many will remember the story - the same/closely similar rules apply
I also have just finished a site with part of my names up for sale, but thinking about it, what about for example buydomains.com? How can they get away with having all their names with ads and all are for sale.
So far it seems that you can only park pure geo names, as country and city names can not be TMed, and pure generic names. All other names are better to 'unpark'?
And would having a valuable, non generic name, 'unparked' be enough?
Of course developing might be better, although many here have hundreds or even thousands of (valuable) names and developing many of them is practically impossible.
Would having a 'coming soon' page instead of 'unparking' or even a simple picture like for example ozb.com already be a better alternative then 'unparked' with really nothing to see?
Wow, i think DOMI should re-read what he's saying.
His logic is terribly flawed, if what he was saying was the case - How would businesses work? There'd be no competition, nothing.
He took the risk, he bought the domains, they should be his to do what he pleases with... This is a very bad precedent to set and if it's not rectified may very well encourage even more reverse hijacking... I can see some unethical domainers jumping aboard, creating corporations with 2-3 letter acronyms and taking a chance on a few UDRPs
If you had as much money as him you would probably invest into a large percentage of certain markets too.
I really hesitated in replying to anything you said because of the legitimacy of the nature of your comments. I will most likely not respond to your response.
EDIT: Just read your last post. Whatever dude. You have too much time on your hands.
Here's a thought - what if LH.com was the ONLY domain he owned? Then he's hoarding 1 domain that is not being used in the best interest of the internet, right? Not right? If not right, then what's the magic number of domains 1 person can own and park without it considered to be hoarding domains? Who is supposed to come up with that number and how can they base that number on a logical argument for the better of the internet? Also, how is one to determine legitimate use of the name? What if LH.com was the only name he owned and he put a personal non-business site on it? It's not a business so he still is hoarding it and deserves to lose it?
If owning 1 name and not "legitimately using" it aka parking it or putting nothing on it is hoarding, then that makes YOU (nor any of us) no different than HIM and thereby indicates we all have the right for our domains to be taken from us by companies on the simple basis that they have more money and can afford to bully us.
So...which is it? The impossible-to-determine "magic number" of domains that people are supposed to own, or all of us including you are hoarding names and are not doing what's best for the internet?
Does this mean i can claim samryan.com because it's my name and it's parked at the moment?
Does this mean i can claim sam.com because it's my name and it's parked at the moment?
so I can provide highest and best use of it. Domi, your statement is utter nonsense.
the same/closely similar rules apply
!
