alert Why You Can't Trust GoDaddy Brokers

[jberryhill]

It is important to understand that GoDaddy brokers are not working for you.

I'm currently defending a UDRP which, although it will be an easy win for the domain registrant, would have been completely unnecessary if GoDaddy was honest with its own customer.

In the course of fielding an inquiry to buy a domain name, GoDaddy broker John Campanaro received this email:

The "buyer" was claiming to have a trademark and threatening legal action.

Now, in the course of this negotiation, the parties ended up being extremely close. The margin between the final offer of the "buyer" and the domain registrant was around $1000.

Had GoDaddy's customer realized that the "buyer" was now claiming to have a trademark and threatening legal action, that would have given GoDaddy's customer an opportunity to consider whether to lower their offer simply to avoid a frivolous legal dispute, or at least to have some warning that GoDaddy knew what the "buyer" was going to do next.

So, what did GoDaddy broker John Campanaro do next?

He lied:

If you were formerly a Uniregistry customer and have been moved to GoDaddy, you need to understand that some very basic principles of customer service did not survive that transfer.

GoDaddy will withhold information from you, and will not tell you if the other side in a negotiation is making legal threats, so that you can make a rational and informed decision. Instead, they will drive you right over the cliff and even, as happened in the longer course of this negotiation, make up stuff, attribute it to you, and then it will turn up in a UDRP or other legal dispute filed against you.

GoDaddy will dig a hole and push you right in.

 

[HostGeeks.com]

Unfortunate that you had to go through a UDRP defense, which could have been avoided if GoDaddy had been more transparent with you. Suggest reaching out to GoDaddy's customer support or filing a complaint to express your dissatisfaction.

 

[jberryhill]

TLDR?

It's not that long. The short version is that GoDaddy Brokerage will not tell you if their "buyer" is making legal threats and gathering ammunition to file a UDRP instead of engaging in a straightforward negotiation. This can end up costing you your domain name and/or legal expenses.

 

[Peter45]

Isn't the broker obliged - out of the brokerage contract - to give his client all relevant information out of his correspondence with the buyers?
Aren't legal threats or trademarks claims relevant information?
Doesn't the broker make himself liable, or suetable - breach of contract or something - if he doesn't pass it over?

Sorry for the barrage of questions : )

 

[jberryhill]

Sorry for the barrage of questions : )

They are good ones, though.

But GoDaddy is concerned about someone routing around their commission.

So, they will not say something as simple as "The buyer is claiming a legal right to the domain name and threatening action. We cannot evaluate claims of that kind or provide you with legal advice."

 

[tonyk2000]

Originally, Uni simply showed all the communications to sellers, including emails from buyers and responses from brokers. It allowed the sellers to indirectly participate (if they so wished) - by sending appropriate messages to brokers. This is how the things _should_ work. I personally had some sales this way, and I'm sure my participation helped. At some point of time, Uni stopped allowing this (all leads were set to "private"). It appears that GoDaddy is following this scheme.

So, if the domain is set to makeoffer - it makes even more sense to use own landers and handle all communications with the buyer directly. This would not eliminate GD brokerage completely - they may still receive inquries via other channels such as auctions.godaddy etc. And, of course, it is not too clear what to do if the seller wants to outsource all the routine brokerage tasks.

 

[xcloud123]

yes，i dnot trust them，they all should be fired ，low working，unsmart

 

[the_poet]

I miss Uni's top-notch brokerage. I was afraid that after Uni's acquisition by GD they would never be able to provide such a professional service and unfortunately that came true.

 

[bmugford]

TLDR?

Is that really long enough to say TLDR? It took me all of about a minute to read it.

Thanks for sharing @jberryhill.

Brad

 

[Domain Sugar]

Yikes. This is very concerning. Thanks for the share, John.

 

[DomainsMaven]

Respect everyone, trust no one.

 

[bmugford]

This is the problem with having a third party represent your domain, and you knowing nothing about those communications.

On one hand, it is really information the owner needs to know.

On the other hand, this tactic could be used by a broker in a nefarious manner (even if there was not an actual claim) to try and compel an owner to sell the domain, under duress.

There should certainly be some type of policy that covers this situation. I think it is inappropriate to just carry on negotiations, as if the TM threat never happened.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

So, they will not say something as simple as "The buyer is claiming a legal right to the domain name and threatening action. We cannot evaluate claims of that kind or provide you with legal advice."

That would be a very reasonable response to this type of situation.

Brad

 

[Josh Bond]

Wow. This could be happening right now to anyone with a domain listed on Afternic or Dan, even if the domain doesn't resolve there. If your names are listed on their platforms, and a seller contacts Afternic/Dan brokers, they could be fabricating stories about talking to you, quoting you as having said things, and creating legal evidence to be used against you later. Meanwhile, you know nothing about any of it.

 

[the_poet]

That would be a very reasonable response to this type of situation.

Brad

Yeah, that's what would have happened with the former Uni's brokerage.

 

[jberryhill]

Look at the message in the OP. On March 28, the "buyer" said that if the offer of $4000 was not accepted, they would "initiate the legal process to obtain our trademarked domain name".


GoDaddy's Campanaro then turns around and says this to the GoDaddy customer:

------------------

-------------

So, Campanaro has a buyer who is saying that if the price is not $4000, then they will take legal action.

He then tells GoDaddy's customer that if the price is not $4000, then the buyer will look at alternative domain names.

 

[bmugford]

Look at the message in the OP. On March 28, the "buyer" said that if the offer of $4000 was not accepted, they would "initiate the legal process to obtain our trademarked domain name".


GoDaddy's Campanaro then turns around and says this to the GoDaddy customer:

------------------

Show attachment 237826

-------------

So, Campanaro has a buyer who is saying that if the price is not $4000, then they will take legal action.

He then tells GoDaddy's customer that if the price is not $4000, then the buyer will look at alternative domain names.

Good point. Even if they did not disclose the TM threat, they certainly misrepresented what the client actually said. Nothing was ever said about alternative domains.

Brad

 

[Future Sensors]

You now see GoDaddy's services being eroded in every possible way. It's not surprising, but very sad to see.

Thank you for sharing @jberryhill

 

[Future Sensors]

Not only the Seller, but also the "Buyer" has a reason to be angry with the broker, I think.

 

[the_poet]

Look at the message in the OP. On March 28, the "buyer" said that if the offer of $4000 was not accepted, they would "initiate the legal process to obtain our trademarked domain name".


GoDaddy's Campanaro then turns around and says this to the GoDaddy customer:

------------------

Show attachment 237826

-------------

So, Campanaro has a buyer who is saying that if the price is not $4000, then they will take legal action.

He then tells GoDaddy's customer that if the price is not $4000, then the buyer will look at alternative domain names.

This is a blatant lie, indeed a concerning situation. And since pretty much everyone of us has domains listed on the GoDaddy ecosystem, it's safe to say it affects the whole domain industry and GD should issue a clarification.