Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sex.com Settles Case Against VeriSign

Posted by michael on from the sex-appeal dept.

netcentr writes "A press release on CircleID has announced that the owner of the Sex.com domain name today has got 'a final settlement with VeriSign (formerly Network Solutions, Inc.), concluding a six-year legal fight that set several important precedents for the future of the Internet. After the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted Sex.Com a sweeping victory that held VeriSign/Network Solutions, Inc. (collectively "VeriSign") strictly responsible for mishandling the famous domain name, Sex.Com and VeriSign have settled Sex.Com's lawsuit against VeriSign.' Gary Kremen was awarded a $65 million judgment against Cohen for stealing the domain name, which the U.S. Supreme Court declined to overturn on June 12, 2003."

9 of 165 comments (clear)

  1. 2nd post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    VeriSign is bad news(for years thay would not let you put "fu*k" in your domain name)

    The base VeriSign site:
    http://www.recallverisign.com

    Check out this page by GoDaddy.com about VeriSign: https://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/PressReleases/inter net_battle.asp?isc=&se=%2B&from%5Fapp=

  2. PDF Mirror just in case by MrRuslan · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.narvakitchens.com/CircleID.pdf

  3. How much did they settle for? by billstewart · · Score: 4, Informative

    The press release doesn't say whether it was the full $65million or some smaller amount, or how long Verisign would have to pay. Google News has pointers to one or two versions of the press release, plus Slashdot (:-), plus a Wired article that has the press release but also speculated that the settlement is probably a lot less than the full boat, and some comments on Kremen's attempts to track down the assets of Cohen the name thief.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:How much did they settle for? by red+floyd · · Score: 4, Informative

      The $65M judgement was against Cohen, who stole the domain. This is Kremen's suit against VeriSign for being idiots (for handing over the domain without verification) and dickheads (for refusing to do anything about it).

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    2. Re:How much did they settle for? by billstewart · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, but at least one of the court cases (I think the CA Supreme court one, but it's been a while since I read them) said that Cohen and Verisign were jointly liable, so if Kremen couldn't collect from Cohen (who took the money and ran), they could collect it from Verisign and leave Verisign stuck trying to catch Cohen and any of his assets.

      --

      Bill Stewart
      New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  4. Court of Appeal Decision by David+Hume · · Score: 5, Informative


    You can find the decision by the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit at:
    Kremen, et al. v. Online Classifieds Inc., et al. (pdf warning)

    To get the html version, paste this url:

    http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ 99 9D1D5B0D734B6088256D6D0078CB88/$file/0115899.pdf?o penelement

    into the Adobe PDF Conversion Page.

    --
    Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
  5. Re:Why so much by mehtajr · · Score: 5, Informative

    $25 million of the award was punitive damages, so presumably, the other $40 million was compensatory (lost profits) and legal fees (probably mostly legal fees).

    Interestingly, those damages were awarded by a judge, not a jury. Here's a link. I would've expected a smaller judgement from the bench.

  6. Re:Astounding by jjohnson · · Score: 4, Informative

    In the mid-late 90s, domain registrars were explicitly avoiding fixing their mistakes on legal counsel's advice, namely that to fix a mistake was to admit liability for that mistake, and to admit liability for that mistake was to open oneself up to damages in the millions. Thus, they all took the legal position that they weren't responsible for anything they did until it was proven otherwise.

    Stupid from a common sense point of view, smart from a business point of view. I can think of a lot of domain name fuckups that, could the owner have sued, would have sunk the registrars. As it is, they've avoided huge lawsuits for the last 8 years.

    It took a domain name with the potential money behind it of sex.com to push it all the way through the courts to the current situation.

    --
    Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
  7. I worked with Steve Cohen weeks after he stole sex by hmhoek · · Score: 5, Informative

    I had just started at a small recruiting shop and he was around in various unspecified capacities. We started talking one night and he was really excited about showing me how he owned sex.com. He did a whois, which had his name, then logged into the sex.com servers and poked around a little. He then bragged about the cashflow and the offers to buy from Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler.

    He also asked all the secretaries to pose naked, used the company phones to call Nevada brothels for business advice and other shady activities.

    I was later deposed as a witness for a sexual harassment case against the company because of his behavior (he was not an employee but rather an acquaintence of the owner) and the behavior of other sales people. The company's attorneys were in the process of searching for him at that time, which was around 2000 or 2001.

    I can't wait for him to finally get caught. He reminds me of Robert Vesco; he's probably funding Al Queda or Russian prostitution rings or something now.