NameSilo

Doxxing - Yes or No?

Labeled as poll in General Domain Discussion started by Internet.Domains, Sep 1, 2019.

Replies:
65
Views:
2,339

?

Doxxing - Should we do it?

  1. No

    58 vote(s)
    84.1%
  2. Yes

    9 vote(s)
    13.0%
  3. Other - Please explain

    1 vote(s)
    1.4%
  4. Sometimes

    1 vote(s)
    1.4%
Total: 69 vote(s)
  1. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    4,322
    Doxxing - Should we do it?

    Doxxing, also spelled "doxing," refers to the practice of using the Internet to source out and collect someone's personal and private information and then publicly releasing that information online in a revengeful manner.

    The domain community is often subject to people who back out of agreements. It comes with the territory. When someone backs out after an agreement is reached, it is time consuming and frustrating.

    So should we dox? Is it fair to dox? What are the consequences if we dox? How does doxxing help legitimize domain investing and reselling? Is Doxxing a bad look for the community as a whole?

    We don't like being labeled as "squatters" so should we be careful we are not labeled "doxxers" to those outside of domain investing?
     
    The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
  2. MrAcidic

    MrAcidic Upgraded Member Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    1,809
    Likes Received:
    3,095
    voted no

    so someone didn't pay? Get over it and move on, has happened to me quite a few times now and it has never bothered me. If they don't honour their commitments I will not be doing business with that person again.

    Someone didn't pay - am I going to publicly share their information and get some kind of petty revenge?....NO - Just seems like an ego trip to me.....
     
  3. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    4,322
    People back out of commitments. It's happened to me as well, multiple times. People backing out of commitments is part of sales, it comes with the territory in any industry. I just move on and give it no further thought.
     
  4. Ategy.com

    Ategy.com NameCult.com Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    4,398
    Likes Received:
    12,831
    It think it depends .. I'm actually inclined to say yes if it's another domainer who is deliberately making offers just to see what happens or how you price things .. kinda hard to prove though .. so that's a bit touchy.

    But I'd say no in cases where someone someone made an offer but they simply weren't able to get the funds for some reason .. or maybe they indeed wanted it but got too excited and spoke too soon before consulting their partner(s).

    So for the most part I'd say no .. but definitely it would be something to consider if you were sure there was malice involved or if somehow you knew the offer was never intended to be genuine.


    PS ... Those who follow my daily auction lists will know that my little SteamieTheHotDog is the real Doxie! :)

    SteamieCharlevoixDL.jpg
     
  5. Peak.Domains

    Peak.Domains Upgraded Member Gold Account

    Posts:
    521
    Likes Received:
    915
    No, it's not okay to do, and I won't do business with anyone that does it. I don't know why marketplaces will disclose the buyer's info to a seller after a transaction falls through, but it creates problems in our industry. If you're a buyer, and you see that buyers get doxxed, that creates extra barriers and trust issues. What if someone gets doxxed over a domain, then someone deciders to swat them? And it's on the news? Wouldn't be the first time it happened, it's just been streamers and gamers that have taken the heat before.

    There are tons of reasons someone can't get online for a week or two. Medical emergency, family emergency, whatever. Taking punishment into your own hands is not good, you're not Batman. It's a weak attempt to regain some power over the situation because you're feeling powerless, but it's petty and dangerous. It doesn't protect anyone. That buyer can still go and BIN my name even if you've doxxed them.

    Sure, most often it's probably just that the buyer changed their minds, but people have heart attacks all the time, people get into horrible car accidents all the time, do you really want to take that chance by making yourself some vigilante arbiter of justice because you're emotional over missing out on a sale? Do you want the widow of a recently deceased domainer to get phonecalls harassing her at 3am?

    Do you want to doxx someone who was just diagnosed with cancer? Doxxing someone is basically saying "Go harass them because I'm mad at them and sad and I'm an unstable person who can't handle things like an adult." Do you really want to get someone swatted, get their pet dog shot by police, and put their life at risk because they didn't buy your domain? EVEN IF there's no excuse for them cancelling, the dangers are still there and they aren't proportionate to the "crime" whatsoever.

    NamePros should instantly and permanently ban anyone who takes part in doxxing. The consequences of this can be very grave, and what's the upside, really? It's not like we can control who buys our names at BIN anyways, so even if someone has backed out of a sale in the past, getting their name and phone number posted online doesn't stop them from bidding on my names.

    Don't count your eggs before they hatch, and just move on. I won't particulate in any community that's okay with doxxing people, full stop. If you voted "yes", please PM so I can make sure we never do business together.
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2019
  6. Ategy.com

    Ategy.com NameCult.com Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    4,398
    Likes Received:
    12,831
    My understanding of the original post was not in the context where the buyer just disappears .. but when they actively back out of an already agreed upon deal.

    When it comes to end users, I think there are too many possible relatively understandable reasons why they might back away .. particularly if domains are not something they are familiar with. Obviously that is no excuse for cancelling a legal agreement .. but I don't think it's really serious enough to "Dox" them. And as @PeakDomains.co pointed out .. there most certainly are potential consequences that could indeed spiral out of control.

    That being said .. when it comes to other domains who should be familiar with the responsibilities of an agreement. They should know better. But sometimes emergencies can indeed happen .. I've had flooding in my condo several times now. I had a side-business where a middleman died mid-transaction effectively costing a significant sum and if it was a larger deal I'd probably need to back out if it wasn't completed (although effectively I never did large deals where that would have actually been an issue).

    I've also had my credit card blocked (because my repeated purchase patterns at GoDaddy set off potential fraud detection triggers .. lol) .. so sometimes couldn't make a payment exactly on time.

    I think all those sorts of things I could understand as a seller ... but I also think that if there are specific domainers who deliberately and repeatedly make empty offers, then they most certainly should be called out. Obviously figuring out if indeed they do such things repeatedly and intentionally is a hard thing to figure out .. but I wouldn't be against publicly naming those domainers and all their aliases. I don't think I'd agree to go so far as to posting their physical home address though .. that seems a bit excessive and is where things could potentially spin out of control.

    But ultimately if there is a domainer who repeatedly backs out of deals, then the community should be warned/informed about them.
     
  7. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    4,322
    End users or domain flippers, makes no difference, doxxing is not right.

    The better solution is to rely on the marketplaces to ban or discipline those with commitment issues.

    There is no reason for doxxing. Under no circumstances is doxxing a solution to a problem.....imo

    NamePros should have specific rules against doxxing, as it makes us all look as if we condone the revengeful act.

    I see people jump on newer investors, who don't understand TM issues, for making the community look bad. We should also stay away from doxxing, as it makes the entire community look bad.
     
  8. Peak.Domains

    Peak.Domains Upgraded Member Gold Account

    Posts:
    521
    Likes Received:
    915
    @Ategy.com Well said.

    I think there's also a distinction to be made between:

    "Hey, heads up everyone, Bob Loblaw agreed to buy my name and then backed out but has still been active in the community since then.."

    And "Bob Loblaw didn't pay, here's his phone number, email, and home address."

    When I hear "doxx", to me that's usually more than just giving a heads up that someone didn't pay, it would include private/personal info.

    I've seen posts that were like, "I warned them I was going to post his personal information and I still didn't hear anything so here it is..."
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2019
  9. jamesall

    jamesall Upgraded Member Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    1,178
    Likes Received:
    971
    Voted no. There are many reasons why deals fall through.
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2019
  10. Ategy.com

    Ategy.com NameCult.com Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    4,398
    Likes Received:
    12,831
    "Hey, heads up everyone, Bob Loblaw agreed to buy my name and then backed out but has still been active in the community since then.."
    Yes for me if it's a pattern with no justifiable excuse.

    And "Bob Loblaw didn't pay, here's his phone number, email, and home address."
    No for me .. although I'd probably be ok with sharing email (but for the purpose of helping be sure other people don't get messed with as well) .. but not home address .. that's a bit much.

    (PS .. lol @ Bob Loblaw .. Arrested Development rules!)

    Yeah .. my bad .. I never heard the term "Doxxing" in that context before .. I see now that it doesn't imply the first part I'm ok with, but more specifically the more extreme reaction which I'm not ok with. So to be clear .. outing a repeat offender yes ... but "doxxing" no.


    PS .. I still think this Doxie (aka Dachshund) is definitely acceptable:
    (yes .. more than acceptable even driving without a licence)
    20150507_052716 (360x640).jpg
    NOTE: Steamie the HotDog was not harmed in the making of this photo
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2019
  11. equity78

    equity78 Top Member TLDInvestors.com TheDomains Staff PRO Gold Account VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    12,845
    Likes Received:
    11,167
    You don't understand why marketplaces like Sedo do it? Because Sedo considers an agreement to buy a legal binding contract and the seller has the right to pursue taking legal action, that has nothing to do with Doxxing, not in anyway shape or form.

    Refusing to follow-through with a successful bid
    Buyers automatically enter into a legally binding contract to purchase a domain from the seller if their bid is accepted by the seller or if they accept a seller's offer to sell. Give careful consideration when making or accepting offers. Sedo's user agreement requires buyers to pay for the domains that they have committed to purchase. Buyers who refuse to follow through with domain offers that have been accepted by the seller are potentially liable to the Seller for breach of the sales contract to which both are parties.

    https://sedo.com/us/about-us/policies/rules-for-domain-buyers/
     
  12. Peak.Domains

    Peak.Domains Upgraded Member Gold Account

    Posts:
    521
    Likes Received:
    915
    @equity78 Yes, like I literally didn't understand why, I wasn't aware of the reason. Thanks for the info!
     
  13. Blitzpotz

    Blitzpotz Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    799
    Likes Received:
    945
    Voted No, for the main reason that I do not like such behaviour in general. Doxxing - never read about this term before this poll - seems to be related to betrayal and pillory and can develop a life of its own (Mobbing). Data security and Privacy are a treasure we should care for.

    Backing out of agreements can have several reasons. A bad joke or a troll looking for satisfaction. A serious person discovering new reasonable arguments against his original will. And in many situations you won´t get real personal data for doxxing.

    I have a Sedo buyer right now in the low four figures who doesn´t pay. Sedo pretends dunning, I expect no result as usual.
    I have a private buyer who finished communications suddenly after I disclosed a lot of details. Successful time theft. I suppose a former collegue behind it regarding the spelling style.
    Hey but I don´t care. Life is too short to cultivate negative feelings.
     
  14. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    4,322
    Breach of a sales contract is not a justification for doxxing. The release of information from marketplaces is for court proceedings, not doxxing. If the information released is continuously doxxed, the marketplaces may end the practice of releasing information.
     
  15. equity78

    equity78 Top Member TLDInvestors.com TheDomains Staff PRO Gold Account VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    12,845
    Likes Received:
    11,167
  16. Ategy.com

    Ategy.com NameCult.com Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    4,398
    Likes Received:
    12,831
    Ummm .. FYI ... GoDaddy does not release the info of buyers who don't pay (not even just name or even email).

    I had a buyer for a domain back out of a deal and the GD broker refused to give me the contact information.

    Mind you .. the broker said he cancelled their account and that was all he could do .. but I just found it very suspicious that he would be so quick to cancel the account before even reaching out to the potential client or even talking with me at all ... I'd be willing to bet the broker simply used the opportunity to sell the buyer a different domain .. either that or he was the worst broker ever! More importantly I simply wanted the info to get in touch with the potential buyer to try to see what happened and try close the deal myself since the GoDaddy broker effectively gave up almost instantly and claimed there was nothing left to do.

    It's funny .. as much as I hate the bug-filled GoDaddy platform, I'm usually always the first to defend their staff and the first to say all the conspiracy theory claims against GoDaddy are ridiculous ... but I forgot about this one! :-/
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2019
  17. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    4,322
    I suspect you will see more marketplaces take the same approach as GD due to the liability of doxxing. Especially as the general public is becoming more aware and against doxxing.
     
  18. equity78

    equity78 Top Member TLDInvestors.com TheDomains Staff PRO Gold Account VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    12,845
    Likes Received:
    11,167
    Canadian laws on Doxing https://www.forgetthebox.net/puttin...dian-law-punishes-online-offenders-201610181/

    U.S. law commentary on Doxxing

    Most recently, a House of Representatives intern was arrested this week for publishing private information about South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch. Information including home addresses, private cell phone numbers and more was reportedly added to the Senators’ Wikipedia pages.

    The intern has initially been charged with 18 USC § 119 Making Public Restricted Personal Information. However, this federal law only applies to narrow categories of individuals, including:

    • any officer or employee of the United States or of any agency in any branch of the United States Government (including any member of the uniformed services);
    • jurors, witnesses, or other officer in or of, any court;
    • informants or witnesses in a Federal criminal investigation or prosecution;
    • a State or local officer or employee whose restricted personal information is made publicly available because of the participation in, or assistance provided to, a Federal criminal investigation by that officer or employee;
    However, if you don’t fall into one of the above categories, there is no federal law that criminalizes all of the conduct that may be called doxing, such as publishing someone’s contact information. However, there is a federal law against stalking that may apply to many doxing incidents. 18 U.S. Code § 2261A provides:

    https://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/doxing-arrested/

    The U.K. has real laws on the topic

    The UK makes doxxing, trolling and encouraging abuse online illegal. Ambitious new legislation in the UK is trying to set limits and guidelines on acceptable behavior online. ... Doxxing has also become prosecutable, if you publish someone's home address, bank details or other sensitive personal information.

    https://www.neowin.net/news/the-uk-makes-doxxing-trolling-and-engouraging-abuse-online-illegal/
     
  19. equity78

    equity78 Top Member TLDInvestors.com TheDomains Staff PRO Gold Account VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    12,845
    Likes Received:
    11,167
    Yes but that's not doxxing if you consider the transaction a legal binding agreement, I would say more people will stop doing business with marketplace showing no desire to enforce contracts, and if a big enough deal I would imagine someone would sue GoDaddy for the info.
     
  20. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    4,322
    I take the opposite approach. I feel there would be more liability to a marketplace that releases private information and ends up having someone doxxed (harrased) causing severe damages.
     
  21. equity78

    equity78 Top Member TLDInvestors.com TheDomains Staff PRO Gold Account VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    12,845
    Likes Received:
    11,167
    There would be no liability, the seller has the right to sue, you may not agree with that but your opinion or my opinion does not deny another their legal right.
     
  22. equity78

    equity78 Top Member TLDInvestors.com TheDomains Staff PRO Gold Account VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    12,845
    Likes Received:
    11,167
    On April 12, 2013, the domain name MD.org sold at a record setting NameJet.com auction for $555,650.00 to the high bidder ID of ‘Winters”

    Today the seller of the domain name, Privacy LLC, (Privacy) filed a lawsuit along with NameJet, LLC (“NameJet”) against Scott Ross and “Does defendants 1-3” which “may include Ari Goldberger, Esq. and Larry Fischer”, for breach of contract, in refusing to pay for the domain name.

    The suit was filed in the Circuit Court of Fairfax County Virgina.

    Here are the relevant allegations as stated in the complaint:

    “”Defendant Scott Ross (“Ross”) is a citizen of the United States who upon information and belief resides in the State of Florida.

    Although Ross was the buyer who agreed to purchase the domain name at issue, Plaintiffs believe Ross was a straw man acting as a proxy, agent, and co-conspirator with and for other undisclosed parties who are named as Does in this complaint.

    Defendants Does 1-3 are the agents, principals, and/or co-conspirators of Ross who directed Ross, or acted in common control and concert with Ross, to enter into and breach the contract discussed in this complaint.

    Plaintiffs believe Does 1-3 may include Ari Goldberger and Larry Fisher, but without discovery Plaintiffs have not confirmed their involvement.

    After Plaintiffs confirm the identities of the Does, Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend this complaint to name them properly.

    On or about July 26, 2008, Ross created an account with Internet domain auction platform Namejet.com. Upon doing so, Ross agreed to the NameJet Terms.

    Based upon information and belief, Plaintiffs understand that Ross created the account with NameJet in concert with agents and principals, who by their active conspiracy and partnership with Ross are equally liable as the domain name buyer

    The NameJet Terms state that the highest bidder at the end of an auction held on NameJet.com is obligated to complete the transaction with the seller for the amount of the highest bidder’s bid.

    The NameJet Terms also state that all payments associated with using the Namejet.com service are due immediately upon demand.

    From April 10, 2013 to April 12, 2013, an auction was held on NameJet.com for MD.ORG and Ross—together with his co-conspirators, partners, and principals—placed the highest bid, $555,650.00, at the time the auction ended.

    NameJet, as the sales venue for transactions conducted through its website, receives a portion of the sales price as a commission for each transaction completed through its service.

    On April 24, 2013, NameJet sent a letter to Ross demanding payment of the full amount owed by April 26, 2013.

    On April 26, 2013, Ross’ counsel sent a letter to NameJet indicating that Ross did not intend to pay the agreed upon amount.

    At the time of the filing of this Complaint, Ross has not paid the amount of the highest bid or further indicated a willingness to pay the full amount of the highest bid.

    Ross, upon accepting the NameJet Terms while creating an account on NameJet’s website, entered into a valid agreement to tender payment to Privacy LLC upon placing the highest bid in a NameJet auction.

    The NameJet Terms constitute a legally enforceable obligation between Ross and NameJet.

    NameJet has performed all acts required of it under the NameJet Terms, but has been rebuffed by Defendant.

    Ross breached his contractual obligations to NameJet by failing to pay the amount of the highest bid at the auction upon demand and also by clearly indicating an unwillingness to pay that amount.

    As a direct and proximate result of Ross’s breach of the NameJet Terms, NameJet has been damaged in the amount of its commission due, and its reputation has and will continue to be damaged.

    Section 3.4 of the NameJet Terms provides, in pertinent part, Should you fail to substantially prevail in any lawsuit brought against NameJet, NameJet will be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs from you.”

    As a direct and proximate result of Ross’s breach of the Terms Agreement, Privacy LLC has been damaged in an amount of at least $555,650.00.

    As a direct and proximate result of Ross’s breach of the Auction Agreement, NameJet has been damaged in the amount of its commission, and its reputation has and will continue to be damaged.

    The Plaintiffs asked the court to award General compensatory damages of “not less than $300,000″, the $555,650 representing the winning bid placed under Scott Ross’ NameJet Account, Attorneys fees and costs of the suit, and Pre- and post-judgment interest.””””

    I obviously don’t know if the allegations contained in the complaint are true or not and we remind everyone that allegations are just that at this point.

    However the allegations are shocking especially considering the parties allegedly involved.

    We do know that the domain name MD.org sold at the April auction for $555,650 and the bidding came down to two bidders.

    At the time we guessed that one of the bidders could have been the group that launched MD.com just a few week prior to the auction as was reported by Ron Jackson’s DnJournal.com.

    We have reached out to Scott Ross and each of the named Does Defendants to see if they have any statement and we will update this story when and if we get any such statements.

    This is only the second lawsuit I’m aware against an allegedly non-paying bidder arising out of a domain name auction.

    In 2009 Ad.com sold at a Moniker.com auction for $1.4 Million.

    The seller of the domain name ad.com and Moniker.com sued the non-paying bidder and the case was resolved last year.

    I do think its good for the industry for sellers and auction house to enforce bidding and sales agreements against sellers and buyers as we have seem way too many instances of non-paying buyers and non-transferring sellers with the parties getting little to no support from the auction houses.

    https://www.thedomains.com/2013/07/...md-org-namejet-record-setting-555650-auction/
     
  23. Internet.Domains

    Internet.Domains Top Member VIP

    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    4,322
    They have the right to sue, not to dox. Big difference.
     
  24. Bob Hawkes

    Bob Hawkes formerly MetBob NameTalent Gold Account VIP

    Posts:
    4,177
    Likes Received:
    9,656
    I vote a definite no. Never, ever the right thing to do.
    Bob
     
  25. equity78

    equity78 Top Member TLDInvestors.com TheDomains Staff PRO Gold Account VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    12,845
    Likes Received:
    11,167
    Wait you brought DOX into this, what makes you think someone suing someone for $100,000 has anything to do with doxing them? Doxing is what people are trying to use as an out for those who did not meet their legal requirement, that's not doxing, this is doxing:

    What is doxxing?
    Doxxing is a cyber attack that involves discovering the real identity of an Internet user. The attacker then reveals that person’s details so others can target them with malicious attacks. Doxxing is analyzing information posted online by the victim in order to identify and later harass that person. Here is what we’re going to cover today in this anti-doxxing guide. Use the links below to easily navigate it:

    https://heimdalsecurity.com/blog/doxxing/
     

Want to reply or ask your own question?

It only takes a minute to sign up – and it's free!
Topics / Tags:
NameWorth
  1. NamePros uses cookies and similar technologies. By using this site, you are agreeing to our privacy policy, terms, and use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
Loading...