news Crypto Company Sues a 79-year-old For Wormhole.com Domain

[Tom_Collins]

Crypto Company Sues a 79-year-old For Wormhole.com Domain

The DN owner was offered $2,500 for wormhole.com initially. LOL.

Feel bad for the guy

 

[D Haynes]

Can't for the life of me think why he would have quoted 50k. He's as dumb as they are ruthless.

 

[tiletalk]

well he got what he asked for... not a man of his word it seems

 

[noneisnone]

why didn't he fight it in court ? preach of contract ? what contract!

 

[bmugford]

Can't for the life of me think why he would have quoted 50k. He's as dumb as they are ruthless.

Not every random person who registered a domain 28 years ago for free is aware of domain value.

Even then while "wormhole" is a solid brand, it is not like some obvious high value domain like it was Gold.com or something.

The guy is also 79 years old...I hope to even be alive and with reasonable cognitive abilities at that age.

Brad

 

[Brandmore]

I don’t like it when people don’t stick to their words. The best time to get a consultation is before making a counter-offer!

 

[bmugford]

I have mixed feelings on this. The court case is not some slam dunk case.

I have seen mixed rulings on if email correspondence is a a binding contract in itself. It would probably depend on the actual wording itself.

When you start the process and agree to terms via escrow.com or some other formal agreement it is a bit different than flippantly throwing out a number with no further terms in an email.

If an informal email agreement is binding, I better start filing lawsuits against buyers that back out.

Brad

 

[MadAboutDomains]

well he got what he asked for... not a man of his word it seems

I don’t like it when people don’t stick to their words. The best time to get a consultation is before making a counter-offer!

Did he SIGN a contract? It's not a contract if you say "It's for sale for $50k" then you change your mind...

What causes a person to think in this way? Quite ruthless, horrible and unforgiving people just out to "gotcha" others with the threat of unsavoury legal wranglings just so that they get what they want.

I can only hope that karma will come to bite.

 

[bmugford]

I can tell you right now there is zero chance I would ever do business with this company.

Say what you want about $50k being binding or not, but these sleazeballs opened up with a $2,500 offer for this domain.

That is really trying to take advantage of an old man who might not know any better. Shameless.

Brad

 

[tiletalk]

Why did he counter if he didn’t want business?

you win some and you loose some. This man didn’t do his research before countering.

he thought he’d scare them off but then had sellers remorse when it got accepted

nothing to see here

 

[MadAboutDomains]

you win some and you loose some. This man didn’t do his research before countering.

Please explain. What research?

 

[tiletalk]

To form a contract, it does not always need to be in writing. It can be verbal also.

in these instances it’s for court to decide whether there was a contract. If nothing is in writing then it’ll be based It’s on probability of an event but here it was probably in writing.

 

[tiletalk]

Please explain. What research?

What his name was worth in the matket

 

[MadAboutDomains]

At the moment it's just people in a forum making sh*t up and dismissing someone's misfortune as an obvious misstep that would inevitability leave him without claim to his rightfully owned asset that he's had for decades.

It probably isn't a contract to the extent that you are implying that could be enforced in law.

From the wording of the article it sounds like he suggested a price for the domain but did not did not accept the sale. If there was not agreement from both sides to accept the sale then there's no contract by the sounds of things.

Is there precedent of such a decision that indicates that this wouldn't be the case? The article suggests he could have settled out of court for more, I don't know what leads them to that conclusion either.

I'm open to someone who knows what they're talking about to provide something useful instead of just finger in the air from guessers.

 

[BRANDERX]

Shameless.

Them or the 3rd party broker?

 

[AEProgram]

Maybe the people emailing all day one word domain owners with low ball offers aren't crazy.

 

[Bob Hawkes]

I have somewhat mixed feelings on this. Yes, stand by your word. But it was not quite the way first described in media that they gave a formal offer and he said I accept. Rather he simply said he was firm on $50,000 as I understand it now. I am not sure how it would have played out in court in terms of a binding contract.

I think we should not say he should obviously have known true value. Vast majority of people do not know value of domains It shows the importance of getting outside expertise before deciding.

Re settling out of court, as someone in my 70's now, I sometimes wonder if legal firms take advantage of the elderly because they know they don't want to be involved in a lengthy legal battle in later years, or have it passed on to loved ones, possibly, to deal with. When I was 40 I would be more apt to fight an injustice in court than I would now.

Just my thoughts,

Bob

 

[TribeMagnet]

It is not likely that it was a legally binding contract. As far as I can see, several of the necessary requirements are missing.

shareyouressays dot com/knowledge/10-essential-elements-of-a-valid-contract-in-business-law/94753

 

[barybadrinath]

Where is ica , where are ica members, where is Paul nicks , where is aman Bhutani
Are they not going to get justice for this 79 yrs old domain registrant now. As they did super actively last time.

 

[Kingslayer]

I once agreed a deal with a massive company, it was a big deal, for a big domain but I realised afterwards I left a lot of money on the table as it was in Escrow.

All that weekend, I was thinking of ways to get of the deal without losing the buyer, I come to the conclusion I couldn’t, I had to honour the price I said and put it down to experience.

If $50k was good for this seller, they should have stuck to it, not change their mind when the other party agreed just because “it was too easy” that is not the way to do business.