Live data from Hacker News

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

techcrunch.com

91–100 of 115 posts

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

#91
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it need to be prevented exactly? Why is the internet different than anything other situation where people see an opportunity to make money and take advantage of that opportunity? Like buying real estate or wine, or art and so on? It is trivial anyway to "use" a domain name. Are you further suggesting that someone who is legitimately "using" a domain name (and who is going to decide what use is anyway) then c…

In my opinion, it is wrong to sit on a scarce resource that you didn't create and are not using, thereby preventing anyone else making use of it. Wine and art are dissimilar cases because they can be created in as large a quantity as there is a market for. Real estate, on the other hand, is a very similar case, and in my opinion there should be laws against playing dog in the manger with real estate - either an outri…

It is not a scare resource. It is simply, like with wine or art, viewed as valuable by those who have decided that they want it and don't want the easily available alternatives. [1]

If you can't get ycombinator.com you can get yycombinator.net or ycombinator.somenewtld (that was just released).

And Wine and Art of the type that has value can't be created in as large a quantity as there is a market for anyway (cheaper mass produced wine can of course). If there wasn't scarcity the value would not be as great. With domains the reason the value is high is similar. There is only one "bell.com" and if you want that name and not "thebell.com" or bell.xyz you need to pay the person who got to it first (legitimately I might add).

This is all just sour grapes. Somebody wakes up one morning and decides that life isn't fair because the domain that they want is owned by someone else. Might even be a bakery on main street that got to "mycakes.com" first (made that up ..)

> "Real estate, on the other hand, is a very similar case, and in my opinion there should be laws against playing dog in the manger with real estate - either an outright ban or a hefty penalty in the form of extra property tax."

Ridiculous free market system works like this and always has. You are free today to buy real estate at absolute bargain prices in Newark NJ and sit on it for years and try to make some money later. Go a short distance north and you will end up in Manhattan where you won't buy a parking space for the same 4x price. What do you want to do now have the state take all property that people have acquired legitimately and redistribute it? Ridiculous.

[1] And maybe when someone decides to name their company they should consider what names they can buy prior to deciding to use a domain that they will not be able to buy, and then crying about how unfair the system is because it is not available right?

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

#92
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We manage to assess real estate without running into those problems. It definitely wouldn't be an easy policy to enact.

> We manage to assess real estate without running into those problems. We also don't generally use the documented offer standard you suggest for domain names for real property, but on objective features of the property, replacement costs based on those objective features, and application of a depreciation schedule to those features subject to depreciation.

Of course. I don't think documented offers is how the scheme would actually be implemented. Of course: I don't think any scheme like this would be implemented in the first place.

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

#93
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.

Internet is also home to a thriving ecosystem where mystical creatures called "startups" frolic freely in the forests.

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

#94
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the renewal fee is fixed. The comment you're responding to suggests taxation on an appraised value. If you're sitting on a domain name for which there are documented offers of, say, $100,000, an appraised tax would assess you annually N% of $100,000.

Sell me your domain for 5000 or I'll offer 100000...

We can stop this abuse by demanding a full-amount escrow, or at least a rescind fee to be posted at the time offer is made.

Pricing assets is an art, and humanity has a lot of experience in this art. Something can be figured out if there is a will.

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

#95
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…

Isn't Harsh just a mildly-common Indian name like Richard?

Probably Harshil is. Harsh must be the shortened version.

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

#96
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key take away is the part of the plaintiff's filing that seems to want to redefine 'register' to include 'renew'.

Which is going to look ridiculous as soon as it hits court, because there's clear precedent for the standard meaning - sixteen years of it. Team Harsh are probably hoping for an internet-ignorant judge. I wouldn't want to bet on their likely success with that gambit.

Most of the problem is that he'll have to go into a foreign court just to keep a domain he had for ages.

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

#97
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it society that would be benefiting from Harsh taking away Keen's domain? Or is it Harsh? By defining the benefit as being to "society" one might sound noble while masking the reality: Harsh is attempting to steal Keen's domain name in a sleazy and opportunistic fashion. Defining this kind of hijacking as a benefit to society is misdirection at best.

I'm absolutely not trying to defend Harsh Mehta's tactics. I'm just trying to start a conversation about the value of Kneen's sitting on a domain name he isn't using for 16 year.

Well - OK lets try taking the conversation a bit further.

"Adverse possession was still possible in any private property where at least ten years had passed ‘without effective action by the owner" [1]

Should we have 'squatters' rights' (adverse possession) for domain names? I personally think not...

[1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622995/Squatter-400...

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

#98
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…

Let's make fun of names from other cultures! Real cool.

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

#99
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…

Its not Haaaarsh. Its H-rsh, which means joy in Hindi/Marathi.

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

#100
Looks EXACTLY like cybersquatting to me. You have to learn to read behind the lines here. I've had to deal with these people before, they are infuriating. Heres the facts that suck

- Has the domain for 16 years, doing nothing with it. - Strings a long a deal for purchase because it doesn't meet his demands. - Continues to fight extremely hard to do nothing with said domain.

I find it convenient the author never mention why the guy backed out of the deal, probably because his demand was $50k+ and completely unreasonable.

Post reply on HN