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

[GeorgeK]

An Arizona court has ordered that the ETH[.]LINK domain name be transferred back to True Names:

https://freespeech.com/2022/09/10/a...omain-name-be-transferred-back-to-true-names/

 

[Keith]

You could certainly make the argument.

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

Brad

You mean they renewed with a valid credit card and the registrar rejected it? That’s the absolute only way I’m on the original registrants side here. Jail and lawyers aren’t an excuse.

 

[bmugford]

You mean they renewed with a valid credit card and the registrar rejected it? That’s the absolute only way I’m on the original registrants side here. Jail and lawyers aren’t an excuse.

I think it is a valid legal argument to make. I don't know what role GoDaddy played in this situation.
It seems like all parties were aware of the situation regarding this domain though.

If it is true that GoDaddy allowed a third party to renew the domain in the past, they are going to have to explain that and what changed.

If the court case proceeds we will find out more information about what actually happened.

Brad

 

[Keith]

I think it is a valid legal argument to make. I don't know what role GoDaddy played in this situation.
It seems like all parties were aware of the situation regarding this domain though.

If it is true though that GoDaddy allowed a third party to renew the domain in the past, they are going to have to explain that and what changed.

If the court case proceeds we will find out more information about what actually happened.

Brad

I missed the third party renewal but it’s really irrelevant. I can renew your domains if you give me login info to access the CP.

In this case, the domain wasn’t renewed and that’s that unless - godaddy blocked parties from logging in to access the domains.

Is that what happened here? If so, of course the auction should be overturned.

 

[bmugford]

I missed the third party renewal but it’s really irrelevant. I can renew your domains if you give me login info to access the CP.

In this case, the domain wasn’t renewed and that’s that unless - godaddy blocked parties from logging in to access the domains.

Is that what happened here? If so, of course the auction should be overturned.

It seems like from reports all parties were well aware of the situation - the owner, their representatives, GoDaddy, etc.

I don't suspect we will get a clear answer, as I would expect the case to be settled before it gets to that point.

If you want to take an absolutist role, the renewal is the response of the registrant.
However, it is unclear what role GoDaddy played in that situation.

The registrant seems like they were clearly wanting to renew the domain.
Their lawyer was apparently in contact with GoDaddy regarding this.

This situation is not about a party walking away from their interests in a domain by simply not renewing it.

If the owner had legal representation, it is unclear to me why a solution could not be reached to renew this domain. Were options give to them and they failed to do what was needed? I have no idea.

This also creates other concerns regarding similar situations where someone might be incapacitated or dead. Does GoDaddy have a clear path in place to deal with ownership in these situations?

Brad

 

[bmugford]

This ruling is terrible.

It is just a preliminary injunction. It is not a ruling on the merits of the case.

If it was not granted, the situation could have become far messier.

Brad

 

[Keith]

The registrant seems like they were clearly wanting to renew the domain.
Their lawyer was apparently in contact with GoDaddy regarding this.

I call bs here.

The registrant had to simply give the lawyer login info and problem solved. Why would you contact godaddy to renew a domain? You wouldn’t if you had legit access.

It’s very easy to renew domains. Sounds like the original registrant is full of excuses.

 

[bmugford]

I call bs here.

The registrant had to simply give the lawyer login info and problem solved. Why would you contact godaddy to renew a domain? You wouldn’t if you had legit access.

It’s very easy to renew domains. Sounds like the original registrant is full of excuses.

GoDaddy will be able to present their side of what happened, if it makes it to that point.
They have not really issued a detailed explanation regarding what went on behind the scenes.

There are situations where it might not be as simple as password if someone is incapacitated, dead, or simply doesn't have access to information.

In these situations GoDaddy, or any registrar, needs to have some process regarding ownership and access.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

Practically speaking, this does show why any core assets should be renewed for much longer than (1) year.

Brad

 

[Keith]

It seems like from reports all parties were well aware of the situation - the owner, their representatives, GoDaddy, etc.

I don't suspect we will get a clear answer, as I would expect the case to be settled before it gets to that point.

If you want to take an absolutist role, the renewal is the response of the registrant.
However, it is unclear what role GoDaddy played in that situation.

The registrant seems like they were clearly wanting to renew the domain.
Their lawyer was apparently in contact with GoDaddy regarding this.

This situation is not about a party walking away from their interests in a domain by simply not renewing it.

If the owner had legal representation, it is unclear to me why a solution could not be reached to renew this domain. Were options give to them and they failed to do what was needed? I have no idea.

This also creates other concerns regarding similar situations where someone might be incapacitated or dead. Does GoDaddy have a clear path in place to deal with ownership in these situations?

Brad

GoDaddy will be able to present their side of what happened, if it makes it to that point.
They have not really issued a detailed explanation regarding what went on behind the scenes.

There are situations where it might not be as simple as password if someone is incapacitated, dead, or simply doesn't have access to information.

In these situations GoDaddy, or any registrar, needs to have some process regarding ownership and access.

Brad

I hear you but what you’re saying, or the registrant is saying, doesn’t add up.

If the lawyer was actively trying to renew, what’s that about? The client could give login info and the renewal is done in 5 minutes.

It sounds like Handshake domains are the best option at this point. You can’t trust a third party to hold your assets.

 

[bmugford]

I hear you but what you’re saying, or the registrant is saying, doesn’t add up.

If the lawyer was actively trying to renew, what’s that about? The client could give login info and the renewal is done in 5 minutes.

It sounds like Handshake domains are the best option at this point. You can’t trust a third party to hold your assets.

GoDaddy will have an opportunity to explain their role in this.

It is quite possible they provided a path for the registrant, or their representation to renew the domain.

If what happened is what has been reported so far, it does seem odd that a lawyer was not able to reach a solution either via direct account access, power of attorney, etc.

It is not uncommon to have someone take care of your affairs if you are incapacitated.

I am curious to find out more about what happened behind the scenes.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

If the lawyer was actively trying to renew, what’s that about? The client could give login info and the renewal is done in 5 minutes.

For the sake of argument, there are situations where that not might be so simple.

Many people for instance use autogenerated passwords via password managers.
Many people use 2 stage authentication.

If you lose access to that information, possibly in relation to a criminal case where your devices might have been seized...It might require some alternative option to login to your account.

Brad

 

[Keith]

GoDaddy will have an opportunity to explain their role in this.

It is quite possible they provided a path for the registrant, or their representation to renew the domain.

If what happened is what has been reported so far, it does seem odd that a lawyer was not able to reach a solution either via direct account access, power of attorney, etc.

It is not uncommon to have someone take care of your affairs if you are incapacitated.

I am curious to find out more about what happened behind the scenes.

Brad

The other “big” question is - does an Arizona judge know domain law?

 

[satsdifference.com]

w'o email isn't my name enough

- Dennis Zabala

Just wondering. How is @jberryhill related to this. You mention his name very often in relation to these wwwnames.

GoDaddy will be able to present their side of what happened, if it makes it to that point.
They have not really issued a detailed explanation regarding what went on behind the scenes.

There are situations where it might not be as simple as password if someone is incapacitated, dead, or simply doesn't have access to information.

In these situations GoDaddy, or any registrar, needs to have some process regarding ownership and access.

Brad

 

[J.R.]

The other “big” question is - does an Arizona judge know domain law?

With GoDaddy headquartered in Arizona, I'd imagine cases related to domain law are common on the Arizona Courts docket.

 

[Domainists]

How odd that the integrity that kept us at Godaddy for more than 20 yrs is now the exact opposite, hence our buying predominantly elsewhere the past few years. Why in the world has Godaddy made the greediest and clearly immoral choices in 3 consecutive major events? smh.

"When the founder goes, the company tends to jump that shark!"

 

[tonyk2000]

It appears that courts generally tend to decide in favor of original registrants in such cases. For example, a few years ago, somebody managed to save his 3L .com in pendingdelete status this way - Verisign was ordered to restore a pendingdelete(!) domain. Eth(.)link case is uncommon, simply because the registrant (or their rep?) was allowed to renew it once. What exactly changed in 2022 is unclear then. The court might agree with Plaintiffs that GD simply decided to cashout this time...

 

[Surya Giri Kurniawan]

The strong Argument :

- Godaddy had auctioned it and get the money from the auction
- The owner is in jail, no access to internet

If there is an evidence that his family has tried to make a phone call to renew it, but no access, there will be no more chance for the winner to restore the domains..

Giving pasword? There are a lot of people not remember pasword. Even me, many time have to change pasword after not inserting the correct one.

Court must decided it on purpose, and use a make a sense reason. If it is just because the owner not renew the domain, I am sure the court will reject the case. Must be something we don't know that had trigger the court's decission...

 

[MadAboutDomains]

I am glad that this was resolved. We can all start using the internet as normal again once this fundamentally vital piece of internet infrastructure is back online.

 

[pb]

If the lawyer was actively trying to renew, what’s that about? The client could give login info and the renewal is done in 5 minutes.

What if he had 2FA?

 

[bmugford]

What if he had 2FA?

Yeah, I pointed that out earlier in this thread.

He was involved in a criminal investigation. It is possible he doesn't have access to the login information or hardware devices.

Brad

 

[MadAboutDomains]

Yeah, I pointed that out earlier in this thread.

He was involved in a criminal investigation. It is possible he doesn't have access to the login information or hardware devices.

Brad

I'm sure there's a device out there that could have been smuggled in via his you-know-what for this purpose.

 

[Keith]

What if he had 2FA?

His phone wouldn’t be in prison with him. The lawyer could’ve easily accessed the account of everything was legit.

This seems fishy to me…

 

[Mytz.com]

eth is not good

 

[tonyk2000]

It is Wednesday, but the domain is neither transferred nor pendingtransfer. Still at Dynadot, still bodis parking. Strange

 

[silentg]

Domain is back in control of ENS DAO

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571683432144711680