321–330 of 493 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like it's better to have a "do use" list for something as important as a domain name registrar. - Namecheap - Cloudflare - Route 53 (if on AWS) Any others?
I use infomaniak from switzerland. Mainly because I can physically go to their office and discuss in person if there is a problem.
A similar thing has happened to me before. There is a company with the same name as my surname with a trademark for it. When I registered a domain with my surname in it, the registrar had an automatic process in place that checked for this trademark and took away access of the domain. So far so good. The problem was that the registrar and its support then ghosted me and also never refunded me for the money already pa…
I don't think this is good.
Trademarks are country-specific, not global like domains. Further, within a country trademarks are only valid within the scope of certain classes, which means:
* There will often be more than one trademark holder of even non-surname trademarks.
* You can't trademark a surname to prevent its use generally, you can only restrict its use in a narrow sphere.
I understand why domain registrars automatically overenforce their country's trademark laws (they can't deal with the legal complications that will result from them not doing so), but it's very much not good that someone like you can get to a domain for your surname first and be told you can't have it in case the trademark holder (for which class???) might want it.
I'm the one running itch.io, so here's some more context for you: From what I can tell, some person made a fan page for an existing Funko Pop video game (Funko Fusion), with links to the official site and screenshots of the game. The BrandShield software is probably instructed to eradicate all "unauthorized" use of their trademark, so they sent reports independently to our host and registrar claiming there was "fraud…
I run a domain registrar. "serverHold" is not a status that iwantmyname could've set. If they had suspended the domain it'd have "clientHold" set. Server Hold means the registry (i.e. .io directly) has suspended the domain. Your best bet would be to contact the Internet Computer Bureau Ltd who run .io at admin@icb.co.uk, or the registry technical support provider Identity Digital at techsupport@identity.digital.
The last time someone I knew had an issue, they had to get a senator to make waves to get anything resolved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
After this, everyone will be moving away from this registrar...
And itch.io who removed that page.
I'd expect them to remove that, they're not a host for fan pages.
Brand Shield and other AI slopware needs to be sued to death for all the damage they cause, including their customer's reputation and bottom line
Even if the suit is 100% justified (which it is in this case), and you can show damages, the problem will usually be of jurisdiction. Funko Pop is an American Company. BrandShield, the "Brand Protection Software" they used, is based out of Israel. iwantmyname, the registrar, is from New Zealand. They got bought out by Team Internet, which is British. And who knows where all of them are actually registered. They are a…
Funko Pop hired BrandShield, but from what I understand they did so exactly because the latter does all the work without you having to intervene. Kind of like you hiring a lawyer and them using ChatGPT to present the case, full of errors and non-existent sources. The lawyer might have been acting on your behalf, but they didn’t really do so according to your intentions and their fuck up isn’t your fault. On first view I’d say BrandShield is a culprit here, but can’t be so sure about Funko Pop yet.
On the other hand, iwantmyname is absolutely at fault. They took down a client’s website without asking or recourse, then sat on their asses. That’s who you sue, because they’re the ones who ultimately had the power and made the decision that affected itch.io. If iwantmyname wants to sue BrandShield and/or Funk Pop or whatever else in turn, none of your concern. The one’s who hurt the business were iwantmyname by not doing due diligence or contacting the client but just automatically bending over.
Now if they should be sued in Britain or New Zealand, that’s for the lawyers to know.
In fact, all of this is for the lawyers to figure out. I’m not one. I’m merely expressing what makes logical sense to me, which could be incredibly wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That kyc thingy is icann requirement Is it really? Or just contact info is enough?
The requirement in the contract is nowhere near that specific. Contact info validation is sufficient for almost all registrars. It's possible a given registry has higher standards, or maybe one registrar got some order to be more thorough, but great reason to avoid given this is a commodity and there are actually good alternatives. (I broadly like Tucows and Cloudflare) Namecheap is on my NO NO NO list, along with Go…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it sounds like this was DMCA abuse by Funko, aided and abetted by BrandShield, and it resulted in damages to you. Also sounds like iwantmyname just went along with it, they are probably conditioned to do so by the rules. I would write up a complaint and send it to the incoming FTC Commissioner. Yes, I'm serious. From the signals Trump is sending if there is ever a time when Republicans may support some form of DMC…
Given the OP and admin in the comments explicitly say that this wasn't a DMCA claim it would rather hurt any campaign to lie and say it was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I run a domain registrar. "serverHold" is not a status that iwantmyname could've set. If they had suspended the domain it'd have "clientHold" set. Server Hold means the registry (i.e. .io directly) has suspended the domain. Your best bet would be to contact the Internet Computer Bureau Ltd who run .io at admin@icb.co.uk, or the registry technical support provider Identity Digital at techsupport@identity.digital.
I've heard a ton of stories about .io, IMO, they play fast and loose in a space where that isn't okay, and they get away with it mostly because they are a ccTLD. The last time someone I knew had an issue, they had to get a senator to make waves to get anything resolved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course the problem is that legally speaking, they don't cause any damage - service providers they target cause the damage. BS have no true authority over these service providers, just the threat of some legal claim. The service providers comply voluntarily as they don't want to spend time checking if the claim is valid.
I don't think this is the kind of advice a good lawyer would give. BrandShield, Funko, and iwantmyname all caused serious financial harm through, at a minimum, tortious negligence. I'm not a lawyer, but even a yokel like me knows there's more to this legally than a shrug and "the software did it".
The strongest case would be something along the lines of breach of contract via the domain registrar, but your standard internet contract has a term in it that amounts to "we get the right to fuck you", so I assume that applies here, so no breach of contract actually exists. This also kills every claim that's dependent on breach of contract, so tortious interference is also dead.
Fraud will fail because itch.io itself isn't being defrauded at the very least. Business disparagement, and anything else along the lines of defamation, is going to fail because you need something like actual malice--specific knowledge of falsity--there, and that's essentially impossible to prove, not without somebody admitting that they knew all along everything was false.
Tortious interference is dead for several reasons. First, you need an underlying tort, which, as detailed above, probably doesn't exist. Next, you need specific knowledge of the contract being broken. Finally, you need intentionality here: it's not "I did something that caused the contract to be broken", it's "I did something to cause the contract to be broken." Outside of somebody jumping up and down shouting "I'm tortiously interfering with your contracts," it's basically impossible to prove tortious interference.
The registrar in question is iwantmyname, so I guess you can add them to your "do not use" list.
I feel like it's better to have a "do use" list for something as important as a domain name registrar. - Namecheap - Cloudflare - Route 53 (if on AWS) Any others?