Domain: dynadot.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to dynadot.com.
Comments · 8
-
Re:honeypot
What a silly site! I lol'ed. You sir are correct! dude = bullshitter
Anyone can get it, but here:
Domain Name: rankmyhack.com
Registered at http://www.dynadot.com/
Registrant:
UnderHost Networks Ltd
UnderHost Networks Ltd
1744 Laverendrye Road
Trois-Rivieres, Quebec G8Z 2E2
Canada
Administrative Contact:
UnderHost Networks Ltd
UnderHost Networks Ltd
1744 Laverendrye Road
Trois-Rivieres, Quebec G8Z 2E2
Canada
privacy@underhost.ca
+1 8004657440
Technical Contact:
UnderHost Networks Ltd
UnderHost Networks Ltd
1744 Laverendrye Road
Trois-Rivieres, Quebec G8Z 2E2
Canada
privacy@underhost.ca
+1 8004657440
Record expires on 2012/07/18 UTC
Record created on 2011/07/18 UTC
Domain servers in listed order:
ns23.underhost.com
ns24.underhost.com -
It is a prank...
The "study" was realeased one week after the domain being created, by a gatech student. This guy must be ROFL.. look at this: Domain Name: aptiquant.com Registered at http://www.dynadot.com/ Registrant: Gill Web Services Tarandeep Gill 7867 138 St. Surrey, BC V3W7b5 Canada Administrative Contact: Gill Web Services Tarandeep Gill 7867 138 St. Surrey, BC V3W7b5 Canada taran@gatech.edu +1 7782429002 Technical Contact: Gill Web Services Tarandeep Gill 7867 138 St. Surrey, BC V3W7b5 Canada taran@gatech.edu +1 7782429002 Record expires on 2012/07/14 UTC Record created on 2011/07/14 UTC
-
Re:So what's a good one?
Try http://www.dynadot.com/ and verisign seem to be ok. I dunno about the rest.
-
Re:Number of holes in the author's argument
I don't know of a $10 offering; if there's one from godaddy.com, I would pass, given my past experience with that company. But dynadot.com offers RapidSSL non-chained certs for $19.99 per year.
-
The real problem is the domain registrar
The legal system worked. As soon as Wikileaks got involved in the case, the judge reversed himself almost immediately.
The real problem here is with Dynadot, the domain registrar. Like most domain registrars, Dynadot tries to wriggle out of the concept that domains are the property of the registrant, substituting one-sided terms of service which give them discretionary power over the domain. That's the problem.
They made a deal with Bank Julius Baer to shut down the site, and got the court to sign off on the deal, without even notifying the registrant. That was Dynadot's doing. That's where the problem started.
Interestingly, Dynadot has one of those indemnification clauses in their agreement that everyone ignores. This time, it matters. It reads: You agree to release, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Dynadot
... against any losses, liabilities, claims, damages or costs, ... relating to or arising out of Your registration, application, transaction request, resale, or use of services provided by Dynadot and Your account with Dynadot ....Should Dynadot be threatened with a lawsuit or receive notice of a filed or pending lawsuit by a third party, Dynadot may seek written assurances from You concerning Your promise to indemnify Dynadot. Your failure to provide such written assurances may be considered a material breach of this Agreement.
One could argue that Dynadot's insertion of such a clause created an obligation on Dynadot to promptly notify the registrant of any threatened litigation. Dynadot has claimed in their contract that the registrant has responsibility for claims against Dynadot by third parties. Yet Dynadot did not properly notify the registrant of such a claim. Instead, they apparently went to court before notifying the registrant. That's usually considered negligence or worse.
-
Dynadot's Service AgreementPeachy. Again, my opinion, and my opinion only.
2. DISPUTE RESOLUTION.
You agree to be bound by Dynadot's dispute resolution policy that is incorporated herein by reference, and that is located on our web site at http://www.dynadot.com/icann_dispute.html. You agree that Dynadot, in its sole discretion and at no liability to You for any resulting loss or damage, may modify our dispute resolution policy at any time, without notice. Revised dispute resolution policies will be posted on our web site and are effective immediately. You agree that, by maintaining any service through Dynadot, after modifications to our dispute resolution policy have become effective, You have agreed to these modifications. You agree to periodically review our web site to make Yourself aware of any such revisions or changes. You agree that, if You do not agree to any modification, You may terminate this Agreement without refund or credit to You of any fees paid by You to Dynadot.
For the adjudication of any disputes brought by a third party against You concerning or arising from Your use of a domain name registered with Dynadot or Your use of our services, You (but not Dynadot) agree to submit to subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and venue of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and the courts of Your domicile. You agree that in the event a dispute arises with any third party, You will indemnify, defend, and hold Dynadot harmless pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. You agree that, if Dynadot is notified that a complaint has been filed with a judicial or administrative body regarding Your use of our services, You will not make any changes to Your account or services without our prior approval, and that Dynadot may take whatever action it deems necessary, in its sole discretion, regarding modification, assignment and/or control of the service or account as necessary to comply with the actions or requirements of the judicial or administrative body. You understand and agree that Dynadot will comply, if so obligated, with all court orders, domestic or international, directed against You and/or the domain name registration.
Things are not looking good for Dynadot. I can't see anything that would enable Dynadot to enter into arbitrary settlements affecting a registrant's rights without their input or participation. They don't seem to be covered because the injunction is solely between BJB and Dynadot, not Wikileaks or their domain name. Dynadot was not compelled to enter into this agreement (i.e., entering into the settlement was not "necessary to comply" with any court action); it appears to have been entirely voluntary. -
Dynadot's Service AgreementPeachy. Again, my opinion, and my opinion only.
2. DISPUTE RESOLUTION.
You agree to be bound by Dynadot's dispute resolution policy that is incorporated herein by reference, and that is located on our web site at http://www.dynadot.com/icann_dispute.html. You agree that Dynadot, in its sole discretion and at no liability to You for any resulting loss or damage, may modify our dispute resolution policy at any time, without notice. Revised dispute resolution policies will be posted on our web site and are effective immediately. You agree that, by maintaining any service through Dynadot, after modifications to our dispute resolution policy have become effective, You have agreed to these modifications. You agree to periodically review our web site to make Yourself aware of any such revisions or changes. You agree that, if You do not agree to any modification, You may terminate this Agreement without refund or credit to You of any fees paid by You to Dynadot.
For the adjudication of any disputes brought by a third party against You concerning or arising from Your use of a domain name registered with Dynadot or Your use of our services, You (but not Dynadot) agree to submit to subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and venue of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and the courts of Your domicile. You agree that in the event a dispute arises with any third party, You will indemnify, defend, and hold Dynadot harmless pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. You agree that, if Dynadot is notified that a complaint has been filed with a judicial or administrative body regarding Your use of our services, You will not make any changes to Your account or services without our prior approval, and that Dynadot may take whatever action it deems necessary, in its sole discretion, regarding modification, assignment and/or control of the service or account as necessary to comply with the actions or requirements of the judicial or administrative body. You understand and agree that Dynadot will comply, if so obligated, with all court orders, domestic or international, directed against You and/or the domain name registration.
Things are not looking good for Dynadot. I can't see anything that would enable Dynadot to enter into arbitrary settlements affecting a registrant's rights without their input or participation. They don't seem to be covered because the injunction is solely between BJB and Dynadot, not Wikileaks or their domain name. Dynadot was not compelled to enter into this agreement (i.e., entering into the settlement was not "necessary to comply" with any court action); it appears to have been entirely voluntary. -
Re:Maybe Sun should keep it?
Heh, that site you mentioned, registered to Dynadot Privacy really smacks of a Grass Roots campaign by interested parties. I was particularly amused by the popup that was essentially an image of a firefox crash. It didn't even do anything interesting when clicked on.