Dynadot

alert The fund can't be withdrawal from Epik.com via Masterbucks wallet

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

enamebroker

Top Member
Impact
493
It happened on 23rd Aug 2022 and this matter lasted almost one month without any process. Masterbucks.com declined my fund withdrawal and disabled the button of fund withdrawal. And I contacted Epik.com and got no further action even if Rob Monster got involved in it for two weeks. All the time I was told in email by management review.

What is wrong with Epik.com? Do you think it is normal to disable fund withdrawal? How can I get back my fund from Epik.com? Thanks for your suggestion.

Capture4.JPG
 
85
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Cheers.

Just thinking out loud here, filtering some noise

We have this user here, who sold a domain on behalf of another member. Not paying her what's owed for months. A 100K. Fact. Proven. Written IOY.

What should we do about it? You know... A professional forum... The kind that's been known to infract users solely for using an unprofessional avatar...

Would love to know the reasoning...
On a side note, I would not support @Rob Monster account being banned completely.

If he wants to come here and explain the situation, he should be allowed to do so.

However, he should be on a short leash. No self-promotion, no threats, no BS.

Brad
 
15
•••
The more Rob doesnt talk, more looks like D.B. Cooper.

The data leak contains something that was related to fish & chips politics or worse... & likely to attract higher instance attention.

Regards
 
8
•••
3
•••
On a side note, I would not support @Rob Monster account being banned completely.

If he wants to come here and explain the situation, he should be allowed to do so.

However, he should be on a short leash. No self-promotion, no threats, no BS.

Brad

Tough one. I'm on the fence about this.

I really don't know what the best move would be.

I would love him to stop by to apologize/explain. I would've granted him that opportunity at an earlier stage. I'm afraid it's wishful thinking. Legal won't allow it.

In a perfect world yes. Given circumstances...
 
3
•••
A PRO badge is quite literally an endorsement of an individual. It's not a objective thing where you hit certain numbers and boom you're a pro. It's also based on standing in the community, character, integrity, etc. It surprises me how any entity in the domaining world would choose to continue to endorse this. But I thought the same thing 2, 3, maybe even 4 years ago so life is full of surprises.

This whole mess, in its totality, should have only been a stain on Epik and it's board members, investors, partners, all the people who ran the weird little side-projects, all the attack-dogs and people who volunteered their time for free to attack and harass people who would speak up, everyone who continued to profit even when they could tell something was wrong here... It didn't have to get this bad. We allowed it to.

But instead of merely being a stain on Epik & co., it's exposing a lot of issues with domaining as a whole, not just with Epik.

  • How long will Epik remain in good standing with ICAAN?
  • How many people are being scammed on .tv's at Epik, for example, that don't know anyone on a forum who can help them get in touch with the right people at GoDaddy (the leading brain in our industry, like it our not)?
  • How many customers, who don't read forums, are going to lose their domains and renewal fees until ICAAN does something?
  • How many new "Escrow" transactions are being set up each day that the sellers will never get paid for?
  • Where are all the people who were pretending this was a real escrow service and vouching for it up and down?
  • How many people are continuing to list their portfolios, unknowing that they'll never be paid for their sales?

This really doesn't inspire trust, in an industry that already has a shaky reputation (even if you don't like to admit it, it's true, sorry, most people don't like us and sometimes they're not wrong).

We expect customers to hit random landing pages of companies they've never heard of, and fork over thousands of dollars. This requires high levels of trust, and the response as a whole is rightfully eroding whatever bit of trust or integrity there is in this space.

We've seen how much money Epik can continue to collect even when they've stopped providing services. What's to stop any other registrar from taking the same path? What's to stop any credible registrar from being sold, the new owners decide to drain it and stop renewing, stop paying out for sales, etc. We can be pretty certain that they'd get away with it for at least a few months. What's to stop any of that? Before recently, I'd have said ICAAN.

Seeing the breakdown at the highest levels of domaining means trust is more important than ever, since the actual systems and institutions in place seem to be dragging their feet.

If a registrar larger than Epik was running into trouble, they could probably get away with millions before anything happened to put a stop to it. Maybe Epik has gotten away with millions by now. We know about a couple of big sales that Epik didn't pay out for, but imagine how many smaller ones there are, too. People reach out to support, support tells them to wait and that it's all good, and the victims keep piling up.

You don't really have the luxury of being neutral when you're on a sinking ship. "Guys, calm down, stay in your cabins, it's just an iceberg. The iceberg has some good points, let's hear it out. Ignore the water at your ankles, it's nothing, it's fake news, you aren't up to your waist in water now, just wait here a bit longer as I grab the last lifeboat... Trust me, I'm an investor in this ship, it's going to be okay. In fact, we created our own boat rating services, and we have a 5 star safety rating! Here, just use this snorkel, you're going to be okay, don't listen to the haters, it's a coordinated attack on us."

We've got ICAAN-accredited Epik still accepting payments, GoDaddy buying up any viable competitor/useful service and knee-capping them to stunt any innovation, we've got the top domaining forum endorsing verifiable scammers/former sponsors, what a mess.

As domainers, we pay entirely too much rent to to middlemen for doing next to nothing, or actively holding back innovation as part of their business model. SPaaS, stunting progress as a service.
 
19
•••
I think Rob’s only excuse his lawyer telling him dont talk.

Don't make things up.

Rob doesn't have a lawyer representing him in this proceeding:


Screenshot 2023-05-30 at 6.41.17 PM.png


The plaintiff didn't file for default judgment against him because the plaintiff decided to file an amended complaint instead, which re-sets the clock for an answer.

Why the plaintiff believes service by email to that address to be sufficient is an open question. The original complaint was served on his residential address. So, they must have had some communication with him, but he is most certainly not represented by a lawyer thus far in this proceeding.
 
5
•••
Why the plaintiff believes service by email to that address to be sufficient is an open question.
Especially since the domain for the email address is with Epik, that's playing with fire as to whether the domain is even active. At least in this case, it looks like Rob was able to get in renewed just a couple weeks ago.

I guess some domains are getting renewed after all...
 
8
•••
The compliance process at ICANN (one "A", two "N"s), is designed more along the lines of assisting registrars to become compliant, and isn't really set up to shut down a registrar until things have escalated pretty far.

That's why it is important to get a lot of folks submitting the detailed information about their particular situation.

If someone can't renew a domain, loses the domain, and complains to ICANN, then ICANN can't get the domain name back for them. ICANN will get a complaint, notify the registrar and allow time for the registrar to respond and explain what happened. Sometimes the answer is "yep, we screwed up, and we have taken measures to avoid making that mistake again" because, sure, mistakes happen when a company is managing thousands of low-margin transactions.

So, yes, the usual externally-observable outcome of ICANN compliance is nothing.

However, it gets to be harder for the registrar to keep doing the same song and dance in response to a large volume of the same complaint, and they can't say "we've gotten the problem fixed" after the 20th occurrence. At that point, ICANN can start the formal process of issuing a notice to the registrar that they have 30 days (last time I checked) to actually fix what appears to be a systemic problem.

It does not work along the lines of some rapid response to an evolving meltdown like what is apparently happening at Epik.

Where ICANN usually gets excited are situations in which the registrar is not paying its fees to ICANN.
 
30
•••
@jberryhill Thank you for the correction, and sharing your insights (here, and everywhere else on the forum).

I don't really have an understanding on the whole process here, so your info is very helpful in adjusting my expectations.

It really is on us to try to self-police and warn people as much as possible while the wheels slowly turn, so props to everyone who has been working tirelessly in doing so.
 
11
•••
Don't make things up.
In my defense, I said “i think”
It was only plausible explanation i could come with.

The next is a self-deprecating meme based off this; so dont think about u; and verbally eviscerate me with logic.
IMG_4854.gif
Thank you for the clarification! U probably hate the show
 
Last edited:
0
•••
epik and Royce's response to Adkisson's Amended Complaint is live. Is "Royce Epik Holdings, Inc" an actual company or do their attorney's just stink?
 

Attachments

  • 197110706628.pdf
    549 KB · Views: 49
10
•••
The first 3 words of Epik and Royce's attorney's response to Adkisson's 1st Amended Complaint seem to be typos.

Screenshot from 2023-05-30 20-52-26.png




Better find a black or at least brown shoe attorney.

Screenshot from 2023-05-30 20-50-35.png
 
8
•••
epik and Royce's response to Adkisson's Amended Complaint is live. Is "Royce Epik Holdings, Inc" an actual company or do their attorney's just stink?

epik_defense.jpg


1.) It seems like the claim is pretty clear.

The plaintiff wired $327,000 to Epik for an "escrow" transaction facilitated by Epik CEO, Chairman, and majority shareholder Rob Monster.

The domain was not transferred. The money was not refunded (in a year).

2.) Yeah, sure. I doubt there is a less than (1) year statute of limitations when it comes to being scammed out of $300,000+.

3.) Just throwing everything at the wall I guess.

4.) The plaintiff wired $327,000 to Epik for a domain. The domain was not delivered and the money was not returned. The plaintiff doesn't have standing?

6.) Epik Escrow took the escrow payment via the Epik CEO, Chairman, and majority shareholder Rob Monster. Why would Epik not be responsible for the damages?

9.) Epik and Brian Royce acted in good faith? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:

Is that what you call taking an escrow payment and not delivering the domain or a refund?

Or is the good faith all the promises Brian made and failed to keep?

Epik already admitted they received the escrow payment, the transfer did not happen, the money was not refunded, and they still owe the money.

Epik either has the funds to pay the plaintiff back and has decided not to, or does not have the funds to pay the plaintiff back. Either way there is some explaining to do in where those "escrow" funds went.

Escrow funds are not a company or personal slush fund to do with as you please.

So I guess Epik's stance is something like this -

Sure, we took a $327,000 (unlicensed) escrow payment a year ago and failed to perform. We did not deliver the domain or a refund (in a year). We owe him the money, but we will just pay him back when/if we feel like it.

Brad
 
Last edited:
13
•••
2
•••
12
•••
Show attachment 238738

1.) It seems like the claim is pretty clear.

The plaintiff wired $327,000 to Epik for an "escrow" transaction facilitated by Epik CEO, Chairman, and majority shareholder Rob Monster.

The domain was not transferred. The money was not refunded (in a year).

2.) Yeah, sure. I doubt there is a less than (1) year statute of limitations when it comes to being scammed out of $300,000+.

3.) Just throwing everything at the wall I guess.

4.) The plaintiff wired $327,000 to Epik for a domain. The domain was not delivered and the money was not returned. The plaintiff doesn't have standing?

6.) Epik Escrow took the escrow payment via the Epik CEO, Chairman, and majority shareholder Rob Monster. Why would Epik not be responsible for the damages?

9.) Epik and Brian Royce acted in good faith? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:

Is that what you call taking an escrow payment and not delivering the domain or a refund?

Or is the good faith all the promises Brian made and failed to keep?

Epik already admitted they received the escrow payment, the transfer did not happen, the money was not refunded, and they still owe the money.

Epik either has the funds to pay the plaintiff back and has decided not to, or does not have the funds to pay the plaintiff back. Either way there is some explaining to do in where those "escrow" funds went.

Escrow funds are not a company or personal slush fund to do with as you please.

So I guess Epik's stance is something like this -

Sure, we took a $327,000 (unlicensed) escrow payment a year ago and failed to perform. We did not deliver the domain or a refund (in a year). We owe him the money, but we will just pay him back when/if we feel like it.

Brad
Yeah, pretty ridiculous stuff and super weird that Monster's company is paying for Royce's attorney, well, technically my 10 USDC and bunch of other suckers' money paid for those terrible lawyers but still very weird we didn't also pay for Monster's attorney. Someone obviously has firm grip on Monster's you know whats or he would have fired Royce long ago and be using Epik attorney and it must be something related to criminal activity because Monster wouldn't care about a civil suit he can kick for years. It is all so tiresome and black pilling.

Anyway, I am looking forward to discovery and Monster's response to Adkisson, which is due by this Tuesday or we're back into default judgement territory again. However, I'll be surprised if we ever see either.
 
8
•••
3
•••
Last edited:
2
•••
Monster's future.
Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of Theranos, is in federal prison today.

She was once described as the youngest self-made billionaire.

She will now be working alongside other inmates for between 12 cents and $1.15 an hour.

Most will go towards restitution payments to victims.

 
13
•••
When it comes to DNProtect.com [...] Epik has reportedly taken control of assets that don't belong to them.
Bill should've bought the stolen domain insurance.
 
7
•••
The compliance process at ICANN (one "A", two "N"s), is designed more along the lines of assisting registrars to become compliant, and isn't really set up to shut down a registrar until things have escalated pretty far.

That's why it is important to get a lot of folks submitting the detailed information about their particular situation.

If someone can't renew a domain, loses the domain, and complains to ICANN, then ICANN can't get the domain name back for them. ICANN will get a complaint, notify the registrar and allow time for the registrar to respond and explain what happened. Sometimes the answer is "yep, we screwed up, and we have taken measures to avoid making that mistake again" because, sure, mistakes happen when a company is managing thousands of low-margin transactions.

So, yes, the usual externally-observable outcome of ICANN compliance is nothing.

However, it gets to be harder for the registrar to keep doing the same song and dance in response to a large volume of the same complaint, and they can't say "we've gotten the problem fixed" after the 20th occurrence. At that point, ICANN can start the formal process of issuing a notice to the registrar that they have 30 days (last time I checked) to actually fix what appears to be a systemic problem.

It does not work along the lines of some rapid response to an evolving meltdown like what is apparently happening at Epik.

Where ICANN usually gets excited are situations in which the registrar is not paying its fees to ICANN.
Epik's adjustment of the auto-renew grace period (0-45 days set by the registrar) is effectively gaming the system. Many of those who file complaints about non-renewals may do so within that window so Epik can, if notified ICANN, just renew the domain name. It helps Epik's cashflow situation in spreading the payments with what is basically an interest-free loan. If this is what is happening, then ICANN will be happy that most of these complaints are successfully resolved. There are no breach notices on the ICANN Breaches, Suspensions and Terminations page.

https://www.icann.org/compliance/notices

Regards...jmcc
 
4
•••
The epik Titanic has sunk beyond the point of no return.
 
Last edited:
2
•••
Well, the $327,000 was from May 2022. Kathleen's $100K was from Sept 2022.

That money was long gone before the RICO case was filed.

Brad
And Brian claims that his plan is to fix Epik this week. I don't believe that will happen.

Brian Epik.png
 
6
•••
And Brian claims that his plan is to fix Epik this week. I don't believe that will happen.

Show attachment 238817
I will believe that when I see it.

Hopefully the fix is paying all the victims back, and not trying to use the new Wyoming based Epik LLC for some shenanigans like shifting assets and debts around.

Brad
 
Last edited:
13
•••
5
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back