Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 115 posts

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

#51

Post by BuildTheRobots »

swang wrote: post #8

The guy's name is Harsh, what other actions would you expect from him? But seriously, looking at the doc and not mentioned in the article. Harsh apparently tried to negotiate, failed, then tried to "transfer" the domain. When Kneen called him out on this, Harsh suggested it was someone else, and that he wouldn't have done this since he found a suitable alternative. So I'm pretty sure Harsh was being purposely manipul…

Not just "Harsh", but "Harsh Mehta".

Now if you're going to tell me that Harsh Meta isn't the best computer-game supervillian name ever, I don't know what is.

What's particularly sad to see is that in the process of publishing the court filings, they've also very obviously published the defendants home address too (whois not withstanding).

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

#52

Post by physcab »

Purchasing domain names is the most frustrating experience. Why there is no transparent market is beyond me. Mehta's tactics are clearly abusive, but if someone was holding onto a domain name for 16 years and not doing anything with it is more infuriating to me. There really needs to be a use it or lose it policy.

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

#53

Post by clamprecht »

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?

Would you argue that the guy who has owned the beautiful un developed downtown property for 16 (or 60) years should be forced to sell it to build a W hotel because it's a "better use" of the land? How about building an orphanage? To me it's the very definition of property rights. I get to do what I want with my property, including doing nothing (as long as I don't otherwise break the law).

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

#54

Post by madengr »

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?

Society does not need to "benefit". His domain is is property, and some idiotic "start-up" certainly does not need to steal it. If their business relies on a name, then it's a worthless business.

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

#55

Post by kennywinker »

rbosinger wrote: post #16

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

Exactly. And then when your company starts to do better, you throw $xx,xxx at the owner of the .com version and getdropbox.com becomes dropbox.com.

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

#56

Post by nedwin »

physcab wrote: post #52

Purchasing domain names is the most frustrating experience. Why there is no transparent market is beyond me. Mehta's tactics are clearly abusive, but if someone was holding onto a domain name for 16 years and not doing anything with it is more infuriating to me. There really needs to be a use it or lose it policy.

What other property rights should be under your "use it or lose it proposal"? Land? Housing?

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

#57

Post by solve »

mbreese wrote: post #15
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.

It's squatting because:

Workbetter.com

Try going to the domain.

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

#58

Post by rubiquity »

tptacek wrote: post #28

The unfortunate thing about the case is that both parties are Internet natives and, Mehta especially, part of the startup ecosystem. What the fuck does this mean?

They were born in Internet and have since relocated elsewhere but still journey back to Internet from time to time.

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

#59

Post by solve »

jpgvm wrote: post #27
solve wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trademark law probably says yes.

Except in this case the domain was registered 16 years ago. You can't just see a domain you like, go register a trademark for it and demand they give it to you. Atleast not for .com.

That is actually how trademark already works, if you have enough money. E.g. well funded brands like Coke, Google, Facebook, can easily use trademark to retroactively remove rights to a name from anyone who wasn't actively using it for some non-squatting purpose - within certain trademark and legal scopes.

Doesn't matter if someone simply owned property with that name prior to the trademark. The test is more complex than that.

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

#60

Post by yen223 »

nedwin wrote: post #56
physcab wrote: post #52

Purchasing domain names is the most frustrating experience. Why there is no transparent market is beyond me. Mehta's tactics are clearly abusive, but if someone was holding onto a domain name for 16 years and not doing anything with it is more infuriating to me. There really needs to be a use it or lose it policy.

What other property rights should be under your "use it or lose it proposal"? Land? Housing?

It already is, sort of: http://www.dtpli.vic.gov.au/property-and-land-titles/land-ti...
Post reply on HN