A couple of days after Kentucky issued their seizure notice against 141 domain names, we reported that Godaddy had caved into kentucky by tuning over “registrar certificate” to the court in Kentucky, which gives the bearer exercises control of the domain name.
The day we published that story we were at TRAFFIC NY. During lunch that same day Howard Neu was told by a Godaddy representative that my story was not true and Godaddy had not turned the domains over. Howard related that news to the lunch crowd at the show.
But I did not retract my story.
Why?
Because I thought Godaddy was simply playing with words, and I had substantial information that those certificates were turned over.
Over the last few days many news reports have surfaced that confirmed that Godaddy.com did in fact turn this “certificates of ownership” to the commonwealth.
In the story published by the Washington Post today, it states:
“””””Christine Jones, general counsel for GoDaddy.com, the registrar used by 20 of the 141 domains named in the judge’s order, said the company tried to walk a line between complying with that demand and defending the rights of their customers, noting that the casino site owners did not have an opportunity to present their side of the case at the hearing in which the judge ordered the transfer of the domains.
“We issued a registrar certificate to the state that says the court has jurisdiction over the issue, but it doesn’t have control over the domains, other than the ability to exercise judgment so that when there is a final adjudication on the merits of the case or a settlement by the parties, we will honor that outcome,” Jones said”””””
So in fact Godaddy did turn these certificates over to the state, while telling Howard, Rick and thereby hundreds of attendees at the TRAFFIC show, that they did not hand the domains over.
Now whether you call it an outright lie or a half truth, as the whois did not indicate a change on those domains records, it’s up to you.
I think the statement made by Godaddy to Rick, Howard and all TRAFFIC attendees was misleading at best and in my opinion a false statement.
One thing is for sure.
Godaddy gave the Commonwealth of Kentucky “” jurisdiction over the issue”” as Ms. Jones said.
Jurisdiction is what all the attorney’s are fighting in Kentucky and the major issue of the case
How does Kentucky have jurisdiction to take domains belonging to people not located in Kentucky?
GoDaddy gave it to them.
I have said it before, Domainers need to pay close attention to how registrars are conducting themselves in this case, as next time it could be one of your domains in jeopardy.
Mike,
Please keep on top of this. I really want to know if they used ME for damage control. Then had Howard and myself relay false info to the attendees.
*
Thanks, Mike.
This is scary stuff.
*
If true, it’s truly unbelievable; do people/companies have any integrity today? I would only transact business with people/companies that are trustworthy and have the utmost integrity in conducting business.
Well, Well, Well…
I see this to be a VERY POWERFUL ISSUE
regarding Character and Integrity for:
Mr. Berkens,
Mr. Schwartz,
Mr. Neu,
and yes,
Mr. Parsons himself.
Hmmmmmmmmm……….
Curious as to what was the name and position of the GoDaddy rep?
It appears we were lied to by godaddy.com and used at a time when they just wanted this to “Go away.” This CRAP really is going to come back and haunt them and pisses me off. They USED OUR PLATFORM to cover THEIR ASSES and it was all CRAP! The guy that told me this better come out HERE and set the record straight before I go on the offensive!
The guy is ADAM DICKER who came up to me at lunch time to ask me to please announce to the crowd that GoDaddy did NOT give up the domains.
Personally, I spoke to somebody else. I am not sure who it was but he was with GoDaddy and sitting with Adam.
To those concerned,
Go Daddy General Counsel, Christine Jones, has stated the following:
“I’m not sure who said what at TRAFFIC, but as we have been on record as stating, we did not give the names to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, as stated in the order, as the registrant had not had a proper chance to be heard on these issues.
We did provide the court a Registrar Certificate giving jurisdiction to the court. Meaning whatever the end result of this litigation, we will implement the court’s order.
The registrant still has the ‘locked’ domain names and the Commonwealth of Kentucky does not.”
I hope this statement helps to clarify our position on this matter.
Regards,
Alon
Office of the President
Go Daddy
Alon
By “giving jurisdiction to the court”, as Ms. Jones stated, Godaddy handed over the one issue that is being argued about in the Kentucky court; which is how does Kentuckyhave jurisdiction over a domain owned by someone not in Kentucky.
Godaddy gave the jurisdiction issue to the state and as such may swing the decision in the state of Kentucky’s favor.
@Alon,
I don’t know what kind of idiots you and Christine Jones take us for. What you have effectively done is interfered with someone’s business by locking or handing over certificates or whatever other candy coating you want to call this.
The bottom line is that the domains on the 141 list that were registered with you are now frozen and cannot be sold or transferred to another party or registrar. The owners of the domains have now effectively lost the domains and have to subject themselves to the Kentucky court to see what happens to their domains next.
Sure these are dirty rotten gambling domains and the people behind them are probably bad guys, blah blah blah.
But tell us what you’re doing to do the next this happens and it’s a another court in another state and they want all the porn domains or another court that wants to protect the phone company business by taking domains in those business sectors.
Based on your actions so far, you’ll hang those domain owners out in the wind too.
These don’t sound like the actions of a trusted business partner.
– Richard
As Richard says above, and let’s make it perfectly clear – GoDaddy sold domainers down the river with their “certificates” giving up jurisdiction to Kentucky. That was
THE prime defense against the ridiculous and oppresive order issued by the court that domainers had to give up their domains without a hearing, without due process, without equal protection under the laws (which are protecting the Kentucky gambling interests) and with NO jurisdiction over the registrars or the domainers. And let us not forget the idiots at eNom who could care less about the domainers doing business with THEM.
Nothing but political word-playing BS from GoDaddy; trying to have it both ways.
Either they’re with us; or they’re against us.
No middle ground on this critical issue.
Would they turn over certificates if any jurisdiction (state, country, even a city or town?) laid claim to any of Bob’s domains; including GoDaddy.com?
No? I didn’t think so.
Then why are they treating their paying customers any differently?
My listings will be off their site by Saturday night; I hope others will follow.
Furthermore, aren’t these the kind of companies (including here eNom) that the domain conferences should think twice about accepting money from?
Hmmmm, godaddy why do you poison the hand that feeds you which is the customer that registered the domain name with your Company – Stand up for the Customer and protect their domain name from Criminals in the Government.
Without customers Godaddy Company would NOT exist at all.
T.R.A.F.F.I.C. has never received a penny from eNom who has no interest in seeking domainers’ domains. GoDaddy came to T.R.A.F.F.I.C. once a year and a half ago to promote their GoDaddy girl, but we haven’t heard from them since then.
I think the point Howard is making is while these companies are supported by our industry dollars, they don’t return the support and in this case as in others, sold us down the river. How any domainer can live with that without speaking out is beyond me. These folks need to be shaken by the ankles until they understand and stop kicking us in the balls.
Maybe it is time to have a new seal. One for registrars that are not domainer friendly. That are domainer adverse.
Outrageous behavior by these companies and it is up to us to make a stink. Up to us to make sure they don’t get away with it. Up to us to make sure domainers know who is on their side and who is not. Maybe they will be lucky and pick up these domains in the DROPS!
btw….a good start would be for all bloggers to take a minute and make a blog post and point them to this conversation. If we want to take control, then we need to take control.
@Howard & Rick,
I think it is a great idea to rate registrars that are not domainer friendly !!
My comments about the current situation is based on seeing first hand how domains have been taken advantage of.
We’re in the trenches with a lot of domainers through our hosting business. We’ve seen many cases of registrar’s interfering with their business or taking clients out of business completely. Just think about some domain issues you’ve read about in the past couple years and you will know exactly what I am talking about.
We always try to give our clients, new and old, plenty of advice about what registrars to avoid, payment processors, solutions providers etc. Over the years we have seen all sorts of dirty tricks and we’ve been more than happy to help out people avoid the pitfalls.
-Richard
Here’s a registrar who has a large budget for advertising, but doesn’t spend a dime on the rights of their customers.
Let’s keep in mind possession tends to be regarded as prima facie evidence of the right of ownership.
I totally agree with Rick, a domainer friendly seal is a great idea.
Hi guys!
Here a new blog about bad experience with GoDaddy – http://www.gohelldaddy.com
If you had one, please share your story with other users – send it to info (at) gohelldaddy.com
Even if you already post it in some other place, please drop me a link.
Thank you!
Come back to Moniker, people. Come home to Moniker.