Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL • Hacker News Board

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#11

Post by solve » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:12 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #9

shkkmo wrote: post #6

I have sympathy for Kneen, but do we really, as a society, benefit from people that buy useful domains and then sit on them for 16 years while doing nothing with them?

The bigger question is whether anyone has the authority to take it away from him.

Trademark law probably says yes.

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#12

Post by mbrameld » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:12 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #6

I have sympathy for Kneen, but do we really, as a society, benefit from people that buy useful domains and then sit on them for 16 years while doing nothing with them?

For the amount he was willing to sell for my guess is he just hadn't been approached yet. The article made it sound like he would sell it cheaply as long as the buyer was going to actually use it and not just resell it. If those implications are true I'd say we benefit as a society.

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#13

Post by chasing » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:13 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #6

I have sympathy for Kneen, but do we really, as a society, benefit from people that buy useful domains and then sit on them for 16 years while doing nothing with them?

I understand your general point, but I think it'd be highly problematic to start assessing ownership of things based solely on whether someone is doing something useful enough with them.

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#14

Post by mbrameld » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:13 PM UTC

solve wrote: post #7

Forcing squatters to have to file a trademark to retain their squatted domains would improve the squatting situation 10000x. Clearly the current Workbetter.com owner is squatting the name.

The article makes it sound like he was willing to sell very cheaply on the condition that the new owner actually use the domain and not resell it. That's not really squatting behavior.

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#15

Post by mbreese » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:14 PM UTC

solve wrote: post #7

Forcing squatters to have to file a trademark to retain their squatted domains would improve the squatting situation 10000x. Clearly the current Workbetter.com owner is squatting the name.

It's only squatting if someone already owned the trademark. That clearly was't the case 16 years ago.

A startup tried to buy a domain and failed. So instead of moving on, they decided to sue. Sounds like a winning plan to me.

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#16

Post by rbosinger » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:14 PM UTC

I thought that when this happens that you just go register workbetter.ly or something. Isn't that the way of the web?

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#17

Post by ejcx » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:14 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #6

I have sympathy for Kneen, but do we really, as a society, benefit from people that buy useful domains and then sit on them for 16 years while doing nothing with them?

Isn't this a problem that is hopefully solved by the huge number of new TLDs. I think it will eventually be a non-problem.

I have seen some many startups using .co, .io, and even an early stage using a .technology. I actually saw Harris Teeter, The Grocery Store, opening a new location in Northern Va and advertising that it was hiring with giant banner that said "harristeeter.jobs".

.com is here to stay, but there is still room for more top-TLDs

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#18

Post by DenisM » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:15 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #6

I have sympathy for Kneen, but do we really, as a society, benefit from people that buy useful domains and then sit on them for 16 years while doing nothing with them?

In in real estate this problem is solved through taxation - tax the property for its appraised value, and squatting will be a thing of the past.

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#19

Post by smileysteve » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:17 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #6

I have sympathy for Kneen, but do we really, as a society, benefit from people that buy useful domains and then sit on them for 16 years while doing nothing with them?

As suggested by the only 2 domain sells, he didn't buy them for the money, so he may have bought them for a reason or idea in his head. Who hasn't had an idea that could resound to "WorkBetter"

And there are "punishments" to prevent someone from sitting on a domain that they have no intent to use. We can assume that Kneen has paid about $160 in domain renewal fees.

However, I do like your idea of preventing "doing nothing". Just as ICAHN requires up to date information, maybe they should require that you direct it to a host that is to do something other than to sell the domain after X years.

Re: Startup Sues a Domain Name Owner to Grab a 16-Year-Old URL

#20

Post by nnain » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 4:19 PM UTC

The article sets a slight bias in favour of Kneen already. So, many people might sympathise with him more. But who knows what negotiation talks actually happened?! The tone, the mood..

The coming generations should have a better chance at finding domain names I feel. So I personally would side with the one trying to acquire the domain name for his/her registered company.