.mobi Breaking News: Sedo Auction 3 To Be Re-run In January 2008

[Pred]

BREAKING NEWS: SEDO AUCTION 3 TO BE RE-RUN IN JANUARY 2008

Just in from Sedo
(feel free to rep :sold: )


Third .Mobi auction to be rerun on January 23rd, 2008
Hello everyone,

Many of you have been asking about the December .mobi auction that was interrupted due to our server crashing. Per the DotMobi registry's requirements, the December auction results have been declared void. The auction will be rerun on January 23rd, 2008. Please read on below for Sedo's official announcement.

"On December 5, 2007, the third and final .MOBI auction was scheduled to close on Sedo’s domain auction platform. In line with the previous two .MOBI auctions, the available domains garnered significant attention and received many competing bids in the seven days the auction ran. The domains received so much attention in the final moments that Sedo’s auction servers crashed before the completion of the auctions, rendering our system incapable of processing many validly submitted bids, including proxy bids set by user’s using the feature to automatically bid up to a maximum amount, and sending out winner notifications in error.

While Sedo takes steps to ensure the stability and security of our services, the crash that occurred could not have been predicted given traffic spikes more than ten times higher than anticipated by previous high-traffic auctions. Decisions were made with the intention of protecting all parties involved, but as we have learned from investigating the crash more carefully since December 5th, the auction was compromised and as such, DotMobi has exercised its right to declare the auction results void and will conduct a new auction at Sedo.com beginning on January 23rd, 2008. Sedo will be contacting everyone who participated in the auction to inform them of this decision.

Sedo apologizes for any delays responding to user concerns about the close of the auction, but a thorough investigation was necessary to determine what exactly occurred when the servers failed. As the world’s largest marketplace for buying and selling domain names, we take great pride at Sedo in our efforts to ensure the operation and security of our marketplace at all times. While this crash has forced us to reconsider the maximum levels of traffic our site may receive at any given time, we can ensure all of our users that steps are being actively taken to strengthen our protective measures to ensure any auction—whether one domain or special auction event such as .MOBI—run smoothly and close without any of the problems we experienced on December 5th.

Thank you for your understanding and best wishes from Sedo during this holiday season!"

Thanks,
Monica

 

[TheBaldOne]

Bricio,

So the law should be flouted. Is this what you are saying?

So contracts can be torn up. Is this what you are saying?

So Sedo and mTLD can run false auctions at the expense of the winners. Is this what you are saying?

The law of contract is very precise, as is the law with auctions. mTLD are contracted 'by law of contract' with the winners of the first auction. Now Sedo and mTLD are saying that mTLD had a veto on the auction results and are using that veto to declare the auction void. What total and absolute rubbish. If I was advising either Sedo or mTLD (which obviously I am not) the first thing I would suggest is that they seek 'top' international legal advice, secondly that they get a damn good PR team in who are aloof to the rangles in their respective boardrooms.

 

[webecri]

Awesome post! This is heavy...! Thanks Bill for your input and letting me copy this on www.dotMobiz.com

I wouldn't bank on this auction going ahead!

This is the proceedure that they would follow to see the metal of the complainents. But having corresponded with some of them this is a fool-hardy strategy on Sedo's and mTLD's side.

Firstly, the statement says that mTLD had the right to declare the auction void, I have yet to see published any document that was given to any person taking part in the auction where it states that mTLD reserves the right to declare the auction void!

Secondly, Sedo and mTLD have now decided basically to say that the published TOS by Sedo are null and void, this means that under the law where 'mutuality' must exist in a contract that all other buyers and sellers can declare an auction run by Sedo as null and void!

Thirdly, Sedo and mTLD have decided to 'smoke' the issue by trying to get the winners of the first auction embroiled with the winners of the 2nd unlawful auction.

Fourthly, the statement is so vague as to the reason of the 'crash' that it implies almost in as vague terms as possible that something untoward and illicit occurred. Now they will have to prove this in court.

Fifthly, Sedo and mTLD have now not only opened the floodgates to the winners of the first auction but have also opened wide claims by the subsequent winners of the second auction for damages.

SIxth, a novel approach by the claimants in a US court could be the argument that Sedo have shown themselves to be unsuitable to run auctions and therefore perhaps an approach could be made to issue an injunction under the 'wire laws' that no Sedo auction is allowed to be transmitted within the US. through the US, on any equipment housed in the US (such as telephone wires or computers), or belonging to any US citizen or resident.

As I have said in other posts this could be a long drawn out affair, but my $20 is that the January 23rd auction as mentioned in the Sedo statement will not occur.

Point six is what I would call the 'grand slam approach'. This could of course destroy Sedo's business within the US, and indeed lead to much more trouble for Sedo. But hey, when have the majority of us ever thought that Sedo oozed with common sense. Rather than clear up the mess and move on Sedo and mTLD have decided on a show down, no doubt positive in their own minds that their big bucks and big muscles will win the day. Strange I seem to remember some chap called Goliath thinking the same!

Pred, well reported. Trust me to go for a bite to eat just as this was about to hit the wire!

 

[Mobi Cheap]

For those who missed the final moments of the original auction, here is the shortest NP thread that sort of documents things as they happened (not mine, mine is a much longer one):

http://www.namepros.com/dot-mobi/403517-what-happened-on-sedo.html

So will the new ending times be staggered this time?

 

[Pred]

(not mine, mine is a much longer one):

thats what they all say!
:sold:

 

[Mobi Cheap]

thats what they all say!
:sold:

I have no idea what you're saying Gov.

But for the avoidance of doubt, didn't mean it that way.

P.S.: Just practicing my lawyer impression, LOL
:hehe:

 

[TheBaldOne]

Mobi Cheap, good link (though I think a possible attempt to swing opinion rather than anything else :hehe: ). However, as is the law, if Sedo had suspended the auction when they themselves admit that they 'knew' things were amiss before the end of the auction then fine. Sedo did not, everybody was in the same boat, the winners were declared and the contracts joined.

This is now old hat, and I think you will agree without listing to many links that the case for the original winners was proven on this forum.

Now Sedo and mTLD are trying a new tactic (although expected), but this falls foul of the law just as their first attempt to unlawfully run the second auction fell foul of the law.

A legal contract is a legal contract. In this business, more than most as few of us actually know one another and it is 24 hour global transactions, our word has to be our bond. Unfortunately Sedo and mTLD seem to disagree.

 

[Work In Progress]

This will be interesting. Now if I were a winner of one of the lower priced sales I d be pissed

What some forget is the first "winners" were not real winners if the auction process was stopped prematurely, not allowing further bidding. Sure, I'd be upset if I were in those shoes, but I also recognize how auctions work. Most of the action comes in the last 5 minutes. How is it fair to say the first "winner" won a name when many other interested bidders where trying to bid but couldn't due to a faulty server?

I think the rerun is a good thing. Nobody is going to be happy with results as is. Not everyone will like the re-run as well. But it's about the fairest way of doing it at this point.

:imho:

 

[webecri]

What some forget is the first "winners" were not real winners if the auction process was stopped prematurely, not allowing further bidding. Sure, I'd be upset if I were in those shoes, but I also recognize how auctions work. Most of the action comes in the last 5 minutes. How is it fair to say the first "winner" won a name when many other interested bidders where trying to bid but couldn't due to a faulty server?

I think the rerun is a good thing. Nobody is going to be happy with results as is. Not everyone will like the re-run as well. But it's about the fairest way of doing it at this point.

:imho:

The problem is the sending of the contracts by email. That makes them winners...

 

[aggieuk]

Mobi Cheap, good link (though I think a possible attempt to swing opinion rather than anything else :hehe: ). However, as is the law, if Sedo had suspended the auction when they themselves admit that they 'knew' things were amiss before the end of the auction then fine. Sedo did not, everybody was in the same boat, the winners were declared and the contracts joined.

This is now old hat, and I think you will agree without listing to many links that the case for the original winners was proven on this forum.

Now Sedo and mTLD are trying a new tactic (although expected), but this falls foul of the law just as their first attempt to unlawfully run the second auction fell foul of the law.

A legal contract is a legal contract. In this business, more than most as few of us actually know one another and it is 24 hour global transactions, our word has to be our bond. Unfortunately Sedo and mTLD seem to disagree.

You mention THE LAW etc but which law's hymn sheet are you singing from and which one are they singing from, it all depends i suppose which countries laws they are signed up to, i know USA law is very easy to sue anyone, whereas UK law it's much harder and much fairer to all parties concerned. I expect Sedo is signed up to German law, anyone know these facts??? And if German law would have any adverse effects on this outcome?

 

[TheBaldOne]

W-I-P, The winners of the 'first auction' are the legal winners. Sedo knew things were amiss but did not act to suspend the auction prior to its set close time (hammer comming down). The 'second auction' was actually unlawful because Sedo tried auctioning goods (domain names) that they did not have the owners permission to auction.

For arguments on this please see the various threads on this forum (do a search of 'sedo mobi auction').

You will see it is all a question of timing. But now Sedo and mTLD are trying again to run an auction whereby the owners of the domains will undoubtedly seek a court injunction and have this auction stopped.

But more interestingly is the 'grand slam strategy' that is now being mutted as a possible strategy to initiate a closer of Sedo's auctions within anywhere in the US (and that would mean anywhere). Sedo and mTLD have decided on a high risk strategy, now the question is will this blow up in their faces even more than the initial auction fiasco would have?

The auction fiasco was recoverable from, the strategy now adopted undoubtedly will not be. It is a flawed strategy on Sedo and mTLD's behalf, but they 'know' what they are doing, or rather I guess they are reassuring each other they know what they are doing!

AggieUK. Plaintiffs decide where to enforce international law disputes. The basic rules are:

1) Where the plaintiff lives or carries on business
2) Where the defendant lives or carries on business (in the case of multiple nations then any nation)
3) Where the business was carried out.

I am talking law as is covered by UK, Eire, German, and oh yes of course, the good old USofA!

 

[bricio]

Bricio,

So the law should be flouted. Is this what you are saying?

So contracts can be torn up. Is this what you are saying?

So Sedo and mTLD can run false auctions at the expense of the winners. Is this what you are saying?

The law of contract is very precise, as is the law with auctions. mTLD are contracted 'by law of contract' with the winners of the first auction. Now Sedo and mTLD are saying that mTLD had a veto on the auction results and are using that veto to declare the auction void. What total and absolute rubbish. If I was advising either Sedo or mTLD (which obviously I am not) the first thing I would suggest is that they seek 'top' international legal advice, secondly that they get a damn good PR team in who are aloof to the rangles in their respective boardrooms.

just to start i am not an attorney
no, never... law must always be respected

although we have a contract i wrote that cause for me the first auction didnt end, however sedo didnt do the right thing re-starting the auction just few minutes after the crash... sedo should have emailed all the bidders saying about the crash and that they would "continue" the auction in one, two or three days cause (i dont know the right time) then the "winners" couldnt argue they didnt read such message as it happened

i dont think they would re-run this auction if they werent advised by their attorneys (both mTLD and sedo); probably this is the best option they had
if they didnt do that they would be taken to court by the first winners or by the second winners (it would depend on who sedo would give the name)

but remeber again, i am not an attorney

 

[nametrekker]

I have to admit this makes me quite happy, as it seems the right decision. Now the winners/losers can participate again, if they so wish.

I'm actually surprised some of the names went for as low as they did. The big ones - Games, Music, Movies, Sports - those went for what I expected.

But many of the others - less than I anticipated. You can be sure many others will get on this round, especially after some developed mobis are earning decent revenues; this extension just came out of the gate.

Let's put the last auction fiasco behind and stop bickering. In legal cases like this, the only real winners will be the lawyers. I guess some blokes felt SEDO and MTLD would be handing out settlements and free mobis for those who had the highest bids before the servers crashed - well, since that's not the case, put it to rest.

If you want to play mobi, place your bets.

If you want to take legal action, call your lawyer. I hear the barrister blokes in the States take cases on pro bono or contingency.

It's your choice.

Will everyone be happy with this decision. Not a chance. But mind you, what's the best without all the legal dance?

 

[onassis]

It commercial, money talk. All the best to the winning bidder of the sedo auction at 3rd Dec 2007.

If other bid higher than your bid at January, please prepare to give away your rightful domain.

 

[TheBaldOne]

Nametrekker the law is not there as an amusement or to be ignored.

Can I ask you a question, if your house burnt down tomorrow and the insurance company said 'Oh no, we decided that all policies taken out the day yours was we will ignor, tough, your not getting a penny!' would you let it drop? Would you just walk away?

What about if you were fired unfairly? Your whole career thrown aside by a false accusation made against you, would you just walk away?

Why should the lawful winners of the first auction just walk away? Why because they shouldn't class themselves as winners when a lawful contract had been made?

Biggie, in reply to your 'implied' question. I am just an interested onlooker. If I thought the law was different then I would argue differently.

Bricio, re your post above. That is why the timing of the actions by Sedo mean clearly that the auction ended at the set time. They 'knew' things were amiss but decided not to suspend the auction but to run it for almost an extra 3 hours. This action shows 'bad faith'. But all of the press releases and statements now show that Sedo and mTLD acted in an unlawful way by running the second auction.

Now they are saying that mTLD held a veto over the auction results. This is pure poppycock. Again they are digging themselves deeper and deeper, in fact they are after the world record on this one!

 

[onassis]

Totally agreed with you, I will be pissed off if I am the winner at the 1st auction.

 

[nutzdaddy]

I was a winner of the same domain in the first and second auction

third time luck for me maybe lol

 

[TheBaldOne]

Nutzdaddy, you have sought legal opinion on your situation? It might well be worth it for you.

 

[nametrekker]

Bald One,

No hard feelings, mate.

I wish you the best of luck with your clients there. If you think you can get a settlement for those "winners with contracts", sock it to them. That's big biz in the States, I hear. Getting settlements. Good luck with your case, mate. You seem to know the legal ins out outs there.

 

[TheBaldOne]

Nametrekker, I have no clients, I am not in the States, in fact I am in the UK, and if anything this is costing me money by diverting me away from work.

 

[nametrekker]

Bald one, sorry for the misunderstanding. I thought you were preparing a case. I'm sure many people on this forum appreciate your concern, advise and support. Truth is, this was a terrible situation. And I agree there should have been more preparation by the auctioneer.

 

[nutzdaddy]

had'nt really thought about it really, still in shock at the moment, where's the best place to start? see a local solicitor?

thanks for your time

Nutzdaddy, you have sought legal opinion on your situation? It might well be worth it for you.

 

[TheBaldOne]

Nutz. There is a member here who is representing some of the claimants. I will PM him for you if you want and ask him to contact you (be careful to check who you talk to first).

 

[accent]

"Compromised"

That is the word they use in the movies when a spy steals the secret plans. If BOTH auctions were "Compromised" - say by a DOS attack or someone hacking the code to influence the outcome, then Sedo/Mtld would be on solid ground in calling for a new auction. Have not seen that yet.

If the attempted injunction fails then does that really mean that ownership of the domains can be transfered in the third auction with certainty? I am not sure, but I think you can still bring suit, either for damages or for specific performance (possesion of the domain) lacking an injunction.

And here is another point. As I understand it many lawyers rarely ask for injunctions because their client then becomes liable for losses sustained by the defendant if they later lose the suit.

What is best for .Mobi is to get this resolved and the domains into the hands of those who will best develop them. I am not convinced that this will happen.

 

[TheBaldOne]

Accentnepal, the problem is that Sedo know that if they had undergone an attack they would have stated it clearly by now, instead they insinuate in the slightest of terms that this may have happened, but it is just a ruise to try and gain sympathy (huh).

One of the strengths of the claimants is there number, also a temporary injunction can be obtained even without Sedo or mTLD being present in the court. The judge just needs to be satisfied that there is a case of dispute over the ownership of the domains. In essence the 'winners' have everything to gain and mTLD and Sedo have everything to lose.

Remember up until Friday last week they were telling the 'winners' of the unlawful second auction that they were the rightful winners. Then Friday last week they say that mTLD had suspended the transfers of the domains but that the second winners would be notified when the transfers would be completed. Now today Sedo and mTLD say that the 'winners' of the second unlawful auction are not the winners at all but that they are going to run a third (unlawful) auction! Perhaps tomorrow or next week they will say that Santa's Elfs are the winners in a secret auction!

mTLD would do best to settle this quickly, but undoubtedly bouyed up by Sedo's insistance that they can ride the storm they have decided on this high risk strategy. The problem for winners of any supposed third auction is that they risk having the names taken from them at any point!

 

[Mobi Cheap]

Mobi Cheap, good link (though I think a possible attempt to swing opinion rather than anything else :hehe: ). However, as is the law, if Sedo had suspended the auction when they themselves admit that they 'knew' things were amiss before the end of the auction then fine. Sedo did not, everybody was in the same boat, the winners were declared and the contracts joined.

This is now old hat, and I think you will agree without listing to many links that the case for the original winners was proven on this forum.
...

That's ironic isn't it?