DirectNics legal rights in relation to its recent actions

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

JR is dead on.

But the problem with Directnic or anyone else playing vigilante here is there's no checks and balances. One party has all the power.

The sex.com case pretty well sets a precedent that domains are property, and there's something that really rubs me wrong about any individual party depriving another of use of their property without due process. And any Directnic kangaroo court or investigation is not my idea of due process.

However, as Slavick has pointed out (and I trust Slavick on domain laws more than I do pretty much anyone else), your domains are NOT your property in many states.

California is one where they are. Ergo that's where sex.com was referenced as property. Slavick mentioned in Virginia, they are not. On another board, in another post, KK mentioned AOL winning an award against a company and was considering taking their domains in lieu of settlement payment. The company paid.

ALSO on another board, it was shown where Shaw Cable, out of Canada, got Tucows to shut down one of Brad Shaw's domains. No CP - just that they were involved in a trademark/copyright infridgment case. Brad won - the site was taken down BEFORE any judges made a ruling.

Everything is case by case.

[softball]

Originally Posted by Peaches

However, as Slavick has pointed out (and I trust Slavick on domain laws more than I do pretty much anyone else), your domains are NOT your property in many states.

California is one where they are. Ergo that's where sex.com was referenced as property. Slavick mentioned in Virginia, they are not. On another board, in another post, KK mentioned AOL winning an award against a company and was considering taking their domains in lieu of settlement payment. The company paid.

ALSO on another board, it was shown where Shaw Cable, out of Canada, got Tucows to shut down one of Brad Shaw's domains. No CP - just that they were involved in a trademark/copyright infridgment case. Brad won - the site was taken down BEFORE any judges made a ruling.

Everything is case by case.

No site should be taken down before there is a legal ruling. A civilian with a registration company is not a legal expert. Even if they were, it is certainly not clear that they have the right to lock up someone's shop because they don't like the product. It is not about cp folks, it is about how it is dealt with. The CP is a red freeking herring.
We fall prey to the same bullshit that the public does. Whenever you mention porn, they think CP.
So a company decides to flex its muscles (DN) what do they choose to set the precedent? CP.
Isn't it very obvious?

[LadyMischief]

Guess it doesn't matter what the legal rights are or what anyone things. Looks like DirectNIC just axed a freehost and all their domains are in registrar-lock as well.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=687480

Should be interesting to see who's next.

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by LadyMischief

Guess it doesn't matter what the legal rights are or what anyone things. Looks like DirectNIC just axed a freehost and all their domains are in registrar-lock as well.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=687480

Should be interesting to see who's next.

All my domains are on REGISTER-LOCK. It's so no one can change them w/o my permission!

And did you even BOTHER to read this posted approx TWELVE HOURS AGO:

Sorry guys, it's not Directnic related.. Cogent had a fiber cut at 8:05am which isolated the Montreal network from the rest of the Net, it lasted ~15 hours!! What's unfortunate is we're in the process of turning up BGP sessions with our providers and a couple of days later this outage wouldn't have affected us.

Seriously........

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by Peaches

All my domains are on REGISTER-LOCK. It's so no one can change them w/o my permission!

And did you even BOTHER to read this posted approx TWELVE HOURS AGO:


Seriously........

Looks like I might have been mistaken. Ahh well my apologies. I think that the problem you seem to have with me is that I have a personal opinion on this that's very strong, and so do you. We will likely not agree, but I can see your points and hopefully you can see mine. I don't really care about DirectNIC, if any OTHER registrar was doing this (and apparently there was another), I would be just as worried. The whole thing happened under what seemed like a worthy cause, but the implications for the future could be bad for EVERYONE in the industry. You may not promote teen sites, Peaches, but teens aren't the only things that people can find offensive or have sites shut down for. Just about anything can be considered offensive depending on where you are and you know that. I am extricating myself from any further discussions because I am tired of running around in circles. If you people won't see (as you yourselves have said but seem not to observe personally) that there are TWO sides to the coin, and it's not my job to educate your perception. At least I can acknowledge that DirectNIC might have done what it thought was best. I don't think that you can acknowledge the potential damage their actions MAY have on future business. Let's hope you (or I) never have to worry about it.

[Peaches]

This has nothing to do with teen sites, DirectNic or you. My problem is with ANYONE who throws things around like they're facts when they know nothing at all about what they're talking about. You made a very inflamatory post here w/o even READING THE DAMN THREAD.

And your comments on TOSs not being able to supersede law are just ignorant.

If DirectNic closed Slick's site down illegally then Slick can sue. Period, end of story.

[LadyMischief]

Originally Posted by Peaches

This has nothing to do with teen sites, DirectNic or you. My problem is with ANYONE who throws things around like they're facts when they know nothing at all about what they're talking about. You made a very inflamatory post here w/o even READING THE DAMN THREAD.

And your comments on TOSs not being able to supersede law are just ignorant.

If DirectNic closed Slick's site down illegally then Slick can sue. Period, end of story.

Ya well we all make mistakes Peaches. Relax, you aren't immune to humanity either.

As for my comments on TOS's, actually, I'm not ignorant. If someone put something that was against a law on the books as a term, it would not be enforcable, but as Sarretah clarified, it would have to go to court to be deemed as such. Still, the point does remain.

I agree, if they took the site down illegally, he can sue. It seems they are all working on things so I hope it comes out well, I just hope that other, less REASONABLE registrars don't get a bug and decide to start locking down domains.

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by Peaches

However, as Slavick has pointed out (and I trust Slavick on domain laws more than I do pretty much anyone else), your domains are NOT your property in many states.

California is one where they are. Ergo that's where sex.com was referenced as property. Slavick mentioned in Virginia, they are not. On another board, in another post, KK mentioned AOL winning an award against a company and was considering taking their domains in lieu of settlement payment. The company paid.

ALSO on another board, it was shown where Shaw Cable, out of Canada, got Tucows to shut down one of Brad Shaw's domains. No CP - just that they were involved in a trademark/copyright infridgment case. Brad won - the site was taken down BEFORE any judges made a ruling.

Everything is case by case.

The ICANN and WIPO process for settling copyright infringement cases is an example of a good due independent due process. I think Shaw's case actually pre-dated that. But we ALL live under those rules including all of the registrars.

I hate kiddie porn and the black eye it gives all of us. And although on one hand I respect Directnic for taking a stand, I am a bit uneasy with how heavy handed it was with no due process or independent corroboration.

[Peaches]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

Twith no due process or independent corroboration.

Neither of which you are privy to so how are you making that ASSumption?

[softball]

Originally Posted by Peaches

Neither of which you are privy to so how are you making that ASSumption?

Then enlighten us if you are. Quit beating around the bush. All these inferences of other processes at work and blah blah blah. Spit it out. Say something damnit. We would all love to know. Is there a gag order somewhere along the line?