The New Temporary Site: Patterico.Net
1&1 has still failed to update my DNS information — despite the fact that I renewed the domain before the expiration date.
I am still trying to figure out whether they are merely incompetent, or whether they are dishonest extortionists and/or thieves. At this point, I really don’t know. I just know they’re telling me the transfer is still in process, but it shouldn’t take this long.
In the meantime, I have registered Patterico.net, and pointed it at my site. The propagation may take time, so don’t discard your raw IP address bookmark just yet.
But if you hate the raw address, go ahead and bookmark Patterico.net as a possible alternate way to get to this site — while I try to work out the issues with the faceless bureaucracy that is 1&1. Let me know if it works for you before I start publicizing it as an alternate domain.
Anyone know a good civil lawyer with experience in dealing with domain registration issues, who might be willing to take on a case pro bono, or even just give some general advice on the policies and procedures involved in rescuing a hijacked domain? I’m not to that point just yet, but it may be headed that way. I already have a lawyer who is willing to do the case pro bono if necessary — and he’s very smart and a quick study. But he’s unfamiliar with this area of the law, and wants me to help educate him on the general procedures if I can.
P.S. I see they have now parked patterico.com and are making money off of it.
Interesting background reading: start here for an example of someone else this happened to — the difference being that the other guy didn’t renew before expiration, and I did. The story is about this guy. Read his tale here (when he lost the site) and here (when he got it back).
Note that he eventually got his site back from 1&1, albeit weeks later, apparently by filling out a redemption form. I’m likely going to do that today, to cover my bases, even though I shouldn’t have to because I renewed it before the expiration.
I’ve got about 40 domains from GoDaddy. Great Service
Geezer (093622) — 10/24/2008 @ 1:11 amIncompetence. There isn’t enough money involved for it to be cheat or extortion.
cboldt (3d73dd) — 10/24/2008 @ 3:53 amIt’s the host, not the registrar, that has the job of defining the IP Addy. One can register a name (e.g., with GoDaddy), and then locate/relocate that domain anywhere on the net.
cboldt (3d73dd) — 10/24/2008 @ 3:57 am.
You can, if you want, have patterico.com and patterico.net point to exactly the same IP addy. The web-host can arrange this for you. I have a couple of totally unrelated by name (but very related by business) websites that resolve to the same IP.
Cbolt: there is plenty of money in it, especially when you automate the process. This is Sedo’s bread and butter.
Patterico:
I’m not a lawyer, yet, but I thought drafting a complaint on your behalf would be good practice. Can you tell me if this is any good? A RICO cause of action might also be appropriate, as well as one for Ratification.
I apologize in advance for the length of this thing, but I do want to spread it around so it will be cached by google. If you think it’s too big, don’t hold back on deleting it on account that you’re worried my feelings would be hurt.
Patrick Frey,
Plaintiff,
v.
Tim Schumacher; Sedo.com, LLC; Sedo GmbH; 1&1 Internet, Inc.; United Internet AG; and Does 1-1000,
Defendants.
GENERAL CHARGING ALLEGATIONS
The defendants, and each of them, were at all times mentioned in this complaint in privity of contract with each other and, except for Mr. Schumacher, were at all times subsidiaries of the same parent corporation, United Internet AG.
1&1 Internet, Inc. was in privity of contract with Mr. Frey since DATE_OF_SIGNATURE. See attached Exhibit A.
Plaintiff Patrick Frey (hereinafter, “Mr. Frey”) is the proprietor of http://70.32.75.225, a web site known as “Patterico’s Pontifications.” 70.32.75.225 is the Internet Protocol (IP) address of Mr. Frey’s web site. Web browsers use IP addresses to find, display, and interact with web sites.
Mr. Frey is the true owner of http://www.patterico.com.
Until DAY_ONE Mr. Frey used his ownership and control of http://www.patterico.com to cause it to “redirect” to his web site at http://70.32.75.225.
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) maintains a series of “name servers” such that when web surfers type in the domain name of a web site (such as http://www.google.com) they are redirected to the web site’s IP address (which, for Google, is http://74.125.19.104). This allows web surfers to find web sites by typing in their domain names, so that web surfers do not need to memorize IP addresses.
Between DAY_ONE and LAST_DAY, http://www.patterico.com did redirect to http://sedoparking.com/?path=home, a web site belonging to Defendant Sedo GmbH.
During the time between DAY_ONE and LAST_DAY, the Internet traffic to Mr. Frey’s web site at http://70.32.75.225 was XX% of the traffic that he would normally receive per day.
Domain name “squatters” are persons who wrongfully “occupy” a domain name.
Domain name squatters profit by their wrongful occupation of a domain name
Sedo provides advertising services to domain name squatters. This service is known as “Sedo Domain Parking.”
Between DAY_ONE and LAST_DAY, Sedo caused http://www.patterico.com to redirect to http://sedoparking.com/?path=home, a web page with an advertisement for Sedo’s domain name squatter advertising service “Sedo Domain Parking.”
Domain name squatters using the “Sedo Domain Parking” service occupy valuable web domains, which are wasted on computer-generated “spam” advertising with zero informational value for web surfers. These domain names are valuable resources, which Sedo ties up such that they cannot be used to host valuable content. Sedo’s “Domain Parking Service” has no redeeming purpose, does not benefit society in any way, and serves to assist domain name “squatters” in profiting from their illegal and immoral activities. This constitutes ratification of said illegal and immoral activity.
Another manner by which domain name “squatters” profit by their wrongful occupation of a domain name is to offer to sell it back to the rightful owner. The rightful owner is put in fear that the squatter will sell the domain name to a third party. Once a domain name is sold to an innocent third party, it is extremely difficult for the rightful owner to get it back. American courts cannot always provide a remedy, because ICANN does not answer to American courts.
Sedo provides a service to domain name squatters by which they can “auction” domain names back to the rightful owners, or to anyone else who wishes to buy them.
Sedo’s “auctions” are fraudulent. Sedo pretends to offer the web sites at a certain price, and pretends to accept bids. However, as soon as a bid is entered, Sedo will raise the asking price, despite the absence of another bidder not connected to United Internet AG.
(www.wordie.org/lists/15724)
Sedo allows domain name squatters to use their service, including the infamous domain name thief “DomCollect,” which is also owned by United Internet AG.
United Internet AG controls an empire of criminal entities, including 1&1 Internet, Inc., Sedo.com, LLC, Sedo GmbH, and DomCollect, which conspire together to commit crimes and torts against people across the world, including American citizens.
The United Internet AG organization follows a pattern and practice of malice, fraud, and oppression as their standard way of doing business, especially in enabling, participating in, and ratifying domain name theft and squatting, and is therefore subject to punitive damages.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
CONVERSION
against all defendants
Mr. Frey possessed the right to control the internet domain name http://www.patterico.com.
Defendants, and each of them, intentionally prevented Mr. Frey for a significant period of time (NUMBER_OF_DAYS days, between DAY_ONE and LAST_DAY) from being able to control which IP address http://www.patterico.com would redirect to.
Mr. Frey did not consent to the redirection of http://www.patterico.com.
Mr. Frey did not consent to being unable to change the redirection of http://www.patterico.com.
Mr. Frey was harmed because he lost the use of http://www.patterico.com. Mr Frey was harmed because his web site received less Internet traffic. Mr. Frey will lose future Internet traffic because some visitors to http://www.patterico.com, upon seeing the “Sedo Domain Parking” advertisement, may believe that Mr. Frey’s web site has been shut down.
Defendants’ conduct, and each of theirs, was a substantial factor in causing the aforementioned harm to Mr. Frey.
Defendants are well aware of the precise value of internet traffic, because defendants are in the business of selling internet advertising.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF CONTRACT
against 1&1 Internet, Inc.
There was a contract between Mr. Frey and 1&1 Internet, Inc. regarding the registration of http://www.patterico.com. A copy of said contract is attached as Exhibit A.
1&1 Internet, Inc. breached this contract by causing http://www.patterico.com to “redirect” to an IP address other than http://70.32.75.225 without Mr. Frey’s permission or consent, express or implied.
1&1 Internet, Inc. breached this contract for base financial motives, including to use http://www.patterico.com to advertise Sedo’s domain name squatter advertising services.
As a direct, legal, and proximate result of 1&1 Internet, Inc.’s breach of contract, Mr. Frey’s interest in his intellectual property was harmed.
As a direct, legal, and proximate result of 1&1 Internet, Inc.’s breach of contract, 1&1 Internet, Inc.’s sister organization Sedo GmbH did use http://www.patterico.com for NUMBER_OF_DAYS to advertise its domain squatter advertising services.
Because Sedo GmbH is in the business of selling domain name squatter advertising services, Sedo GmbH knows the precise value of its advertisement on http://www.patterico.com for NUMBER_OF_DAYS. These unjust profits are the result of 1&1 Internet, Inc.’s breach of contract, and Mr. Frey is entitled to recover them under the “unjust enrichment” theory of recovery for breach of contract.
Mr. Frey lost the use and benefit of http://www.patterico.com for NUMBER_OF_DAYS. He is entitled to recover the value to him of http://www.patterico.com during those days. Mr. Frey is uniquely suited to take advantage of http://www.patterico.com because that domain name is associated with his personal identity. While Sedo GmbH can use its domain name squatter advertising services technology to take advantage of any well-trafficked domain name, it is only providing generic advertisements that most web surfers have learned to ignore. Mr. Frey’s use of http://www.patterico.com is personal to him, and therefore more valuable than the value that Sedo GmbH can derive from hosting its advertisement for its domain squatter advertising services on http://www.patterico.com. Mr. Frey is entitled to recover these damages under the “expectation” theory of recovery for breach of contract.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
INTERFERENCE WITH A CONTRACT
against all defendants except 1&1 Internet, Inc.
There was a contract between Mr. Frey and 1&1 Internet, Inc.
The defendants, and each of them, had actual and/or constructive notice of this contract regarding the registration of http://www.patterico.com. A copy of said contract is attached as Exhibit A.
The defendants, and each of them, intended to cause 1&1 Internet, Inc. to breach the contract by causing http://www.patterico.com to “redirect” to an IP address other than http://70.32.75.225.
The defendants, and each of them, did cause 1&1 Internet, Inc. to breach the contract by causing http://www.patterico.com to redirect to http://sedoparking.com/?path=home.
The defendants, and each of them, induced the aforementioned breach of contract for base financial motives, including to use http://www.patterico.com to advertise Sedo’s domain name squatter advertising services.
As a direct, legal, and proximate result of the defendants’ actions, and each of theirs, Mr. Frey’s interest in his intellectual property was harmed.
The defendants’ actions, and each of theirs, was a substantial factor in causing the aforementioned harm to Mr. Frey.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FRAUD/FALSE REPRESENTATION
Against 1&1 Internet, Inc.
1&1 Internet, Inc. represented to Mr. Frey that it would provide domain name hosting and redirection services. Implied in such a statement is the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
Mr. Frey did enter into a contract with 1&1 Internet, Inc. (See attached Exhibit A.)
However, 1&1 Internet, Inc., from the very beginning, had no intention of upholding the terms of the contract or the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Thus 1&1 Internet, Inc. did deliberately deceive Mr. Frey.
1&1 Internet, Inc. intended for Mr. Frey to rely on its false representation in choosing whether to enter into a contract with 1&1 Internet, Inc.
Mr. Frey did substantially rely on 1&1 Internet, Inc.’s false representation. Had Mr. Frey known that 1&1 Internet, Inc. never intended to uphold its contractual obligations to him, Mr. Frey would not have entered into said contract.
Mr. Frey’s reliance on 1&1 Internet, Inc.’s false representation that it would uphold the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing was a direct, legal, and proximate cause of the harm to Mr. Frey.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
EXTORTION
Against all defendants
(because Sedo has not yet put http://www.patterico.com up for “auction,” or otherwise offered to sell it back to him, Sedo has not yet attempted to extort Mr. Frey.)
Unfounded Speculation (4ecd4c) — 10/24/2008 @ 4:30 amcboldt, there is plenty of money in this. It is Sedo’s bread and butter. Sedo (and the rest of United Internet AG) does this on a massive scale, and the process is largely automated.
Patterico:
1 – I sent you an email with a draft complaint. I would be interested in hearing what you think.
2 – Sedo runs an advertising service for domain name squatters called “Sedo Domain Parking.”
3 – Sedo is currently using patterico.com to advertise “Sedo Domain Parking”
4 – Sedo is getting free advertising out of patterico.com –> they have converted it to their own use for profit. I think that may make it easier to demonstrate conversion, and possibly to collect damages.
They aren’t just incompetent, they’re profiting from their supposed incompetence.
They set up their web service, from the very beginning, to automatically grab their own customers’ domain names if the customers fail to re-register, and squat on them, turning them into Sedo Domain Parking advertisement zombies, and then auction those names back to their own customers through Sedo’s auction system.
Sedo/1&1 Internet, Inc. planned from the very beginning to take domain names from their rightful owners (if they fail to reregister)–with whom 1&1 Internet, Inc. was in PRIVITY OF CONTRACT with because the rightful owners are 1&1 Internet, Inc.’s own customers!
Sedo/1&1 Internet, Inc. are set up to rip off people with whom they are in privity of contract. That’s bad behavior. The internet might be new and high tech and complicated, but ripping off people with whom you’re in privity of contract is as old as the common law itself.
In fact, if I was going to re-write the general allegations of the draft complaint, I would make sure to tell the story of Sedo/1&1’s scheme of automated domain-name-taking if someone fails to re-register their name.
You should sue them, Patterico, and you should file discovery motions to get their source code. These people aren’t just committing torts, they wrote source code to automate their tortious conduct
Unfounded Speculation (4ecd4c) — 10/24/2008 @ 5:03 amTyping in patterico.net redirects me to the 70.32.75.225 thing.
I googled reviews of sedo.com and is sedo trustworthy? It is based in Cologne, Germany? Anyway there were some negative viewpoints expressed. If I were conspiracy minded I might think that they are indeed crooks. The thing is you always have some people who swear how wonderful a company’s service is, but how do you know those glowing reviews aren’t sockpuppets?
In any case I try to check out reputations of companies after having been burned in the past. I never want to deal with att ever again. Comcast is another on my shit list of incompetent/evil bastards. Often you find yourself dealing with layers of boobs, passing you back and forth and using various catch phrases.
Yes, sedo has competition, but I’d check those people out also. It does appear that sedo will advertise domains for sale that the rightful owners have not wanted to sell.
madmax333 (0c6cfc) — 10/24/2008 @ 5:45 am— They aren’t just incompetent, they’re profiting from their supposed incompetence.
cboldt (3d73dd) — 10/24/2008 @ 5:56 amThey set up their web service, from the very beginning, to automatically grab their own customers’ domain names if the customers fail to re-register —
.
There’s an argument on both sides of that, the other side being the incompetence that adheres to a failure to timely renew a registration.
.
I’m not defending Sedo or 1&1, and would urge people who are doing web business to never use them. But with damages at this level (slow to update the DNS on a non-timely renewal — assuming non-timely is true), there isn’t much for this plaintiff to grab onto.
unless the renewal was, in fact, timely …
JD (a9d6c5) — 10/24/2008 @ 6:14 amunless the renewal was, in fact, timely …
Which it was. You read the post, right, cboldt?
I paid for a renewal before the expiration.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 10/24/2008 @ 6:17 amCyber-lawyer Lawrence Lessig would be a good source of information.
Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407) — 10/24/2008 @ 6:28 amTyping in patterico.net redirects me to the 70.32.75.225 thing.
Yeah, the redirect is still set up at the hosting company because that way, if they ever do finish what they’re supposed to be doing with patterico.com, that will cause people to be able to access it.
You can, if you want, have patterico.com and patterico.net point to exactly the same IP addy.
That’s what I’m doing at the hosting company. The problem is that 1&1 is still pointing to Sedo Parking instead of to my hosting company.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 10/24/2008 @ 6:30 amPatterico.com is now up for sale by sedo. The current bid is $4409. Maybe snuffles is buying it?
kaf (16e0b5) — 10/24/2008 @ 7:05 amThat price sounds like the beginning of damages and suggests intent.
Mike K (2cf494) — 10/24/2008 @ 7:20 amPatterico.com is for sale
Just moving the IP address were they?
Mrs. EW1 (84e813) — 10/24/2008 @ 7:20 amI confess, I missed the part of the post where the renewal fee was timely paid.
cboldt (3d73dd) — 10/24/2008 @ 7:20 am.
You have a good case. I wonder if there is any fine print in the contract that gives them the right to appropriate your IP addy and domain registration before its expiration. Not that it makes the conduct excusable, just another potential hurdle in obtaining damages.
.
I’ll contribute financially to the suit if you decide to pursue it.
Fine host:
I am a big fan of not ascribing to malice what can be ascribed to incompetence, but this sure doesn’t look like – to use a technical legal term – simple fucktardedness.
I hope you burn them to the ground. I’m assuming a lawsuit will still cost some expenses; I’ll pitch in $150 if it would help. (I know you’re not asking.)
–JRM
JRM (355c21) — 10/24/2008 @ 7:22 amAs JRM puts it so eloquently,
It is not at all unusual for domain names to be pirated…by people with malicious intent.
And this sure looks like a classic case of it: since all that the perpetrator has to do is keep you tied up in red tape until after the election when they can say “Oops, sorry about that.” And that doesn’t necessarily implicate Sedo or 1&1: one method is to find the registrar for the domain you want to mess up and buy that domain for the period beginning when the current owner’s renewal is due.
EW1(SG) (da07da) — 10/24/2008 @ 7:32 amI have done a new post. Sending out an e-mail to bloggers about it now.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 10/24/2008 @ 7:54 amSo, EW1, nefarious forces are at work to halt the operations of the 284th ranked blog (per truth laid bear.com). Don’t get me wrong. I like Patterico’s site and his and the guest posters writing, but the concept that some “for profit” company is seeking to shut Patterico down for political reasons is pretty far fetched.
Sometimes, Occam’s Razor really is true
timb (a83d56) — 10/24/2008 @ 8:24 amI was so panicked for you after seeing your domain swiped that when I was at Network Solutions and saw that Patterico.net was available, I almost scooped it up to make sure it was in friendly hands, and then I could transfer it to you. Then I realized I would have to identify myself in order for that to happen, and decided against it.
I have never identified myself by name online. I have never posted my photo online. I realized long before Joe the Plumber that personal information in the wrong hands can wreck your life.
L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 10/24/2008 @ 8:53 amGeezer wrote: I’ve got about 40 domains from GoDaddy. Great Service
Fun commercials, too.
L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 10/24/2008 @ 8:55 amInteresting story with 1&1 particularly as I have had a protracted and thankfully coming to an end wrangle with their UK/European division. They used to be sterling in pricing and customer service when they started out. Now they simply use their size to break ICANN regulations (they suspend domains you have paid for if you do not renew and do not pay for a domain which you have registered but no longer want and have not expressly canceled)and take payment for domains which do not exist (you need to keep on checking). Their customer service is non-existent and their practises seemed specially designed to be a pointless exercise in solipsism. But this is the internet age. Spread the word and let’s reduce them in size.
David (6f5830) — 10/30/2008 @ 12:52 am