information Brent Oxley Loses Access to Create.com, Plus Millions of Dollars Worth of His Domains

[James Iles]

Brent Oxley, the founder of HostGator, has been accruing a portfolio of ultra-premium domain names since he sold his hosting company for close to $300 million in 2013.

With purchases such as Give.com for $500,000, Broker.com for $375,000, and Texas.com for $1,007,500, Oxley has spent millions of dollars over the past few years accumulating this collection. According to his website, the portfolio is worth more than $25 million.

Oxley has now, however, lost access to a proportion of his portfolio

Read the full report on my blog

 

[The Rover]

The most pertinent question.

Likely because he initially genuinely felt bad for Puneet and wanted to help him out, despite it not being a wise decision. Generous people often get burned and taken advantage of the most.

 

[Dave]

@create.com

Second question,

Why did you not use one of the well known and professional brokers in the Industry to help you with your domains,

IMO

Help him in what way exactly? Broker's are not there to help one manage domains, or prevent legal action from being taken on them.

Brent has been involved with the internet since like 2002-2003 when he launched Hostgator whilst at college, which he sold for $300+ million. He has been involved with some of the largest ever domain purchases/sales. He knows more about domain names than the majority of people.

He put his trust into GoDaddy and they've let him down. He had no control over that, and using a broker would've made no difference.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Circling some attention back to @Paul Nicks initial reply:

In fact, it is the industry standard to ensure that registration rights for domain names are protected and maintained during the pendency of a legal dispute. Locking domains protects all parties until the legal dispute is resolved.

• When does "the pendency of a legal dispute" officially begin that would constitute the locking of domains:

1. Immediately after a suit is filed and prior to the other party being served?
   
2. After a suit is filed AND after the other party has been served?
   
3. or... ?

If Mr. Oxley had been able to obtain a court order requiring us to unlock the domains, we would have gladly done it. The fact he was unable to do so suggests how much more complicated this issue is than is mentioned in the article.

• Where is/was the court order requiring GoDaddy to lock the domains?

It’s not just monetary issues, but demands for the cancellation of the domain registrations at issue.

• Who, what, when, where, why, how... whaaaat?!

 

[oldtimer]

Help him in what way exactly? Broker's are not there to help one manage domains, or prevent legal action from being taken on them.

Brent has been involved with the internet since like 2002-2003 when he launched Hostgator whilst at college, which he sold for $300+ million. He has been involved with some of the largest ever domain purchases/sales. He knows more about domain names than the majority of people.

He put his trust into GoDaddy and they've let him down. He had no control over that, and using a broker would've made no difference.

I believe you misunderstood my question,

I meant before all these troubles got started,

At the time when he first decided to buy (or later sell) so many high value domains.

(@create.com) , Why didn't he use the services of one of the well known and professional brokers in the Industry.

And why weren't these domains renewed for 10 years when he had a chance to do so.

IMO

 

[Future Sensors]

In the real world, accounts like Brent's are always monitored. Carefully.

That's a relief...

 

[Compassion]

Rob Monster you seem to have gotten through to Puneet on a certain level.



Puneet Agarwal

Yes I already told u na that I m Satan

Great work Rob,

You've almost completed the exorcism!

A one-of-a-kind wayshower in the domain world you are.

 

[The Rover]

I hate to say this (since @create.com is obviously going through this mess) but it's not necessarily a bad thing that this is happening, since it's about damn time that GoDaddy be held accountable for lack of transparency. Imagine if this happened to other lesser known domain investors? However, since this story has blown up, I'm willing to bet that there are now millions of dollars of domains that have already transferred away from GoDaddy, or are either in the process of being moved out. Go woke, go broke.

 

[koolishman]

/\

Even after this is resolved, I don’t think people with knowledge of this, will go back to GD easily.

 

[Future Sensors]

/\

Even after this is resolved, I don’t think people with knowledge of this, will go back to GD easily.

Godaddy has undergone a significant transformation since Bob Parsons left the building. The new CEO will no longer shoot elephants. The website has a new look, but behind the scenes a lot has not yet been integrated. I do not rule out the possibility that the organization is able to find itself again, but it will not be instant. It is a steamship that can only be kept on course with tugs.

 

[Lox]

1. Why didn't he use the services of one of the well known and professional brokers in the Industry.
2. And why weren't these domains renewed for 10 years when he had a chance to do so.

1. Most corporate (MS, IBM, etc) employ a discount broker (lesser-known person/company) to carry out buy domains at a reduced/cheaper price. Nothing new. Even @ NP you'll find requests from the undercover DB s.a. one word .com budget $1K-$5K etc.

2. Attract prospects more than anything. [Monitor nr. of Whois requests]

Regards

 

[Lox]

I hate to say this (since @create.com is obviously going through this mess) but it's not necessarily a bad thing that this is happening, since it's about damn time that GoDaddy be held accountable for lack of transparency. Imagine if this happened to other lesser known domain investors? However, since this story has blown up, I'm willing to bet that there are now millions of dollars of domains that have already transferred away from GoDaddy, or are either in the process of being moved out. Go woke, go broke.

Not sure bout that but some % for sure - platinum member
https://www.internetcommerce.org/directory/

 

[oldtimer]

Transferring all the big portfolios out amounts to surrendering,

What if the same thing happens at another Registrar.

Everyone should demand that the TOS be changed at Godaddy and at all the other Registrars across the board so that the Registrants' Rights are protected and respected the Same regardless of which Registrar is being used.

IMO

 

[King]

There are horror stories from GoDaddy on the daily and people continue to use them. It blows my mind.

 

[The Rover]

Transferring out all the big portfolios amounts to surrendering,

What if the same thing happens at another Registrar.

Everyone should demand that the TOS be changed at Godaddy and at all other Registrars across the board so that the Registrants' Rights are protected and respected the Same regardless of which Registrar is used.

IMO

I agree with you to some extent, however, many folks with high value domains can't take a risk and simply wait around for positive changes to be made, particularly if it's ever discovered that there was actually was some type of nefarious motive at GoDaddy (other than just having crappy TOS) behind this particular case. So yes, we should push back and demand changes, but if we're being honest, to use an analogy, how did the public pushing back work out for twitter and facebook? Blatant censorship on virtually every social media platform is just as rampant (if not worse now) than it was even 6 months ago. Thus far, it seems that big tech just keeps doubling down on their TOS in virtually every industry.

 

[Sutruk]

Where is/was the court order requiring GoDaddy to lock the domains?

That's the key. Godaddy locked Brent's domains without a court order, and now they are asking Brent for a court order to unlock them.
Just with a claim, without any final court order, they are acting like judge and jury, and locking Brent's domains.

 

[koolishman]

Transferring all the big portfolios out amounts to surrendering,

What if the same thing happens at another Registrar.

Everyone should demand that the TOS be changed at Godaddy and at all the other Registrars across the board so that the Registrants' Rights are protected and respected the Same regardless of which Registrar is being used.

IMO

I disagaree.

I t teaches a lesson to the Bigdaddys of any industry, and forces a re-think, which can happen pan-industry.

When monies disappear, board takes notice. When Big PR disasters happen, board takes notice.

Press takes notice.

I am sure this one thread alone DID lot of damage to GD.

 

[Sutruk]

What if the same thing happens at another Registrar.

Everyone should demand that the TOS be changed at Godaddy and at all the other Registrars across the board so that the Registrants' Rights are protected and respected the Same regardless of which Registrar is being used.

They can say many things on their TOS, but abusive TOS won't go anywhere on a court.
They are just saying they can lock your domains for whatever reason, literally.
See 14. ADDITIONAL RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
"GoDaddy expressly reserves the right to deny, cancel, terminate, suspend, lock, or modify access to (or control of) any Account or Services (including the right to cancel or transfer any domain name registration) for any reason (as determined by GoDaddy in its sole and absolute discretion), including but not limited to the following..."
Well, I guess that on a court, those TOS woudn't go quite far. That's an abusive and unreasonable behaviour, whatever you say that you can do on your TOS to your clients.

And, as I understand, although I am not a lawyer, a Registrar must follow court orders (final court orders, not just whatever filled claim) on their country, not wherever country is filled a civil claim.
So the rest of the Registrars just have to attend to court orders filled on their country.

The problem with Godaddy is that they are registered on 53 markets (I assume countries), so they have to follow court orders (again, final court orders, not just claims) on every country where they are registered. At least this is what I understand.

 

[koolishman]

/\
Oxley being monied can spend on lawyers. An ordinary joe may give up.

That is the tragedy. That is why this thread and the negative publicity will force a rethink.

 

[oldtimer]

Let's not stop with complaining about the way that these domains have been locked,

Let's demand that all abuse and overreach at all levels and at all Registrars stop after this.

IMO

 

[The Rover]

They can say many things on their TOS, but abusive TOS won't go anywhere on a court.
They are just saying they can lock your domains for whatever reason, literally, without any explanation.

Imagine the negative publicity if we learn that GoDaddy actually rountinly ignores frivolous filings but for whatever strange reason, decided that they'd actually make an exception in Brent's case.

 

[steven22]

Brent,

Sorry you are going through this. I hope you get your names unlocked ASAP. GD needs to feels the pressure from the Domain community to get rid of the old school dead weight management that makes such ignorant decisions.

I often wonder how the old school GD management is still employed after all this time. Their incompetence continues to amaze me given the resources and size of the company.

One thing as a community we should do, target our traffic like Rick Schwartz did several years ago with unethical.com and create a nice looking site drawing lots of eyeballs telling the story of how inept GD is. The goal is hopefully getting the attention of media. With enough eyeballs, we can create some accountability and take back our rights.

Steven

 

[Sutruk]

Imagine the negative publicity if we learn that GoDaddy actually rountinly ignores frivolous filings but for whatever strange reason, decided that they'd actually make an exception in Brent's case.

Furthermore, if Godaddy can do this to Brent's portfolio valued in millions of dollars, what they won't do to the rest of their clients?

 

[DN Playbook]

Thanks for all the feedback on this so far. I've been reading every reply and can understand your concerns.

In the last 36 hours, we've been having some serious discussions about our policies, processes, and ultimately, how we can better serve our customers while protecting everyone's legal rights. We have already engaged the ICA and other industry experts to determine if there are any changes we should and could make. As we make progress, we will keep the community posted.

For Brent, I want you know that no domain name will be deleted. Consistent with our policy, we have paid for renewals and will continue to pay for renewals as necessary. We're keeping them safe, and leaving them up and running.

Hi @Paul Nicks, thanks for chiming in. I think it is important. I have never seen an NP thread blow up like this. Can you answer a couple of questions:

1. Why was it necessary to lock all of these high profile domains? Could they simply have been prevented from transfer?

2. Why are you/GD paying for renewals?

 

[The Rover]

I think the other way. If Godaddy can do this to Brent's portfolio valued in millions of dollars, what they won't do to the rest of their clients?

It's not that they can't do the same thing to the small guys, and it would be terrible if they have. Hopefully we will all learn more in the days ahead. My point and additional concerns are whether GoDaddy seized an incoming opportunity for a little social justice payback, given Brent's persona and perceived ideology. It's one thing for a company to fumble via their own crappy TOS, but it's entirely different thing to play a role in intentionally locking someone's property down because you vehemently disagree with their ideology or have some type of vendetta.

Am I certain that's what happened here? No, but given everything that I've read thus far with this case, I do have my suspicions, especially in this day and age. At the very least, it's not out of the question, particularly in an era where big tech openly and continuously "punishes" people without any recourse or reason, for merely having an alternative political perspective. What will be interesting to know, is whether GoDaddy routinely ignores baseless filings like this, and/or whether they made a strange exception here. It's almost as if I'd rather learn that they have indeed locked other people's domains simply as result of having an abusive TOS, rather than Brent being specifically targeted. Terrible company policies can be confronted and changed, but people's vehement social justice mentality is another animal.

 

[Sutruk]

It's not that they can't do the same thing to the small guys, and it would be terrible if they have. Hopefully we will all learn more in the days ahead. My point and additional concerns are whether GoDaddy seized an incoming opportunity for a little social justice payback, given Brent's persona and perceived ideology. It's one thing for a company to fumble via their own crappy TOS, but it's entirely different thing to play a role in intentionally locking someone's property down because you vehemently disagree with their ideology or have some type of vendetta.

Am I certain that's what happened here? No, but given my own research I have my suspicions, especially in this day and age. At the very least, it's not out of the question, particularly in an era where big tech openly and continuously "punishes" people without any recourse or reason, for merely having an alternative political perspective. What will be interesting to know, is whether GoDaddy routinely ignores baseless filings like this, and/or whether they made a strange exception here. It's almost as if I'd rather learn that they have indeed locked other people's domains simply as result of having an abusive TOS, rather than Brent being the exception. TOS can be confronted and changed, but people's social justice mentality can't.

My guess is that we have learned about this case thanks to James Iles posting it here. Because the domains have been locked since one year ago as I understand, and even with these domains valued in millions of dollars, we haven't learned about this case till this week because of this thread on this forum.
So now think about other people with less valuable domains or people not known as Brent, the former Hostgator owner, if we would have learned about their case.