| ▲ | Spivak 8 hours ago |
| For it to be illegal I think we would have to have much stronger digital ownership laws. I would certainly support them. But for now a domain you "own" is just an entry in someone else's ledger and control is only enforced by contract for big players willing to pay. |
|
| ▲ | schoen 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| There is a Ninth Circuit decision that domain names are a form of property https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kremen_v._Cohen but it's tricky because the domain name registries and registrars have a kind of thicket of contracts nowadays that subordinates registrants' property interests to other rules and considerations. So I don't think a court would think that a modern-day domain name registrant has property rights in a domain name that supersede all of those contractual terms. Edit: my recollection is that Kremen v. Cohen interpreted the legal defaults that applied because Kremen registered the domain name in an era when Network Solutions didn't require registrants to agree to a contract that limited Network Solutions's liability and gave it various explicit rights and powers. I'm not a huge ICANN expert, but I think ICANN broadly thinks the status quo is preferable to one in which registrants had stronger, less equivocal property interests in names. |
| |
| ▲ | otterley 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | The Wikipedia summary of the case suggests that the ruling was much more than it was. Courts tend to rule on narrow issues, as it did here. The question before the Court was not whether a domain name is a form of property. Both parties agreed that a domain name is a form of property; that wasn't in dispute. The Court did affirm their shared position in black letter law, though. Rather, the question before the Court was whether, as intangible property, a tort of conversion claim relating to the domain name could be made under California law. Previously, cases disagreed as to whether it could be recognized. The Court found that it could be. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | falcor84 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Agreed, but I just wanted to say that essentially every single thing anyone owns is, and has been from the invention of tally marks on clay tablets, an entry in someone's ledger. |
| |
| ▲ | stevage 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Of all the thousands of things I own, as far as I know, only my car and my house exist in anyone else's ledger as belonging to me. Am I missing something? | | |
| ▲ | unreal37 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I would find that hard to believe. You have a bank account, surely. A life insurance policy? Airline points? An account with the government social security office for your pension? There are probably dozens (if not hundreds) of things of value (even if the value is near zero) that exist in someone else's ledger. | |
| ▲ | cowlevel 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | All of your property exists in a kind of implicit ledger that a court can reify when needed. If a court decides your bed isn't yours, then it isn't. | |
| ▲ | sokoloff 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Your 401K. Your brokerage account. Your bank accounts. | |
| ▲ | warkdarrior 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Your phone will show up as yours in some Google or Apple database. Your credit/debit cards (really your credit card accounts) will show up as yours in some bank database. Your laptop may show up as your in some Apple/Microsoft/Google account. | |
| ▲ | Calazon 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The money in your bank account? | | |
| ▲ | dexterdog 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Don't forget about the money in your wallet as well since you don't control the printer. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | mzajc 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| These domains wouldn't be worth a penny if they came with a disclaimer that they can be deregistered or even taken over at any point. With a bit of luck, somebody could snatch popular last name domains and set up a catch-all mailserver. |
| |
| ▲ | not2b 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | People persist in "buying" digital movies e-books, and games despite the fact that they can disappear at any point, without warning, because the seller's license expired or they just feel like discontinuing the service. | | | |
| ▲ | schoen 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They do have such a limitation, because of things like UDRP. It's just that there are maybe some forms of restriction on the processes by which domain names can be involuntarily transferred or seized. But it's a real possibility! |
|
|
| ▲ | bookofjoe 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Yes. Otherwise I'd be happy to give you a GREAT price on all the movies I've "bought" from Apple and Amazon as well as myriad Kindle Books. |
