Slashdot Mirror
AOL Stealing Domain Names?
zack writes "Observers.net has an interesting story about someone who registered the domain aolbeta.com after finding out it was available to purchase on August 20. The next day, it was somehow magically transfered to AOL's own registrar, and under their name. Since AOL is an ICANN accredited registrar, apparently they can have any domain they want. Do you really own your domain name?"
I just registered AOLstealsdomainnames.com ....guess I'll wait and see if I get any nasty letters......
On-topic: One of the biggest fears I've had of a shared registration system is the ability to do exactly what AOL has apparently done .. Since there's apparently no user-level authentication built into the registry (why should there be? you don't own your name, according to the Big Boys), as evidenced by having to prove your identity to the registrar, then what's to prevent slipping someone who has the technical equivalent of "root" access a bit of cash to harass your competitors by swapping their names around?
Unfortunately, there's probably not a way to fix this in the current system, as adding authentication for the individual domain name holder would most likely require a re-write of the existing shared registry system, and I think we can guess the chances of NSI&Cartel letting that go through.
---
...then folks will simply start up their own "name lookup system" that is independent of the current DNS setup.
Build it on freenet, submit an RFC that defines a new class of URL, say ihttp, iftp, or blabla.com.i, etc. for "independent" or whatever. There is no rule that precludes a complete "shadow" or parallel naming system from being constructed.
You and I can do this today. Set up a new root server, using different ports than the defaults for named, patch bind to first check the alt-dns database servers and if the name is not found there, check the "real-dns".
There are lots of possibilities and none of them are "regulated".
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
how this can happen? My friend registered a domain name a couple of years ago in his name, but used my address. I wanted to change all the information to my name but could not (Network Solutions is NOT very friendly, even though the hosting company offered to verify that I paid the bills for the registered name). Doesn't Network Solutions have some kind of protective service, that does not let others change the site's address? I remember that I had to email all this information to them, and a week later they emailed me back to confirm that it was indeed me...yadayaada.
If this proves to be true, and you have proof that you have actually registered the site, why not try to get ICANN to change the ruling?
Sig it.
Come on, does anyone really think that the end result would have been any different if this had been handled through the formal dispute resolution system? It doesn't matter how reasonable the registrant's claim to the domain name is (they could even be someone with the name Albert Olbeta) you know that WIPO is going to side with the big corporate interest. I know damn well I'm never going to be able to register rogermoore.com even though that's my name just because there's someone much more famous with the same name.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
> We really need to put this on the front page,
> and not just for people who have found the YRO section.
Keep it off the front page. Notice how few trolls, FP!s, and other BS is evident here? It's like a return to the pre-moderation-good-ole-days.
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
Otherwise, it would seem that registering any aol*.* domain names would just be harrassing AOL (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, if they keep shit like this up).
Mr. Ska
Host DeCSS, link to DeCSS, host source and binaries for all the peer to peer file sharing programs you can find (Napster, Gnutella, etc), link to other sites with PtoP, link to sites hosting Metallica MP3s, host a web email service and encourage your users to have "questionable" conversations with your service, append "hot" keywords to email sent from your service. Hmm, let's see, MPAA, RIAA, Metallica, FBI, NSA. Yep, that's most of 'em. Go for it!
Call us from jail. :)
Louis Wu
"Where do you want to go ...
...the ihttp part any way, but the www.blablabla.upyours part is completely legit. ;-) It requires no changes to your user software at all. Only some nameservers need some config info.
;-(
Otherwise, for the ihttp/iftp stuff you'd have to have a plugin or something to support the new naming/whatever protocol. Just like https, or ssh plugins for http or telnet programs. You can of course invent your own protocol, call it whatever you want, make a plugin, and hand it out. Whether people use it or not is another question
Other than that, there might be some things you can do in the MIME setup stuff that would make it work. Perhaps you can try to add a setup to your mime/application junk that causes ihttp: to be handled just like http: or something like that. Could be fun to fool around and make up some funky URLs.
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
The really stupid part of this whole thing is that, given the current precedents as far as domain names go, AOL would have had no problem legally gaining rights to that domain name. AOL is one of those world recognizable trademarks, and they probably wouldn't have had to be in court for more than a week to get it legally transferred to their ownership. Not to mention the fact that a lot of people are still very sympathetic to a company's right to protect its trademark, and AOL's public image would not have been impacted much by this kind of trial (other than to piss off even more the people who already hate AOL anyway). :)
NOW, however, they have gone and stolen the domain, bypassing the courts, and setting themselves up for a MAJOR PR disaster. If this manages to go to trial, I'm sure it will be a notorious battle that will seriously tarnish AOL's image. It's one thing to initiate a court proceeding to fight for your trademark -- it's quite another to be taken to court for what amounts to theft and a serious abuse of power. We probably couldn't have tied the noose any better for AOL than they've done for themselves! Now we just have to get this article up front on Slashdot where people can start reading it
I didn't see anything in the article stating if Nickolas was actually billed for the domain registration? If he was, that credit card charge may be the start of an real nice evidence trail.
[place
they have gone and stolen the domain, bypassing the courts, and setting themselves up for a MAJOR PR disaster. If this manages to go to trial, I'm sure it will be a notorious battle that will seriously tarnish AOL's image.
Welcome! Have you been living in the United States long? This country is a corporatist state, where the law and the media bend for big corporations. There will be little mention of this incident in any "news" media. Do you remember AOLSearch.com? Same story, different year.
cpeterso
I guess you are pissed because you don't have broadband? I guess it did sound a little like I was bragging and I apoligize for that. My mom let me get it as long as I got my hair cut.
I just registered a domain and was informed via e-mail that it can take up to 72 hours for the name to become officically registered.
:-(. Would suck if you got billed for it too!
If I check with whois it comes up as available still, so be careful when you register to make sure that your details are there and not somebody elses.
I assume if someone/entity has submitted that domain to the NIC before you then you're out of luck
StarTux
I bet AOL thinks nothing will come of this because they are dealing with a 16 year old, and minors are not allowed to enter into contracts. So all those agreements that he had to 'click thru' to originally obtain the domain are probably null and void also. He'll be hard pressed to find an attorney.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
My personal opinion is all registrars should be independant of conflicts of interest in regard to top level domain registration!
Let me explain. AOL for example is a ".com" company. They should be excluded from participation as a registrar for that very reason.
Should a domain dispute come up involving AOL how can a fair dispute and resolution be conducted? It can't because AOL is a registrar themselves, with contacts and influence inside the registration process. And should anyone object it has to go to civil court for a final decision.
So I would think registrars should be neutral, independant and do ONLY registration issues. I also believe companies like AOL, for example, shouldn't be allowed to own any portion of a registrar to avoid issues like what I describe above.
Integrity is what you are when nobody is looking.
*roflmao*
:-)
Maybe he'll get stuck in a jail with web access, so he can continue to administer his domain for the five years he's awaiting trial.
-- Talonius
My reality check bounced.
and post the scores when the olympics start :)
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
If AOL can defend their trademark through direct action, and other non-Registrar companies have to go to the courts, then AOL have an unfair competitive advantage. We have laws to govern trademark disputes, and the WIPO is there to adjudicate, so AOL can sit and wait like everyone else, IMO.
I first discovered the article and posted it up on Geeknews. We have had alot to say about this issue. Personally I want to see AOL beaten over the head about this. Check it out
-Ellis of Geeknews.com
Thanks for clearing that up for me my fellow American. NY,NY,USA
You go to a registrar, and lookup "aolbeta". Then you request to register it. You may or may not succeed.
Meanwhile, someone else goes to a different registrar, and looks up "aolbeta". It's not taken, so they request to register it. They may or may not succeed.
It's called a race condition and it happens in all distributed databases of this nature. This doesn't mean AOL are throwing their weight around. They may simply have registered it before this other guy.
The fact that AOL had it the very next day seems to bear with this analysis. Let's focus on real issues, not some guy who's peeved because he doesn't understand the domain name registration process.
--
It's a
-- Danny Vermin
Always one to want to see the whole story, who had the domain prior to 16 August? I see the .Net and .org variations were taken before then. I'd find it hard to believe that this name just hadn't been snatched up until August.
Was the name really "available"? Did the previous owner give it up, or just fail to pay the bill? Was AOL the previous owner?
I am one to believe in funny timing. I acquired a domain in 1998 that had "lapsed". Within a month I got a call from someone who wanted it, had been waiting for it to become available, I'd beat them to it. Another domain I registered a year later on a Friday got me an email the following Monday from a company who was "just about to register", but I'd beat them to it.
See subject. And yes, I -am- a clueless bastard. ;)