Is domaining ethical?

[james2002]

I understand there are people including myself looking for bargains and we do get domains at bargain prices.

I wonder it is ethical to do that as we know that certain domains are worth much more than the seller ask for.

I understand there are some people who got domains at fraction of their value recently due to IREIT's error.

Is domaining (esp at bargain prices) ethical?

 

[deleted984054565403]

Of course finding bargains is ethical.

If I own a car, and I don't know how much it's worth and don't bother to look it up, while a car collector makes me an offer for it and I sell, isn't it my own loss for not taking the time to find the value of something I own?

:imho: It crosses the ethical/unethical boundary when you provide a potential seller with misinformation about recent sales prices to gauge a false value for their domain.

 

[htmlindex]

Absolutely! It's called "business" happens everyday by many people, not just domainers.

 

[-REECE-]

Agree Steve.

I don't think many people would consider it unethical to purchase LLL.coms for $900 because they were listed at that price.

If on the other hand you tried to convince someone that their LLL.coms were only worth $900 (digging up sales data from 2004-2005), that imho is unethical and not something you'd find me doing. The latter is beyond unethical - a scammer imho.

Of course finding bargains is ethical.

If I own a car, and I don't know how much it's worth and don't bother to look it up, while a car collector makes me an offer for it and I sell, isn't it my own loss for not taking the time to find the value of something I own?

:imho: It crosses the ethical/unethical boundary when you provide a potential seller with misinformation about recent sales prices to gauge a false value for their domain.

 

[james2002]

But we are taking advantage of people who lack the knowledge of the actual value of their domains or their mistakes.

 

[thebrokenbox]

it's their own fault. They should at least know about the property they own, because they own it. It shouldn't be left up to domainers to inform them of the actual price of the domains.

 

[james2002]

it's their own fault. They should at least know about the property they own, because they own it. It shouldn't be left up to domainers to inform them of the actual price of the domains.

Ok. Fair enough. You, domainers and I should not feel bad about getting bargains then.

 

[deleted984054565403]

But we are taking advantage of people who lack the knowledge of the actual value of their domains or their mistakes.

They can research it, can't they? A quick search for a domain name appraisal yields a ton of results.

Going back to my car analogy -- there are tools available to give you the value of something if you're not sure. This is especially the case with the Internet. If a domain owner gets an offer for their domain name -- one of their assets -- it's that owner's own fault for not educating themselves on the value of something they own.

 

[dezinerite]

Of course domaining at bargain prices is ethical.

The only unethical thing in this business is cybersquatting IMHO.

 

[-REECE-]

Unethical = ICANN

Of course domaining at bargain prices is ethical.

The only unethical thing in this business is cybersquatting IMHO.

 

[james2002]

Of course domaining at bargain prices is ethical.

The only unethical thing in this business is cybersquatting IMHO.

Why cybersquatting is unethical? If some new things happen, everyone has their right to register domains either to keep them or to develop them as they want to.

 

[deleted984054565403]

Why cybersquatting is unethical? If some new things happen, everyone has their right to register domains either to keep them or to develop them as they want to.

No, that's not the case if a domain you register infringes on others' trademarks or is registered in bad faith.

If I buy "CheapPickupTrucks.com" -- something generic -- that's fine; but when I buy "DisneyWorldVacations.com" to profit from the keywords or to sell to Disney for $500,000, then I'm doing something unethical.

Cybersquatting, according to the United States federal law known as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, is registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else. The cybersquatter then offers to sell the domain to the person or company who owns a trademark contained within the name at an inflated price.

The term is derived from "squatting," which is the act of occupying an abandoned or unoccupied space or building that the squatter does not own, rent or otherwise have permission to use.

 

[james2002]

No, that's not the case if a domain you register infringes on others' trademarks or is registered in bad faith.

But for example, there was the topic about "hybrid embryo" discussed a lot recently and I registered hybrid embryo (.) com to set up a website if I got time (never get time for it so far as there are more important things to do), why it should be unethical?

I think what I am doing is not cybersquatting.

 

[deleted984054565403]

But for example, there was the topic about "hybrid embryo" discussed a lot recently and I registered hybrid embryo (.) com to set up a website if I got time (never get time for it so far as there are more important things to do), why it should be unethical?

I think what I am doing is not cybersquatting.

It depends if we're working off the same definition of cybersquatting.

Parking or simply not developing a domain is not necessarily cybersquatting, unless it's registered in bad faith. If you registered and parked "iPodStore.com" and collected parking money, you'd be cybersquatting.

If you own the domain you listed, you've registered a generic term that nobody owns the copyright to, meaning you're not cybersquatting. :imho:

 

[james2002]

It depends if we're working off the same definition of cybersquatting.

Parking or simply not developing a domain is not necessarily cybersquatting, unless it's registered in bad faith. If you registered and parked "iPodStore.com" and collected parking money, you'd be cybersquatting.

If you own the domain you listed, you've registered a generic term that nobody owns the copyright to, meaning you're not cybersquatting. :imho:

Thanks for your comment. I appreciated it.

 

[acronym007]

The same question about ethics could be asked for every market. If you have ever bought a stock you would have to ask the same question because I guarantee someone playing with the stocks know more about the business than you and I. Regardless of the strike price, the sale price, someone knows the company is going under tomorrow and 3,000 people just bought the stock. It's your business to know your business or you will be eaten alive in any market. If someone offers you a $1 for a painting on your wall, well you better find out why that painting has value to someone other you, agreed?

 

[namenut]

Buyer beware .....seller be aware ...... is my motto.

A while back I answered an ad (CL) for a digital VCR. The item was a "Digital Video Machine" by Alcorn Mcbride. 10k plus item. I bought them both for $200.

This person was completely unaware of the value. This same person placed the ad. I asked a few peeps about it and most agreed with my keeping the items. So did I. I supose if it were a little ol lady I might have clued her in.

The ireit issue has never been resolved as far as I know. They may have been bleeding and needed cash. Or someone forgot to add a zero to the end of everything. No matter what the statement explaining the actions says we will never know if it is the truth or just damage control. However I don't think anyone should feel bad for taking advantage of a market anomaly. Power to them (lucky stiffs). I would have pounced on it as well if I had the means.

namenut

 

[james2002]

Buyer beware .....seller be aware ...... is my motto.

A while back I answered an ad (CL) for a digital VCR. The item was a "Digital Video Machine" by Alcorn Mcbride. 10k plus item. I bought them both for $200.

This person was completely unaware of the value. This same person placed the ad. I asked a few peeps about it and most agreed with my keeping the items. So did I. I supose if it were a little ol lady I might have clued her in.

The ireit issue has never been resolved as far as I know. They may have been bleeding and needed cash. Or someone forgot to add a zero to the end of everything. No matter what the statement explaining the actions says we will never know if it is the truth or just damage control. However I don't think anyone should feel bad for taking advantage of a market anomaly. Power to them (lucky stiffs). I would have pounced on it as well if I had the means.

namenut

Actually I had some communication with ireit and they said they put wrong prices for the domains. I was asking for domain list from them but they said they are changing the domain prices as they were wrongly put.

 

[namenut]

Actually I had some communication with ireit and they said they put wrong prices for the domains. I was asking for domain list from them but they said they are changing the domain prices as they were wrongly put.

I would have had to say the same thing ..... especially if not true.

 

[Ross]

Ok you guys may think im wierd for saying this but buying a domain is like buying a used car. You are prolly going what!?

Just read this article and relate it to domaining.

http://www.carbuyingtips.com/used.htm

Scroll about 3/4 of the way down to this section "Negotiating a used car purchase with a private seller" and start reading.

IMO these tactics in the article are good business sense. The person that is trying to sell a car for way more than what its worth is the person that is unethical. More often than not the if you educate the seller it will put them on the defensive and make them worried they will not sell the car/domain and make the deal with you, especially if you let them know you have other options.

Now in the case of people not knowing what their domain is worth, well thats just user error. Its like buying a house on a shortsale, slapping some paint on it, and then selling it for $50k more than what you bought it for. Unethical, i dont think so. Just good business sense, IMO. This is the type of things that companies have been doing for years, buying cheap and selling high.


About 2 months ago i sold a car that i had for $150, you ask WTF why? Well simply i didnt want the car anymore and it was taking up space. The car ran and was in good condition for the year. I just simply didnt want it, i was aware of the value. The guy i sold it to was part of a dealership and had contacted me through craigslist. He came looked at the car and bought it. After the deal was done he told me he would do a little work to it and sell the car for $2k, i said good for you! So just because you get a good deal does not mean the person didnt know what they were doing, it could be because they simply didnt want it or just didnt have a desire for it.