31–40 of 135 posts
sussexroyals (there are two of them after all) thesussexroyals (more grammatically correct) thesussexes (as they are commonly referred to in the press) harryandmeghan (has only posted once since Dec 2017) meghanandharry (ladies first!)
and so on...
I remember reading about this in their TOS years ago... I think they normally outline in under taking away names to give to rightful owners. (If you’re name is @apple for example ). This seems like a poorly handled extension of that power. But- truly just an example of how your use, data, name, etc on these services is really just at their whim.
Who would the "rightful owner" of @apple be? Maybe the one who registered it in the first place? Or does that old instinct of defering to power make you want to give in to the presumptuous request of a large entity?
This goes to show that "your" handle on someone else's platform is never really yours. The only thing that can not be taken away from you is a domain name. Start hosting your voice via your own domain.
> All registered domains must be set in use within one year, otherwise the .AL Registry has the right to suspend them.
Meanwhile, I've been emailing Instagram yearly for many years now trying to gain control of an account that has had 1 post and 15 followers for YEARS now, that is squatting on an account name that is the same name as a registered LTD that I actually own and use. Crickets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Forget the ToS and sue for damages. That account had value and this is a poor business practice. Courts award value and the damages are to make a point that its a bad practice if the judge/regulator finds it disturbing. Assuming that the judge / consumer regulator will say "well but you clicked I agree" is a bad assumption, ESPECIALLY when European countries are involved. the company is just as likely to axe that con…
The user still has the account, just with a different handle.
in other instances the follower and engagement to the userID is valuable
in other instances a combination of all three is valuable
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure that 'especially' applies to ccTLDs any more than gTLDs. Especially since most (all?) gTLDs are covered by the same jurisdiction as the .us ccTLD.
Actually gTLDs are restricted by their contract with ICANN (registry agreement (RA), search google for "ICANN RA"). ccTLDs however merely give lip service to domain registration norms, but as there is no contract beyond "this registry is yours to run" ccTLDs have far more leeway (public pressure sometimes withstanding) to do as they please. It is for reasons similar to this that a fair number of ccTLDs don't run EPP…
In the case of "entities with enough power and influence", I don't think any of the ICANN RA requirements make gTLDs any less likely to being seized than any ccTLDs.
This goes to show that "your" handle on someone else's platform is never really yours. The only thing that can not be taken away from you is a domain name. Start hosting your voice via your own domain.
I have to agree that it's the better option. Certainly not a 100% fail-safe solution – I see people already listing domains that were seized for various inexcusable reasons – but the Nissan.com case [0] (Nissan the car company vs. Mr. Nissan the run-of-the-mill computer sales guy) comes to mind as a classic (and fascinating) counterexample. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Motors_vs._Nissan_Compu...
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d200...