ireland.co.uk, bella.co.uk & roadrunner.co.uk

[Whois-Search]

Three new DRS cases now online worth reading:

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/21494_ireland.pdf

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/21498_roadrunner.pdf

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/21496_bella.pdf

 

[GWing]

The one regarding RoadRunner.co.uk is an absolute joke of a decision,

nominet are absolutley scandalous.

Where does this expert get off writing something like

"If one swallow does not make a Summer, do12 domain names (out of 231) constitute a
pattern?"

I hope that Ostashko certainly appeals that one.

 

[retired_member16]

I think that its only a matter of time before Nominet decide that non-use of a domain name is proof of an abusive registration.

Perhaps this is a good thing?

 

[casinogb]

the ireland.co.uk case was interesting, given that a price was agreed and money was sent as well.

what would the seller have felt if the buyer managed to withdraw their funding.

i'm on the side of the buyer for this one, if you agree on a deal, then it should be honoured especially as the money was sent.

seems like a breach of contract and I wonder if the case will go to court for breach of contract.

 

[nnh]

ireland.co.uk

I'm on the side of the seller/nominet on that one. The buyer was a chancer and it nearly paid off!! They had no reasonable claim to it, if it had been the Irish Tourist board then that may have been different.

Nearly getting something is not the same as getting it! If the 'tags' had been changed and it was simply the Nominet paperwork then maybe...FAIR...

 

[olebean]

I'm on the side of the seller/nominet on that one. The buyer was a chancer and it nearly paid off!! They had no reasonable claim to it, if it had been the Irish Tourist board then that may have been different.

Nearly getting something is not the same as getting it! If the 'tags' had been changed and it was simply the Nominet paperwork then maybe...FAIR...

Reverse Domain Hijacking?

 

[rob]

I'm on the side of the seller/nominet on that one. The buyer was a chancer and it nearly paid off!! They had no reasonable claim to it, if it had been the Irish Tourist board then that may have been different.

Nearly getting something is not the same as getting it! If the 'tags' had been changed and it was simply the Nominet paperwork then maybe...FAIR...

It could be the prelude to a court case.

Likewise if buyer rings Nominet and mentions there is a dispute over the domain they would point them towards the DRS regardless.

It does show though that the DRS is not there to solve disputes of that nature.

i'm on the side of the buyer for this one, if you agree on a deal, then it should be honoured especially as the money was sent.

seems like a breach of contract and I wonder if the case will go to court for breach of contract.

I agree.

 

[Edwin]

the ireland.co.uk case was interesting, given that a price was agreed and money was sent as well.

what would the seller have felt if the buyer managed to withdraw their funding.

i'm on the side of the buyer for this one, if you agree on a deal, then it should be honoured especially as the money was sent.

seems like a breach of contract and I wonder if the case will go to court for breach of contract.

I agree entirely. Once the deal is set in motion, with both parties in agreement and an Escrow transaction set up, that should be enough to confirm legally that there definitely IS a deal that has been made, at a price accepted by both parties, and therefore the seller should be compelled to carry it through to conclusion.

 

[GWing]

don't forget that under English law, you have 7 days cooling off period for any contract.

 

[tifosi]

The one regarding RoadRunner.co.uk is an absolute joke of a decision,

nominet are absolutley scandalous.

Where does this expert get off writing something like

"If one swallow does not make a Summer, do12 domain names (out of 231) constitute a
pattern?"

I hope that Ostashko certainly appeals that one.

Especially where I believe the expert was using the incorrect interpretation of 'abusive pattern of registration'.

Isn't this, or shouldn't this be, restricted to the repeated patterns of registrations that have resulted in the loss of domains as shown by the 3case pattern.

The whole drs has bad ramifications for PPC and especially search boxes in parking, and in theory ANY, page containing adverts generated through search.

S

 

[GWing]

Totally agree, if channel 4 racing had contacted Ostashko and said they wanted it back, I'm sure he's not daft enough to hold on to it, to the point of DRS.

If channel 4 racing don't want the domain and have showed no interest in it, he isn't abusing their right not to want something. Obviously it's their right not to buy it, if they don't want to use it.

This expert is a joke, and nominet are an absolute joke in this respect. I'd be off to court to challenge this decision. Nominet's terms and conditions are either unlawful, unfair or interpreted wrong by it's agents.

All it needs is one guy to go to court and win, then nominet will have years of DRS cases to be challenged.

GW

 

[nnh]

Re: Ireland.co.uk

There was no dispute! Because the buyer never had any claim to the domain name so Nominet could not pass it to them!!

The buyer should have gone to court not Nominet. But in court they still had no legal claim to the name.

I live in Scotland, if I offer my house to you and we agree a price that is a binding contract under Scottish law. There is no law that says if I offer a domain name to you and we agree a price that is a binding contact. It's not nice to back out but it's not a binding contract!!

Even if I deposit an amount of money with a bank, solicitor or your aunty peggy, unless we exchange there is/was no sale.

To be honest they don't even stand a chance in court they were just trying there luck. Better luck next time...

 

[domainking]

ireland.co.uk

A deal is not done until all transactions are carried out
i i had ireland and agreed to sell you the name for $6000
until the name is transfered over to you
I have the right to pull away from the deal and thats what demont did he pulled away from the deal.

Every day deals get crashed due to one side going cold and this looks like what happened if some one offers you say $6000 for a name and your 60% of going throught the deal and another person overs you $20.000 until the deal is signed and name is in your name then forget it.

and for the person do go down the road of DRS and use unsavory tactics
im happy that dermot won the case.

and also it cost dermont a few $1000 DEFENDING THIS
maybe the other side should pick up the costs of the lawyers tab for this.
nice one dermot and all the best mate with it

 

[GWing]

I can't help that feeling if Ostashko had the expert that dealt with the "bella.co.uk" case he would have been seccesful in defending the name.

Least the expert "Anthony Gold" understand the definition of generic.

 

[domainking]

It's all very well for you to say this as a seller but turn it around to where you become the buyer and I am not so sure you'd feel the same.

Imagine your domain name purchasing budget for this month is £20,000. A seller advertises a domain name for sale and you agree by email to purchase it for £15,000. Later on you see another domain name for sale. Unfortunately that domain name eventually sells for more than your remaining £5,000 but less than your original budget of £20,000. You have to pass on the second domain name because you've already commited to buying the first for £15,000. Shortly after this, the seller of the first domain name change his/her mind. Not only have you lost the first domain name but you've also lost the second because when that was for sale you didn't have enough in your budget. Tough luck you may say but I think that it is unprofessional to change your mind in this way. It is quite conceivable that domain purchasers are given budgets so for sellers to give buyers the runaround once a sale has been agreed isn't responsible or good business.

I've experienced someone changing their mind on a sale. In hindsight I am actually quite pleased that I didn't purchase the domain name but at the time I was annoyed. Reputation is very important in this industry. If you mess a buyer about, they'll probably tell others. Don't be surprised when some people decide not to do business with you as a result.

Hi Invicable thats why its always best not to count your eggs until they are in your basket.

It all boiles down to trying to get the deal done asap until then its a case of tender hooks.

I personally if i have done a deal would stick to it but there is always both sides to a deal. and once again a deal not a deal until both parties have played there part in the tranfer.

if someone had offered you say £20.000 on the name would you not change your mind lol

 

[retired_member11]

I agree entirely. Once the deal is set in motion, with both parties in agreement and an Escrow transaction set up, that should be enough to confirm legally that there definitely IS a deal that has been made, at a price accepted by both parties, and therefore the seller should be compelled to carry it through to conclusion.

...but Edwin, the DRS Policy had no relevance to the ireland.co.uk circumstances. It was one for the law to decide.

 

[retired_member16]

<SNIP>

If you mess a buyer about, they'll probably tell others. Don't be surprised when some people decide not to do business with you as a result.

That is known in the business as tough bollocks.

If I, or anyone else agree to sell something to A, then a week later get a better offer from B, or even that C pops up and tells me a better way to make money from my domain, well, if A has not passed over any notes, then A can kiss my arse.

-or am I being out of order?

 

[bb99]

If I, or anyone else agree to sell something to A, then a week later get a better offer from B, or even that C pops up and tells me a better way to make money from my domain, well, if A has not passed over any notes, then A can kiss my arse.

-or am I being out of order?

Ignoring the moral issue here, my idiot's guide to law disagrees with this and what's been posted above. Specifically:

- Z offers £10k to X for a domain name
- X accepts the offer

Let's say it's done by email. This is offer & acceptance = contract. It may not be written down, there may not be signatures, but still isn't this a legally binding contract?

So if one party then pulls out there is legal remedy available to the other party should they wish to take it.

That's how I was taught it anyway.

Can someone with a legal brain clarify this point please?

 

[olebean]

Where is the transfer of consideration?

 

[bb99]

Where is the transfer of consideration?

So you're saying that if the scenario were the same BUT the money had been transferred from the buyer to the seller, that would be legally binding - but not until that happened?