Slashdot Mirror


Sex.com Case Finally 'Over'

Spad writes "The Register is reporting that Stephen Michael Cohen has, unsurprisingly, lost his appeal against the $65m in costs awarded to Gary Kremen for defrauding him out of the sex.com domain name almost 6 years ago. However, Cohen is currently a fugitive from justice in Mexico, with his assets in various offshore accounts, making it very difficult for Mr Kremen to claim his money. Kremen is now pursuing a $100m suit against VeriSign for signing over the domain in the first place, which he is expected to win." See our previous story for more background.

6 of 279 comments (clear)

  1. Verisign in big trouble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If they do loose this one others will follow. I read recently they let Al Jazerra's domain go to a US citizen using a forged fax.

    1. Re:Verisign in big trouble by Otter · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I watched a BBC documenty about Al Jazerra filmed during the Iraq conflict. While their slant may be towards their regions audience I found them to be quite imapartial.

      Not that I'm qualified to express an opinion on this one way or the other but -- how on earth can you determine them to be "quite impartial" on the basis of a BBC documentary about them? Presumably anything from the BBC is utterly objective and impartial?

      Incidentally, al-Jazeera's old head was on the payroll of Iraqi intelligence, for what that's worth...

    2. Re:Verisign in big trouble by onion2k · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Incidentally, al-Jazeera's old head was on the payroll of Iraqi intelligence, for what that's worth...

      The head of Fox News is George Bush's cousin. What of it?

  2. If not property right, then what? by cybaea · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The core of Verisign's defence seems to be that domain names are not property rights. From the BBC article on the same ruling:

    Forcing Verisign to accept blame for transferring the domain name in the first place could prove equally difficult.

    Verisign maintains that domain names are not legal property and as such it cannot be held accountable for giving it away.

    If it loses, as legal experts expect, Verisign would face a huge legal bill and fines of up to £100m.

    Two questions: what excatly am I buying when I buy a domain name from Verisign and why do "legal experts" think they'll loose that battle -- presumably they have an extensive user agreement that clears them of responsibility for all and any wrongdoings?

    Confused.

    --
    Hi!
  3. Re:End of the internet? by malia8888 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Verisign had a fiduciary duty to protect Mr. Kremen from theft of his property. They didn't do their jobs and they should pay.

    They aren't guilty of theft like Steven Michael Cohen. Verisign is guilty of not protecting the domain name which in this case is very valuable property.

    This is like a bank giving away the money of a customer to someone who fraudulently obtains access to their account.

    Just by the premise that Verisign accepts people's money to protect and secure a domain name is proof in itself that domains are valuable. If they weren't valuable companies and individuals wouldn't be paying hard, cold cash to assure that the domain doesn't slip away from them.

    Verisign would be better off compensating Mr. Kremen than sending a message to all their customers that they are not trustworthy.

    --
    Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.
  4. downanddirty.sex? by EChris · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So when do y'all think the .sex TLD will come out? Or would that make sex sites too easy to censor? Or is that a good thing for the pr0n business, being easy to block by parental units, avoiding costly court cases?

    sex.com would be such a moot issue if there was a .sex top level domain, in my opinion.

    Chris