146.228.204.72:8080 · Domains

← Back to Domains

Domain: 146.228.204.72:8080

Stories and comments across the archive that link to 146.228.204.72:8080.

Comments · 5

Re:...But they would have lost by cabbey · 1999-12-30 05:35 · Score: 1 · on eToys Drops Lawsuit Against eToy

umm... how pray tell do you think I got the IP in the first place?

here's another varient on the url, without the blink tags; seems to be cached from the last version.
required additional viewing: by bons · 1999-12-30 01:08 · Score: 5 · on Etoy: It's Not Over Yet

What remains of ETOY
Protest.net's overview of this mess
RTMarks's etoy page
ETOYS stock value in the past month accoring to Alta Vista
A better stock picture from yahoo.
At this rate, ETOYS will be worthless soon enough. How low does it have to fall before it simply ceases to exist in it's current form? In this age of internet stocks being so highly valued how can ETOYS not realize the damage this has caused them? How can they be so blind?
Perhaps they have forgotten that we talk to each other. Perhaps they have forgotten that we can hear all sides of the stories. perhaps they have forgotten that we could have been their market and their investors had they not done this.
Perhaps they're just blind.
Important update! by bons · 1999-12-30 00:11 · Score: 1 · on eToys Drops Lawsuit Against eToy

Before you think we've won, Here's a quote from ETOY that may make you rethink yesterday's news. "EToys is willing to drop the lawsuit if etoy corporation allows eToys some control over the content of the etoy site." Protest net has a good overview of the situation.
Apparently the possibility still exists of ETOY taking the legal battle to ETOYS. The war is definately not over.
See etoy's site by waldoj · 1999-12-29 02:50 · Score: 3 · on Etoy Update

It's at http://146.228.204.72:8080/.
Re:/.'ers never read the ruling do they.... by mx80 · 1999-12-05 02:29 · Score: 1 · on No EToy for Christmas

Yes. The original front page was pretty innocuous. Click on the "old fashioned way" link to see the "offensive" material. I don't know where the alleged porn went, but the article claims it was just a link to another site.