Dynadot

legal Arizona court orders that ETH.LINK domain name be transferred back to True Names

NameSilo
Impact
2,904
20 0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Impact
5,711
A good one.

On a side note,

Plaintiffs allege they entered into a 2018 Domain Name Registration Agreement with Defendants GoDaddy, Inc. and GoDaddy.com LLC (collectively, “GoDaddy”), for the domain name eth[.]link (the “Domain”)

Actually, Plaintiffs entered into a Domain Name Registration Agreement with Cayman-based Uniregistry in 2018, which was later acquired by GoDaddy. Wasn't the domain sold as uniregistry expired on Dynadot?

Unfortunately, the court did not explain in clear terms why it was wrong to sell o transfer the domain as a pre-release expired one. A global change in this aspect may be good (as this would eliminate situations where some expired domains simply never return to the market under any model due to internal transfers to either registrar-owned entities / netsol, opensrs / or to particular domainers who are in bed with some registrars or their resellers. On the other hand, a global change may not be that good - do we really want all expireds be technically deleted and end up on dropcatch?
 
Last edited:

bmugford

www.DataCube.comTop Contributor
Impact
42,447
This case really goes to the core of registrant rights.

While the owner was in prison, it appears his lawyer was involved. I don't understand why no one could login to the account and renew it, get a power of attorney, or use some other legal mechanism to renew it.

I am curious to see what went on behind the scenes with this one, as it appears from reports that GoDaddy allowed a third party to renew this domain in the past. How cooperative was GoDaddy in trying to resolve this situation? I feel like it never should have got to this point.

It also creates a potential conflict of interest. When it comes to a registrar, it is far more financially beneficial for a domain to expire than be renewed. In this situation for example, the difference is between a $10 renewal and $800,000 sale.

Brad
 
Last edited:

iTesla

Established Member
Impact
540
This case really goes to the core of registrant rights.

While the owner was in prison, it appears his lawyer was involved. I don't understand why no one could login to the account and renew it, get a power of attorney, or use some other legal mechanism to renew it.

I am curious to see what went on behind the scenes with this one, as it appears from reports that GoDaddy allowed a third party to renew this domain in the past. How cooperative was GoDaddy in trying to resolve this situation? I feel like it never should have got to this point.

It also creates a potential conflict of interest. When it comes to a registrar, it is far more financially beneficial for a domain to expire than be renewed.

Brad
Also if he is in prison, why it was not possible to talk on phone or make a visit so he gives the passwords for email and registrar account to trusted people so they renew it?
 

bmugford

www.DataCube.comTop Contributor
Impact
42,447
Also if he is in prison, why it was not possible to talk on phone or make a visit so he gives the passwords for email and registrar account to trusted people so they renew it?

I don't really know what happened behind the scenes, but there has to be some reasonable accommodation.

Can you be held in prison for instance, and not ever be allowed to contact someone to pay your property tax? I highly doubt it.

If that was the case, they could just end up taking your house when you have no opportunity to even pay property tax.

Also, being in prison itself is the punishment. I know nothing about the case where this guy was sentenced, but that is besides the point.

It seems like the owner's lawyer was involved. This was his property and I think reasonable accommodations should have been made to resolve this before it got to this point.

Brad
 
Last edited:
Impact
5,711
OK, GoDaddy/Dynadot will now return the domain back to the original account via registrar transfer. DNS servers (bodis parking at the time of this writing) will unlikely be changed during the transfer. True Names could not access this account due to some unknown reason, and likely they still cannot access it now. So, how they are supposed to change DNS and start using the domain again?
 
Last edited:

Haroon Basha

Service.xyzTop Contributor
Impact
7,334
Last edited:
Impact
426
I have many non-important names renewed for multiple years. The owner doing renewals one year at a time for something that impotant to him is pretty stupid.
 

Kingslayer

Top Contributor
Impact
7,193
I agree with this, I don’t like the whole process ‘auctioning off expired domains’ – Especially if these domains are clearly a $10k+ domain asset.

Domain investors regard domain names as digital real estate, if that is the case then we need to start treating them as real estate, if you die or some circumstances happen (such as jail/illness/war), can some fat cat take your house/car and auction it off? No they can't if you have next to kin.

There needs to be a process where domain registrants can voluntary give emergency 2nd contact infomation on all domains (such as friends/family) should they not be renewed, so the rightful owners friends or family can be contacted and benefit from this asset (should anything have happened).

Why should domain grab bots and registrars can take your asset, auction it off and make 100% profit from it?
 
Last edited:
Impact
2,618
Unfortunately, the court did not explain in clear terms why it was wrong to sell o transfer the domain as a pre-release expired one.

Luckily Brad did:

When it comes to a registrar, it is far more financially beneficial for a domain to expire than be renewed.

It's an obvious asymmetry of power. Also it's not allowed by many registries for this very reason.
 

biggie

GreenFriendly.comTop Contributor
Impact
14,708
Hi @GeorgeK

i see you don't hold back no punches either :)

nice!

imo...
 
Impact
5,711
Case law, also used interchangeably with common law, is law that is based on precedents, that is the judicial decisions from previous cases, rather than law based on constitutions, statutes, or regulations. Case law uses the detailed facts of a case that have been resolved by courts or similar tribunals. These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent.
In common law countries (including the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand), it is used for judicial decisions of selected appellate courts, courts of first instance, agency tribunals, and other bodies discharging adjudicatory functions.

Source: Wikipedia

So, does it mean that any Uniregistry customer, after his expired domain is sold on Dynadot as a pre-release one, is now able to claim the domain back in Arizona court by simply referring to eth.link precedent?
 

tiletalk

Established Member
Impact
629
Case law, also used interchangeably with common law, is law that is based on precedents, that is the judicial decisions from previous cases, rather than law based on constitutions, statutes, or regulations. Case law uses the detailed facts of a case that have been resolved by courts or similar tribunals. These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent.
In common law countries (including the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand), it is used for judicial decisions of selected appellate courts, courts of first instance, agency tribunals, and other bodies discharging adjudicatory functions.

Source: Wikipedia

So, does it mean that any Uniregistry customer, after his expired domain is sold on Dynadot as a pre-release one, is now able to claim the domain back in Arizona court by simply referring to eth.link precedent?
If you have a good team representing you then probably yes.
 

NYJimbo

Domain Re-AnimatorTop Contributor
Impact
6,809
OK, GoDaddy/Dynadot will now return the domain back to the original account via registrar transfer. DNS servers (bodis parking at the time of this writing) will unlikely be changed during the transfer. True Names could not access this account due to some unknown reason, and likely they still cannot access it now. So, how they are supposed to change DNS and start using the domain again?
Probably manually changed at the registrar if the registrant (or reresentative) requests it.
 

J.R.

Established Member
Impact
476
On the other hand, a global change may not be that good - do we really want all expireds be technically deleted and end up on dropcatch?

Drop Catch wins so many expired auctions due to making greater investments in registrar credentials.

This case provides an additional incentive for GoDaddy and other registrars to invest in more registrar credentials. GoDaddy has enough money to compete against or surpass Drop Catch, they just haven't invested into beating out Snapnames or Dropcatch. GD has been more focused on buying portfolios, etc.

Dynadot, Epik, GD, Namecheap and others need to invest more in their backorder and registrar credentials.

This is another case of the market forcing change on participants, I see this as a good thing for speculators.
 
Last edited:

bmugford

www.DataCube.comTop Contributor
Impact
42,447
My prediction is there is a relatively quick settlement where the domain is returned to the original registrant, and allowed to be renewed.

If it is true that GoDaddy allowed a third party to renew this in the past, the question has to be answered why were they not allowed to this time?

If there was no dispute over ownership, and there was no dispute over the lawyer representing his client's interests, then it seems reasonable to me that the domain should have been allowed to be renewed in the first place.

Brad
 
Last edited:

bmugford

www.DataCube.comTop Contributor
Impact
42,447
So, does it mean that any Uniregistry customer, after his expired domain is sold on Dynadot as a pre-release one, is now able to claim the domain back in Arizona court by simply referring to eth.link precedent?

I don't think this case is really likely to set that type of precedent. It seems like there was a very unique set of circumstances here that doesn't apply in many other situations.

If what has been reported is true, the owner did not exactly just walk away from his interests.

It seems like everyone was well aware of the situation and he had legal representation dealing with the registrar to try and solve this.

Now, GoDaddy might come out and dispute the facts of the case that have been reported.

Still, I would expect it to be settled as that seems like it is in the interests of the parties involved.

Brad
 
Last edited:

topdom

Top Contributor
Impact
1,522
Greatest conflict of interest: Someone is interested in seller's domain. Buyer goes to the registrar, registrar or an agent there "negotiates" the sale, but if the domain is about to expire in 2 months, they would keep the lead, and quietly wait for expiration. Seller doesn't know there is a buyer, buyer doesn't know seller is interested in selling for an ok price. I mean, such things might be happening often , I suspect.
...
Are domains like real estate? Yes, I mean, in part of the West at least, you forget to pay property tax and lose the property instead of paying a penalty fee. So real estate is like domain. But things might have changed recently.
All property in the world were actually owned by the Queen? : I heard such things.
...
IRS was unconstitutional, and it was part of the mafia, and putting people in prison for not paying income tax.
But richest people knew how not to pay any income tax... But now, IRS can't collect tax, I mean, if you don't file tax return, you just don't pay (don't trust me, check this info).
...
You are natural, so you can't be patented. But after vax, you are no longer natural human, and you can be patented: I doubt so, but if things worked the way elites planned, this would happen.
 
Last edited:
Impact
11,729
@bmugford

In all fairness, the domain wasn’t renewed for whatever reason and auctioned off. Sound familiar?

Seems like the auction winner should’ve got to keep it imo.

According to you, if the asset expires it’s not the auction winners problem that it wasn’t renewed.

This ruling is terrible.
 
Last edited:

bmugford

www.DataCube.comTop Contributor
Impact
42,447
@bmugford

In all fairness, the domain wasn’t renewed for whatever reason and auctioned off. Sound familiar?

Seems like the auction winner should’ve got to keep it imo.

You could certainly make the argument.

You could also make the argument in this case that the party did not walk away from their interests in the domain, they were simply prevented from renewing it despite their efforts.

You are clearly referring to the Epik case in my signature.

However, I am not aware of a situation where Epik might have prevented the registrant, or their representatives from renewing the domain.

That situation also involves a lack of notification, explanation, and refund.
It is not an analogous situation.

Brad
 
Last edited: