View Full Version : Selling of domain names...
OK, so I see that a lot of people buy domain names and sell them at ridiculous prices.[nbsp][nbsp]So, I wonder... why can't I get in on this?[nbsp][nbsp]Anyone know how to go about doing this?[nbsp][nbsp]Like who would I put down for contacts, servers, etc. to ease the transfer?[nbsp][nbsp]Anyone know any problems with selling domain names?
_/ drew /_
Or do they just park the domain names?
[This message has been edited by Drew (edited 12-13-99)]
12-13-1999, 02:26 PM
Well I believe now its illegal to take companies domain names and try to resell them, but thats only one part of the picture.
The other part is getting good ones, but unless you are creative the majority of them have been long taken :(
Oh well guess we all missed out on the altavista.com one and some of the other ones :(
12-13-1999, 02:27 PM
Yeah, they just put themselves as the contact, and park the sucker. Then when they sell them they transfer all the info to the buyer. (At least they're supposed to.) Either that or they lease the rights. I think it's slimy. :þ
But that's just me.
Noticed that there's an entire category in most online clearinghouse auction sites (ebay, yahoo auctions etc) for domain names. Yeesh.
12-13-1999, 03:19 PM
Ughhh.[nbsp][nbsp]The domain I was interested in was owned by a entity in Siberia, Russia.[nbsp][nbsp]They wanted $1,000 + transfer fee. Even if I COULD afford it, how could such a transaction be safely completed?????
12-13-1999, 05:48 PM
When I got vdj.net, I wanted so badly vdj.com - but the owners wanted $2500 for it... I watched and waited and waited, knowing it was due to expire pretty soon, hoping they'd forget to register it (I had a script doing a whois daily, set to email me as soon as it was showing available) but they renewed it about a month before the 2 years was up... was worth a shot though ;)
Oh well... can't win them all...
Benson, I don't know about such a safe transfer. It takes trust (alot more in other cases like yours than others).
As far as domain sales... I think you may find this link interesting...
12-13-1999, 10:49 PM
Did you know that it is now possible to register a name like:
You are no longer resticted to 16 letters. You can do this at Joker, but not Network Solutions.
heh I already grabbed a ummm well.. few of those ;)[nbsp][nbsp] I'm sure you all will see them soon ;)[nbsp]
12-28-1999, 05:28 PM
Does anyone know of any US based registrars (other than RegisterNames.com) that will handle long domain names?[nbsp][nbsp]I don't like how RegisterNames.com's online order form is setup.[nbsp][nbsp]I can't specify the contacts at the outset (the domain owner is automatically assigned as admin and billing contacts).
12-28-1999, 07:32 PM
Y'know, theoretically (and I mean THEORETICALLY), you could now buy wheredoyouwanttogotoday.com and offer it to microsoft for a billion dollars. Or whatever seems reasonable to you.
Wheredoyouwanttogotoday and Where-do-you-want-to-go-today are all taken (I was bored so I actually checked).
The registrant of the domain w/o hyphens? Beats me, probably not Microsoft (yet), though.
Or, you could just wait for microsoft.com to expire and then renew it for them! :)
BeHAave (Said in my best Austin Power's voice)
01-21-2000, 09:36 AM
Taken from United Press International:
Musician and TV personality John Tesh is suing Celebsites.com for its use and registration of the domain name JohnTesh.com.[nbsp][nbsp]Tesh himself already runs http://www.tesh.com -- which currently is devoted to his fan club, but is being touted as an eventual information source for families. Tesh's lawyer, Charles Kenworthy, said in a statement: "John Tesh is a recognized 'family brand' whose ability to promote products and family values has been recognized worldwide. Now that he is founder of an Internet company specifically dedicated to family needs and issues, it is critical that the Tesh brand not be compromised by companies like Celebsites.com."[nbsp][nbsp]The lawsuit contends that Celebsites.com violated the Anti-Cybersquatting and Consumer Privacy Act of 1999. Anti-Cybersquatting?[nbsp][nbsp]Can you be arrested for doing that in public?[nbsp][nbsp]If there really is such a law, what does that say about the common practice of buying up domain names with the intent of selling them?
01-21-2000, 01:07 PM
Yep - there is indeed an anti-cybersquatting law. As I understand it, it only applies to trademarked terms and even then only if you have registered the domain in "bad faith" (with the intent on selling it or holding it to harm or otherwise diminish the copyright holder).
For example, there was recently a court case where Volkswagon sued a small Virginia ISP by the name of Virtual Works that was using the domain name vw.net. And, Volkswagon lost - because Virtual Works was not by definition cybersquatting, they were actually using the domain for their business.
However, there have been far more lawsuits where the owner of the domain ended up losing it to the large corporation, because they bought it with the intent of selling it back to the company. And, of course, it backfired.
Worse still, this new cybersquatting law has stiff penalties - I think it's a $10,000 fine and up to a year in prison (?) if you're found guilty. It's a very strict law.
So, realistically, if you want to make money by selling domain names, make darned sure those domain names you're selling aren't trademarked by anybody, or else you'll end up losing.
01-21-2000, 07:22 PM
I've never had any interest in the domain speculating game, but I had no idea the penalties could be so harsh.
What could possibly be the legal grounds for such a law?[nbsp][nbsp]I'm baffled by this.[nbsp][nbsp]How can intent outweigh first-come first-serve when it comes to purchasing something?[nbsp][nbsp]Wouldn't that make an auction for a Picasso somewhat illegal?[nbsp][nbsp]Sure, you want it for yourself, but you also want to keep the rival bidder from having it, and you're willing to drive up the price to keep it out of their hands.
Can anybody shed some light on this?
01-25-2000, 11:42 AM
I didn't like the idea of the cybersquatting law at first because I'd thought it *would* work against sites like "www.vw.net (http://www.vw.net)" where a big corporation could bully individuals or smaller companies out of an established domain.
But if it's only useful against non-sites then I'm in favor.[nbsp][nbsp]Essentially, it's being used as an anti-harassment and trade-mark infringement tool.[nbsp][nbsp]The idea isn't to stop domain sales of clever marketing names ("business.com" or "getrichquick.com") but to stop speculation in specific brands or trademarks ("walmart.org" or "appleibook.net") so that a company doesn't have to buy up every possible domain name variation on its products or be held to ransom.[nbsp][nbsp]
It shouldn't work on non-established products, so if Microsoft comes up with "NewName" software in 2001 then I hope it couldn't use the law to stomp out "www.newname.com (http://www.newname.com)" that was bought in 1999.
And it can't be used against sites that are using the name to comment on the company: if "www.johntesh.com (http://www.johntesh.com)" is a fan site or "www.walmart.org (http://www.walmart.org)" is a bulletin board of complaints against the company, then it's not cybersquatting -- it's free speech.
- Carol Hanson
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.