The Elephant in the Room--Chef Patrick and Oversee Breach of Customer Info

[Ms Domainer]

*

I never know with this site

http://domaingang.com/editorial/there-will-be-no-post-about-chef-patrick/​

what's real or fake, but another site also confirms this.

If true, sad day, indeed.

Either way, because it's out there, Chef Patrick needs to address this issue ASAP to either clear his name or apologize.


*

 

[donnied79]

Steal an apple and kill a people are both crimes but there is a huge difference in the seriousness..
Since the beginning this story was proposed on Rick Schwartz blog like a huge scandal for the industry, comparing it to the Halvarez scandal.
Yes Chef Patrick didn't act correctly and will face the consequences but in my mind it's clear that the worst part is the exploitation of this situation from Rick Schwartz.

 

[DU]

I'm sorta on Chef Patrick's side... yes, he shouldn't have looked up the information, but he didn't do anything malicious.

It's not the intent that matters it's the action.

Does moniker tolerate this kind of activity?
That's the issue.

He did multiple things wrong.

1) He looked
2) He acted on it

There were two opportunities for him not to not screw up and he failed on both.

Failed on 1) No one knows but there's issue Moniker has internally
Failed on 2) People know and there's an issue for Moniker externally

If he had concerns there were ways to contact the holder of a privacy domain that weren't unethical. Other than that? You just deal with it... who do you know that would have visited ChefPatrickSucks.com anyway?

Still - the real issue is for people who like to use privacy. What does that mean?

If you want privacy you have to do it yourself - and it's a pain..why you pay..but you expect it to be honored.

 

[PlusNames]

So a privacy breach doesn't bother anyone?

It does normally, but under this circumstance it doesn't... I know Patrick wouldn't have done something like this if the whole chefpatricksuck.com deal would have happened...

And it's not like your information is really private... it's extremely easy to find out who the real owner is... i.e., you can just contact the owner, and ones he/she emails you back you can just get the persons IP from the email. Map the IP and you now have his/her location and can go from there...

---------- Post added at 05:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:38 PM ----------

So a privacy breach doesn't bother anyone?

---------- Post added at 06:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:32 PM ----------

In his post, he mentions that he wanted to know why that person registered that name and that's why he looked it up. All he had to do was send an e-mail to the address in the whois and the e-mail will be forwarded to the owner of the e-mail. He didn't need to break any rules.

Agreed, he should have just emailed the person, but when emotions are involved we do things we later regret.

 

[silentg]

What's with all the hate against Rick? Rick was just the messenger. If it wasn't for him, none of this would have came out. Even the post on Patrick's blog is a response to Rick's post.

You should be mad at Moniker/Oversee for not coming out earlier.

 

[Archangel]

All I'm saying is: It's NOT that Rick brought it up. That a good thing. It was his EXECUTION that disturbs me. Trying to make something of this tiny magnitude look like the Holocaust is poor. Rick is just trying to get his name into the picture.

What's with all the hate against Rick? Rick was just the messenger. If it wasn't for him, none of this would have came out. Even the post on Patrick's blog is a response to Rick's post.

You should be mad at Moniker/Oversee for not coming out earlier.

Everyone should be grateful to Rick for exposing this.

It's disturbing how many think cover-ups are OK.

If your doctor gave information about you he would be struck off, if your bank abused your privacy they would be fined millions of $.
Anyone who believes in their right to privacy cannot condone this breach.

He has now lost his integrity which will cost him dearly, not to mention the harm it will do to his ex-employer.

 

[DU]

A UDRP might have been in order. The guy who regged the "sucks" site bears some responsibility as well; by parking the page, it was no longer a bonafide review site but a squatted pay-per-click page. The minute that squatter put ads on that domain (what did he expect when he parked it?), he lost the right to own that domain. Chef Patrick should have known that and should have acted accordingly.
*

If I regged JenniferS****S*****IsAC*ckSlut.com and pointed it to some porn you'd bother to spend the $1K+ to try and win the domain through UDRP (and continue to renew it) even though most of the time you'd lose?

Just saying.

I fully expect DNJournal to produce a reasoned follow up that makes the appropriate points. It's supposed to be a journalistic view of Domaining and Ron got himself involved so I'd be curious to know his position.

Me? I still don't really trust anyone. I know people in many places that violated policies. You think if you're famous that your private life is secret? Yah right.

 

[DU]

Heh, a wise policy perhaps.

I should change that to... I don't trust a LOT of people. There are people on this forum I do trust... I've yet to be disappointed actually ....

---------- Post added at 09:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:23 PM ----------

I hate to point this out..

BUT

ChefPatrickSucks.com is no longer pointed at Gay PRON!

That said...now the parking page says:

Chefpatricksucks.com
What you need, when you need it

Now that actually allowed my dirty mind to feel a little warm tingle of laughter.

 

[johname]

When this first came out I expected it to be a guy that worked at say "Walmart" regging walmartsucks.com and using it as a whistle blower site. Then someone uses the private info alerts walmart of the employee owning that name, and subsequently loses their job.

Turns out it two of the "domainer conference attendee" types having a spat.

It's not Halvarez the sequel.

Unless the victim comes out and says something different then what cp said today the story is over to me.

 

[Archangel]

ChefPatrickBlows.com is avail if anyone wants it lol

I hate to point this out..

BUT

ChefPatrickSucks.com is no longer pointed at Gay PRON!

That said...now the parking page says:

Chefpatricksucks.com
What you need, when you need it

Now that actually allowed my dirty mind to feel a little warm tingle of laughter.

 

[DnEbook]

the issue of your rights to privacy and not to be harassed at your workplace see this to be a no so usual scandal , i think chefs reputation is indeed tarnished as a result of this , i wonder if morgan linton will do a post on it ???

 

[silentg]

Member on DNF brought this up. You might want to think twice before getting a domain privacy at Moniker.

The real question is why can a employee of a a company just look under the privacy protection...

 

[Michelle]

What he did imo was very very wrong but reading between the lines and the comments the name was registered by someone whom he knew with the possible motive to *get CP to do wrong* if this is the case .. yes he fell for it and whomever *they* are got what they wanted..

Still does not make anything right but what a shady mess

 

[carob]

Why do we pay Moniker for WHOIS Privacy if it can be breached by an employee?

There are known issues with Moniker Privacy failing, turning itself off and so on. It is about as private as hiding behind a sheet that is flapping in a high wind.

If a product does not do what it says, should you be offering it?

If you sell it and it fails, what action can the disappointed customer take against you?

 

[firefly]

I like Patrick.

That being said, some of the people that are defending him here need to ask themselves the question, would I feel as magnanimous and forgiving if it were someone they are not as familiar with and was/is seen (previously?) as a valued and trusted member of our community.

Trust can take a long time to build and unfortunately can be destroyed in an instant. The fact that this particular issue hinges on the issues of trust and ethics makes all the more sad to see.

GF...thanks for pointing out that comment from the blog. Unfortunately, she is spot on.

 

[dragtastic]

im so sick of this already

thats all I have been seeing on domaining - 1 post is enough - now every single domain blogger is going to keep beating a dead horse.

so who cares if someone registered CPsucks.com
he took it too personally and now everyone is talking about him - pretty smart in my opinoin.

 

[exsedo]

im so sick of this already

thats all I have been seeing on domaining - 1 post is enough - now every single domain blogger is going to keep beating a dead horse.

so who cares if someone registered CPsucks.com
he took it too personally and now everyone is talking about him - pretty smart in my opinoin.

I don't think anyone cares who regged it except CP.

Not a smart move IMO.
He could see increased traffic to his blog for a short while but after this dies down ?

 

[firefly]

Oversee/ Moniker operates a domain trade show named Domain Fest.

Prick Schwartz operates TRAFFIC.

So, they are competitors. Do you think that fact may explain some of Schwartz's maneuvering and animosity?

Doesn't really matter who blew the whistle and for what reason, it is a mute point. It doesn't change the fact that what went on is/was an ethical breach by an individual. A very humbling one if you take a paid service like privacy seriously.

 

[Dave_Z]

If you sell it and it fails, what action can the disappointed customer take against you?

Take it up with the provider, report it to your local consumer-handling government agency, maybe even dispute your payment for it. Although none of those options can guarantee what you want, at least they're some things you can explore.

To think this started as, ironically, a private affair among Moniker, their rep and one of their clients that eventually became public because of Rick and that client. Not necessarily a wrong thing to do since it can help bring attention to a company to get their act together or else.

If one feels what Moniker has done (or not done) isn't enough, then one probably has a decision to make and deal with its results after.

 

[labrocca]

Yes I see that now at least in the replies of blog posts. Rick had 150 replies. Took a while to read them all. I've read Patricks explanation a few times. I could tear apart his blog post heavily. It's filled with some very questionable statements imho. He says one thing then a paragraph later seems to say another.

I just don't believe his motives were benign. He acted emotionally and with malicious but claims he was just hurt and investigating and meant no harm. BS.

 

[~ The 34 Year Buzz!!]

*
...
If true, sad day, indeed...

Big mistake: Trust is hard to earn and even harder to re-build.
On the other hand, everyone does make some mistakes, and people tend to forgive and forget. :wave:

 

[silentg]

He posted on his blog that he left Moniker on good terms. They probably gave him a going away party as well. this privacy breach is pretty serious. Now we know all employees got access to our personal information. .

---------- Post added at 11:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:59 PM ----------

Moniker / Oversee is still hiding behind Chef and letting him take all the heat.

 

[labrocca]

I'm not personally concerned that an employee has access to data. It's like saying NP mods shouldn't have access to my IP or email. If you're on staff at a company data shouldn't be expected to be hidden from them. That being said I don't expect my data to be shared with 3rd parties which I don't have any expectations of privacy with nor have I given permission to share the data.

I'm not going to fine tooth comb their privacy policy but I gotta believe Chef Patrick broke it.
http://www.moniker.com/privacypolicy.jsp

 

[hawkeye]

I'm not personally concerned that an employee has access to data. It's like saying NP mods shouldn't have access to my IP or email. ..

Uhh, no, not if you 'paid to keep it private'!!! That's like saying it's ok for every bank teller/employee to just go thru your bank records at their whim because they're an employee there!

Interesting peoples take on what is ok to do with what others have paid and trusted to be 'private'!!!

 

[labrocca]

Uhh, no, not if you 'paid to keep it private'!!! That's like saying it's ok for every bank teller/employee to just go thru your bank records at their whim because they're an employee there!

You're taking it too far. It appears that Chef Patrick was working in a broker capacity. Which imho would probably give him whois information. Just like a bank teller. When I go to make a deposit they have to see my address and bank account number. I don't expect the janitor at the bank to know my data but I do believe Patrick's role did require him to have whois info access.

Patrick had a trust from Oversee. He broke that trust. There is no one to blame for that action other than him. Oversee could certainly have handled this better but we aren't privy to all the details. They have not made any public posting about the situation. Patricks own public statements imho speak enough about his actions that in my view shows his breach of trust and misdeeds.

 

[hawkeye]

...Now, do you expect a registrar's employee not to look at your domain's actual details in their internal tools for any reason whatsoever? Will there be an objection if, say, an employee looks it up to notify you for renewal, or if they receive a UDRP notice or...

If 'I' paid for privacy protect, yes 'I' would. But that's just me, I expect to get what I pay for.

They can contact me, through the normal privacy contact process, or thru my account info which that domain sits, and 'ask' me for such a needful arrangement. One of many purposes of an account rep. There is 'nothing' that important someone at a domain registry would need to breach policy to get personal info. Without a court order that is.