britainsgottalent.co.uk sedo bid £100,000

[GreyWing]

I don't understand why the respondent isn't working on re-branding his investment.
P.

Hi Phillip, first point would have to be, why should they? I understand being practicable but principles at stake.

I haven't read much of the point of the DRS on this and the £100k sale on sedo says that all parties in this may be a bit bonkers. But from what has been said the domain was registered well before the talent show was commissioned.

The DRS system is corrupt and should be handled by totally independent agency, not nominet and not people in nominet who subscribe to nominet's internal politics.

It's job's for the boys I'm afraid and I'd take them to court if I was you, take them to the small claims court to start with although you'll have to limit any claim to less than 5k for the name, otherwise if you lose you will have to pay nominets court costs.

For less than a hundred quid you can have your day in court, you might not win but you'll be able to air your grievances. Show the previous decisions that Nominet have come too and you may have a chance.

 

[fairplay]

Is acorn a good venue for making public the woes of the DRS? I think all here knows the good and bad already

Rob can you enlarge on this or pm me?

I thought Acorn would be a perfect venue to keep people up to speed with what actually happens in one of these cases as so much is not in the public domain. It gives coverage to the ongoing struggle in this case and it might help others in the future if they can use ANYTHING here as a precedent to help them win their cases?

 

[fairplay]

I don't understand why the respondent isn't working on re-branding his investment.

P.

Philipp this has been mentioned before but the whole argument here is who owns the name britainsgottalent.co.uk. This name was chosen for an original online talent agency, Fremantle knew the name was registered and they knew the site was in development. They have schemed, used and manipulated the Nominet system.

The "Expert" decision is totally one-sided and she has found on the basis that an imaginary income has been made, (even although she had a signed statement that no monies had been made by the sites owners) and when if she would have tried to actually complete the process she relies on for her decision she would have found out it could not be done and NOTHING has been made.

This finding if allowed to go on makes a complete mockery of Nominet and the way the public and independent Nominet members actually feel about an in-house procedure that cannot remain neutral.

When the Editor of The Times newspaper came out and said their accusation against the owner was a LIE. Why were they not found GUILTY of making a claim in "BAD FAITH" and the decision made for the owner??.

The idea predates the show by 18 months, the registration predates the show by a year - So please dont anyone else suggest this, if you knew some of the things that went on you would realise just how dirty big business is in the UK.

This show was originally going to be called Paul O'Grady's Got Talent - How successful do you think it would have been then, and why was it changed??

 

[fairplay]

Please do not publish anything legal here without checking with me first, I am a Nominet member and need to respect any confidentiality clauses such correspondence may carry.

Admin

Admin I think if he came back and was going to intervene there might be come confidentiality to be concerned with, however if there is a negative response I dont how this could be an issue but it may give some insight into just how transparent, independent, or neutral Nominet really are?

I'm intent in getting as much of this as possible out in the open and if it doesnt help us, it might help SOMEONE else.

NO - After everything that these people have done, I'm all for publish and be damned!!

This country still has freedom of speech - right???

 

[fairplay]

Hi Phillip, first point would have to be, why should they? I understand being practicable but principles at stake.

I haven't read much of the point of the DRS on this and the £100k sale on sedo says that all parties in this may be a bit bonkers. But from what has been said the domain was registered well before the talent show was commissioned.

The DRS system is corrupt and should be handled by totally independent agency, not nominet and not people in nominet who subscribe to nominet's internal politics.

It's job's for the boys I'm afraid and I'd take them to court if I was you, take them to the small claims court to start with although you'll have to limit any claim to less than 5k for the name, otherwise if you lose you will have to pay nominets court costs.

For less than a hundred quid you can have your day in court, you might not win but you'll be able to air your grievances. Show the previous decisions that Nominet have come too and you may have a chance.

GreyWing; THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU :smile: :smile:

Not sure about a lot of stuff here but if thats the way people think of Nominet then after what the owner had gone through I'm not surprised.

However your bang on with the most imprtant part of all - Why should they!!!

 

[Admin]

Admin I think if he came back and was going to intervene there might be come confidentiality to be concerned with, however if there is a negative response I dont how this could be an issue but it may give some insight into just how transparent, independent, or neutral Nominet really are?

I'm intent in getting as much of this as possible out in the open and if it doesnt help us, it might help SOMEONE else.

After everything that these people have done, I'm all for publish and be damned!!

This country still has freedom of speech - right???

I can be held legally responsible for any information published here as the "publisher", and I don't intend to spend my money defending anything you post knowing it may invite legal action against me or AD.

I suggest you set up your own blog and publish it there.

Admin

 

[rob]

I suggest you set up your own blog and publish it there.

I would fully agree with that as it would allow you greater freedom to post materials relating to the case.

You can then post on forums, news sites etc to get 'word out' regarding it.

Please bear in mind this is a sales thread for a £100k name that is not worth £100k

 

[retired_member34]

Please bear in mind this is a sales thread for a £100k name that is not worth £100k

I think that sums it up for a lot of us here. Post it on your own blog and then maybe invite some of us to give an honest appraisal of your site and it's value on the blog.

 

[GreyWing]

Maybe time to move it out of the sale section and stick it in the DRS section?

 

[fairplay]

I can be held legally responsible for any information published here as the "publisher", and I don't intend to spend my money defending anything you post knowing it may invite legal action against me or AD.

I suggest you set up your own blog and publish it there.

Admin

I certainly dont want anyone else drawn into a situation where they could be held responsible and I didnt think a forum could be held for anything people posted, discussed, debated?

 

[fairplay]

Maybe time to move it out of the sale section and stick it in the DRS section?

Good idea?: As I came into this late, I didnt realise this was actually a 'sales' string, the only reason its here is because (rob) published the Nominet pdf.

I didnt know there was a DRS section either, could this whole part, from rob's insert be moved to the DRS section??

 

[fairplay]

From rob's pdf?

Admin could everything from rob's pdf be moved to Domain Name Disputes as I'm guessing this is what GreyWing was referring to??

 

[rob]

Admin could everything from rob's pdf be moved to Domain Name Disputes as I'm guessing this is what GreyWing was referring to??

It is not my PDF Why do you think that?!

Likewise, forum owners can be responsible for posts.

 

[philipp]

Hi Phillip, first point would have to be, why should they?

Only because it looks very unlikely they'll get to keep the domain. It would seem like a reasonably pragmatic damage limitation approach if they aren't going to appeal.

Just my opinion, take or leave as appropriate

P.

 

[GreyWing]

Only because it looks very unlikely they'll get to keep the domain. It would seem like a reasonably pragmatic damage limitation approach if they aren't going to appeal.

Just my opinion, take or leave as appropriate

P.

Well that's what I said if you would have quoted my sentence to it's full.

"Hi Phillip, first point would have to be, why should they? I understand being practicable but principles at stake."

But being pragmatic should not come second best to principles, if I come and said I'm taking your house but I'm going to give you £10,000 compensation to be pragmatic, you going to take it? or you going to be a bit pee'd off. If we were living in China then maybe you would except that behaviour.

Personally I don't think the names is worth £100, but if someone has been using it and they were using it first, then it's up to them what happens with that name. It's not for those that have money to start bossing around those that don't, well maybe nominet think it is because their decisions go with the money 99% of the time.

All the best
GW

 

[fairplay]

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/30688_britainsgottalent.co.uk___1.pdf

I meant it was you who posted the Nominet pdf in this string rob...

 

[fairplay]

It's not for those that have money to start bossing around those that don't, well maybe nominet think it is because their decisions go with the money 99% of the time.

All the best
GW

Everyone seems to miss the point that these people promised to come up with an agreeable offer - or at least no-one is commenting on this?

They accused the owner of something that was proven to be a lie. The experts decision is supposed to be based on the fact that the claimant had proven their case, they have not proven anything and thats because the owner has clear and obvious prior-rights, this experts decision is clearly full of procedural irregularity.

The owner has 2 days to either appeal or take them to court and I really would appreciate it if anyone could read through the pdf and to point out any parts where you feel he could use to form his appeal document. He has never written one before and is not quite sure how it should be presented.

Please (if anyone can spare the time) read the document and either post what you think can help or pm me.

Plus if anyone can advise how you start a court case that would be very helpful.

Thanks in anticipation...

 

[fairplay]

Help required

I respect what admin has asked for and I wont publish the answer back from Nominets top solicitor who the owner asked to intervene on an unfair decision but I must share this little excerpt with you and ask for your response.

" ...I cannot intervene in this case. In reaching this position I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the merits of the actual decision."

The owner wants to take them on but is upset by a decision that he still cannot believe. Even when people told him that when BIG companies are involved and complain to Nominet that BIG business wins, he refused to believe this.

He now knows that an unbelievable 99% goes with the monied corporates but worse than this the percentages for winning an appeal is even less!!!

On the other side he believes that if three experts are looking at this they must realise how wrong this is and do the right thing, or a court must surely find and overturn this ludicrous decision.

 

[sneezycheese]

Bottom Line

My thoughts and Opinions:

1. The 'experts' are acting on behalf of Nominet effectively as 'sub-contractors'.

2. Liability ultimately lies with Nominet - obvious really when you think about it.

3. Follow Nominets Complaints Proceedure detailing the important 'issues', including asking for the domain not to be transfered at this time - details on how to do this can be found here:

Complaints

4. If this doesn't resolve the issues apply to the court (as I previously mentioned), as long as you can proove the decision was based on false evidence or or/and incorrect assumptions by the 'expert', and/or any breach of contract by Nominet.

Remember: This is my thoughts and opinions and does not constitute legal advice.

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[retired_member12]

My thoughts and Opinions:

1. The 'experts' are acting on behalf of Nominet effectively as 'sub-contractors'.

2. Liability ultimately lies with Nominet - obvious really when you think about it.

3. Follow Nominets Complaints Proceedure detailing the important 'issues', including asking for the domain not to be transfered at this time - details on how to do this can be found here:

Complaints

4. If this doesn't resolve the issues apply to the court (as I previously mentioned), as long as you can proove the decision was based on false evidence or or/and incorrect assumptions by the 'expert', and/or any breach of contract by Nominet.

Remember: This is my thoughts and opinions and does not constitute legal advice.

Regards,

Sneezy.

Some interesting points there sneezy, I'm in full agreement with much that you have highlighted.

It's matters such as these which lead me to seriously consider standing for the Board next time around.

doubletap.