I feel bad for you, but seeing the other thread about what happened to fleaking and based on equity's response that domain names can be taken back by the corporation in the first 30 days. It will be a tough case to win. Good Luck !!.
Those were great names !!..
Its not Demand Media it is Verisign not allowing that and I don't blame them there is no way I would let them go for $10 and everyone knows no .tv is priced at $10.
ENOM Registration Agreement.
SERVICE(S) PROVIDED AT WILL AND TERMINATION OF SERVICE(S): We and your Primary Service Provider may reject your domain name registration application or elect to discontinue providing Service(s) to you for any reason within 30 days of a Service initiation or a Service renewal. Outside of this period, we and your Primary Service Provider may terminate or suspend the Service(s) at any time for cause, which, without limitation, includes registration of prohibited domain name(s), abuse of the Services, payment irregularities, serious allegations of illegal conduct, or if your use of the Services involves us in a violation of any Internet Service Provider's ("ISP's") acceptable use policies, including the transmission of unsolicited bulk email. You agree that if we terminate or suspend the Services provided to you under this Agreement, that we may then, at our option, make either ourselves or a third party the beneficiary of Services which are substantially similar to those which were previously providing to you and that any reference in this Agreement to termination or suspension of the Services to you includes this option. If we have grounds to terminate or suspend Service(s) with respect to one domain name or in relation to other Service(s) provided through your account, we may terminate or suspend all Service(s) provided through your account, including Service(s) to other domain names. No fee refund will be made when there is a suspension or termination of Service(s) for cause. At any time and for any reason, we may terminate the Services 30 days after we send notice of termination via mail or email, at our option, to the WHOIS contact information provided in association with your domain name registration.
If we terminate Services for a reason other than cause, we will attempt to refund your fees. You further acknowledge and agree that your registration of a domain name is subject to suspension, cancellation or transfer by any ICANN procedure, by any registrar or registry administrator procedures approved by an ICANN-adopted policy, to correct mistakes by us, another registrar or the registry administrator in administering the domain name or for the resolution of disputes concerning the domain name.
Funny you go put in online.tv reunion.tv or Christmas they all say available go to ENOMCENTRAL says buy for $10 log in click and then it says Premium Name not for sale Totally Clueless..
No problem guys, we'll just add three zeros to all of them...
DIR.tv = $10,000.
Gifts.TV = $10,000.
Reunion.tv = $10,000.
Online.tv = $10,000.
Catering.tv = $10,000.
Miss.tv = $10,000.
Survey.tv = $10,000.
Rb.tv = $10,000.
Christmas.tv = $10,000.
Banner.tv = $10,000.
Creditcard.tv = $10,000.
Garden.tv = $10,000.
Brand.tv = $10,000.
Autos.tv = $10,000.
Champagne.tv = $10,000..
For one, I cant believe these were let go of and secondly it's sucks the way these big boys think they can push us around / set whatever laws they want... It might be time for a rally outside the offices and some major people be bought ino the mix to get a few things straightened out.
Im sure if this was tested in a court of law, some laws would be changed. it takes numbers and exposure to the right people in power...
Online.tv went out of business is why these domains dropped they spent alot but were too early. Again Verisign spent $45 million for the DOT TV CORP and can charge whatever they like for a .tv as can any other cctld. Difference in pricing between a .in and a co.uk and a .tm and a .im and a .gd and a .md and a .jp and so on and so on and so on..................................................................................................
I am very dissapointed for you. I have been following all sorts of drops and this would explain why there so many good ones. I wish you the best of luck but I cant see you coming out on top. They reserve the right to revoke anything within a time period, you agreed to it when you purchase the domain. So, considering all things I think you may have an endless uphill battle. Still I hopeyou can squeeze out some nice domains...
Sorry domainacrobat, it just is not going to happen. This is standard operating procedure, and has been happening in other tld's as well. I had a three letter .info taken away by verisign after purchasing at snap, MANY "Geo"TV.com names have been gone from delete status to the account of Unifund Corporation. Just a fact everyone dealing in domains has to cope with...
Good luck getting these at such a cheap rate. However you should be going after Verisign and not Enom. Verisign sets the pricing and they run the registry. Enom just controls the inventory now...
Not sure I follow??? You say sorry Domainacrobat it's not going to happen... Whats not going to happen? I said he has no chance... As far as I can tell, you said the same thing?.
I was just wishing him best of luck..
In this case, I think at least one party [eNom or Verisign ] may undertake the responsibility of such pricing error. Today, eNom.tv sent me an email and removed my domain from my account...
I still don't understand why online.tv let them drop. I understand they went out of business because they spent too much too early, but with renewal fees of $10/each, why would you *ever* let that list of domains drop?.
My only hypothesis is that this is an arrangement between online.tv and Enom/Verisign to bring them back into the fold for registration and that online.tv was compensated for it.
Otherwise, that is the most boneheaded move in the history of the .tv extension to let them drop...
The lease agreement probably concluded... These domains were able to be regged at such a cheap rate provided that online.tv promote them. Since they are no longer in business it isn't in the agreement that the names can just be held. Since these are normally premium regs it was probably in the contract that at the time of renewal verisign can have an option to terminate if the other party is not fulfilling what was in the contract...
Fascinating. Thanks for the fast reply! Do you know that for sure or are you just giving an educated guess?.
I have never seen the full explanation re: online.tv.
I know they started off with about 3,000 names in 2000 and I seem to remember $3M as being floated around as a price and obviously just nominal renewal fees.
Does anyone know a) more or b) more definitively what happened there?.
This is just my best guess.....
Hi everyone, I've browsed on and off this year, joined up last month, but just getting around to posting. (Note, my note may be overkill because I see that CashCowDomains had posted a thread on this so I'll join it as it's directly relevant - and I have something to add about online.tv in my last paragraph.) I thought my recent situation with Enom would be interesting to everyone here involved in TV. And I look forward to participating more. I have been tracking the expiration, redemption period, and pending delete of many TV names for the past couple months. These names were all registered to online.tv - as many here probably know. There were quite a few - more than 150 that I was tracking.
Verisign released them at the original $10 annual registration, and amazingly they were availabe for registration at this price. I missed most of them by seconds/minutes. But I did manage to register two names: Rich.TV and Sports24.TV Believe me they were way down the list of names I was interested in. At least something though, right? Within minutes all the expiring names (e.g. Wedding, tennis, wine, chocolate, finance, vacations, etc, etc,) were registered and since the Whois database still showed "Pending-Delete" anyone who missed that window would not have known what happened - and this all happened during the middle of the night for all you who are US based.
My two new names were duly paid for and placed in my enom account. I had control of them. Today, I returned home from work and receive an email from Enom:.
"Please be advised, that due to a pricing error, we inadvertently listed several .TV premium domain names at $10.00 each. These .tv premium domain names were supposed to be priced at $10,000.00 per domain name. As a result, any .TV premium domains you purchased at the $10.00 rate will be removed from your account and full credit will be issued today. These .tv premium domains will be re-priced and re-added to the Auction website today.".
My two new names were removed from my account straight away. Their message, while not rude, certainly wasn't polite or apologetic. Not the type of shopping experience you expect - especially since I've spent thousands at Enom.
What does all this mean? Obviously, verisign or enom messed up. Their systems automatically released these names at the original premiums. Their fault. Its not my fault I registered what they offered. And yes I understand - from the Fleaking post, and Equity's explanation in that thread, that enom can revoke within the first 30 days without reason. They messed up, if this had happened on Main Street the outcome would be very different - not just a refund - probably a deep discount or some form of customer service.
There explanation letter to me suggests they messed up and are trying to cover their butts by stating that all the names should have been ten thousand not ten, as if they missed typing the three zeros - come on Sports24.TV is worth nowhere near 10k/year, maybe a bit above standard reg. What is a shame is that this could have been a fantastic opportunity for another round of positive publicity - press release or availability of great new premium names, etc. I certainly didn't expect $10 prices. I was hoping for rational pricing and would have been willing to pay reasonable sums for a couple of the names ($10k renewals are too rich for my blood). And to cover themselves they blow it again by pricing all of online.tv's expiring names at 10k premiums.
For those with deep pockets there actually may be some interesting one's in this pile. I'm passing on them but everyone should browse the premium list - all the newly added name's are priced at 10k. Here are some of the best in no particular order - which if they hadn't messed up, some would be priced higher IMO, especially the single letter L.tvs..
E.TV, D.TV, P.TV, Digital.TV, Finance.TV, Wine.TV (I really wanted this one!), Bank.TV, Hotel.TV, Resort.TV, Holidays.TV, Vacations.TV, UK.TV, England.TV, America.TV, Europe.TV, Car.TV, Bike.TV, Catering.TV, Shoes.TV, Chocolate.TV, Satellite.TV, and many more....
BTW - online.tv is still in business, this is a whole different story. I think many thought they went bankrupt but in my effort to get some of these names before they went back to verisign I kept digging. If you followed the trail left on whois and archive.org you come up empty handed. I discovered that online.tv was a uk company, and since I live in the UK, and know something about corporate issues here I dug up old corporate filings and slowly followed the trail to a current registered legal representative office, and actually spoke with an attorney there. Confirmed they are a going concern but never was able to speak with an active director in time. I'm still a bit baffled as to why they would let all these names drop - from what I could tell they still have some funds on their books.
Through April 11, 2007) with a clause that renewal fees would be renegotiated at significantly higher rates on that date. If this is the case then the renewal fees would have been raised well above the $10 level originally negotiated. Does anyone have anymore insight into this?.
Its been an interesting couple months with this situation - unfortunately the ending was handled poorly, and another missed opportunity for TV. Cheers, CarryOn..
What from the 20 people on this board? And only 3 have complained, and their legal claused will hardly make this class action.
No offense CCD, I respect you, so nothing personal...
Heck, it's enom, hardly surprising their are complaints. Just look at the mess it was figuring out which enom site was which.
Nothing new there though, people complain about godaddy as well, but they keep getting bigger and more obtuse...
Well you guys did get a "receipt" showing that you paid. Thats some proof at least...
I hope you can get a decent result out of this CCD,.
Its time to get these companies to take responsibility for themselves..
If they screw up then they should have to wear it like the rest of society, hiding behind an unfair clause in an agreement is not on.
Perhaps getting such clauses removed from the registration agreements is the way to go. Then maybe we would see some decent customer relations and service because they would have to stay on top of things as opposed to having the option they have now of reneging...
That he would not get any of the names that you were hoping he would. That's all...
Personally I think Enom is on shaky ground. In my humble opinion this disclaimer does not warrant sufficient grounds to undo these sales. Enom has made the names available at a set price, they've allowed CashCow to register the names and they've taken his money. He has acted in good faith and hasn't done anything that warrants the cancellations of the domains...
Since we are enter into the contract in good faith..
ENom undo the sale is obviously breach of the contract...
Registering premium names at 10$ in good faith... yes, of course (ironic)..
It was obvious to everybody that it was a glitch in eNom's system.
I don't say that CashCowDomains made something wrong... He tried and succeed to catch the domains. If he didn't catch them, somebody else of this forum had catched them all. But you cannot bypass the argument it was an obvious glitch.....
Its their GLITCH, they have to be responsible, geez you guys, we are all responsible for our own actions and this is the same thing... I registered server.tv and degree.tv and that was glitch and I never got them either, not good enough! stop bowing to these major companies and take them on! 30 days to take a product back that you are developing is fraudulant, whatever way you look at it. I still get emails from friends wanting to join server.tv even one today after 1 mon th of emails to me.tv/enom or whover they are. Still not rectified and still not mine. Ill wear that one, even after I spent money on it as it didnt come up as paid in my account. CCD is in a different situation and has all rights to them as with golf.tv did.
The are so many scenerios in so many types of businesses that this applies to....
Maybe. But Enom should take responsibility for their actions..
I would just write this off as a commercial gesture.
Are they so cash-strapped ? Indeed. Pretty ridiculous. It's just that they are too greedy and may be on their way to killing the extension..
The more I read stories like that the more I think .tv is a domainer's trap..
Quite honestly I must consider .tv a HIGH-RISK TLD due to.
A. unfriendly pricing policies.
B. well, plain mismanagement by Enom/Verisign.
Uncertainty is a major hindrance to any type of investment.
Perhaps it's time to vote with your wallet and consider more sensible extensions...
Sdsinc: good post and Im also thinking the same thing.. it's is mis managed and I am also worried about the future when I see these types of things.. The problem is with these types of companies, they think they are untouchable... one person can bring down a company or a country for that matter, it isnt about bucks, it's about tenacity and conviction..
Greed as you say is the motivator...
To bad a few more like minded people werent here, with a grasp on business and ethics. cheers..
Um. even if they caved and gave you the names for $10 this year, I assume the renewal fee next year will be "corrected" to $10K or even $19990 so even if you win, you win for a year (now that I think about it, that wouldn't be too bad).
They do reserve the right to adjust renewal pricing, right? LOL.
Good luck to everyone...
The bit about renewal pricing also seems a bit odd. so you agree a price say $1000 and then next year they can say they want $3000.
Has this happened yet?..
Autorenewal is in queston? I would set your calendar to renew in advance manually...
I've been watching these and other names as well but with the price tag, forget it...
CCD a couple of other bolded ones to add to your list ..
Wirtschaft.tv 100,000 (WHAT ...how much! what is it what does it mean?).
Comedia.tv 50,000 (ur'm again apologies but how much?? and what does that mean??)..
I think it means 'Economics' in German. Inflated prices anyway...
If we make a mistake paying the proper amount or entering the proper name.. We either get stuck with an inproper spelling or lose our domain. If they do that, they can it back and add 3 more 0's onto it and say sorry, and stand behind their mighty wall of Terms of Service..
Am I the only one who sees a flaw in this and wants CCD to win? Time we start putting these giant companies who go opps and push it off onto our plates all the time in there place. It is us who make Verisign weathly.. And we should be in control.. However it doesn't work that way, atleast we should be in control of this.
That is extremely hard to believe.
Mistake, although not favored, is a perfectly legitimate ground for repudiation of a contract. The primary inquiry is whether it is objectively apparent that a mistake was made.
Sorry, but if a newspaper misprint advertises new cars for sale for $10 then, no, you aren't going to be entitled to buy and keep a car for $10.
Now, it is readily apparent that Enom charges $49.95 for registration of non-premium .tv domain names, and I'm sure you know that.
Given the registry price for .tv domain names it is not objectively reasonable that offering these names for $10 was anything other than a mistake.
The case for a mistake here meets both the subjective and objective tests for voiding the registration contract.
The fact that the registration agreement includes an unlimited right to revoke a registration within the first 30 days only makes Enom's position stronger. I mean, think about this for a minute. Your entire claim to these domains is based upon your agreement to the registration contract for the domains.
So your entire point about the registration contract is that it is valid when it favors you, and not valid where it doesn't?.
I want some of whatever your attorneys have been smoking...
Thanks for your input. Hopefully this will help quell the argument if it is legit to buy these premiums for $10 after a clear registry error.
I do wish CCD luck with this claim but ultimately this claim is going nowhere fast.
With your busy schedule, you manage to clear this issue with us John. A short message enough for us to understand and move forward.
Thank you John for taking the time everyone knows in this business you are the man...
Sounds like you've already had some if you ask me.
I say that because you don't come across like a very professional attorney to mock other attorneys in a public forum. The old enom pricing of $49.95 no longer applies. I personally get them for less than half that. My attorneys were talking from the standpoint of contractual law and are still reviewing all points on this. You opinion, which may be valued by others is not sufficient for me to cease my case against them for this as well as other actions they have taken upon me. They offered names for sale at $10.00 a piece, I purchased those names, enom processed the payment for the names, sent email receipts, placed the names in my account and I updated the nameservers to trafficz for management.
This happened to others as well, AND this has happened with other domainers who have contacted me expressing interest to fight enom/verisign (with regard to various pricing at a mere whim of Enom/Verisign) as they have revoked and resold names for a higher profit and that too is the focus of my pursuit against them. Additional part of my point is that it doesn't favor the domainer at all.
A while back, verisign released some single letter .com domain names. An error or not on behalf of the registry, not the customer.
Thanks anyways and best of luck in your future endeavors.
Well golly, I guess they'll just have to sue me. But since you have not named these attorneys, it's a tough call as to whether I have indeed mocked anyone in particular.
Without knowing any of the details of this situation, an initial answer from just about any attorney in response to "I bought something and now the vendor wants it back" is going to be "they can't do that". I love it when folks seize on an irrelevant detail, as if it changes the situation.
Does Enom offer .tv registrations to anyone for $10 on a regular basis?.
No. You had an objective indication, based on your own experience, that the posted price was wrong.
Your point that you pay "less than half" of $49.95 doesn't change the fact that you know darn well that $10 was an unusual price for premium .tv domain names. It's not about whether you pay less than $49.95. The point is whether they ever offer .tv domain names for $10. Your response indicates you know darn well that they don't offer .tv registrations for $10, even under whatever discount you have.
I got the figure by going to Enom, typing a random string, and seeing what the price was. Yes, you may get a discount of some kind, but you admit it's not at the level of $10.
This observation is objective evidence there was a mistake, because I don't even think the registry-registrar cost is $10. And, no, I'm not motivated enough to go look it up, so someone else can enlighten me here. So? It's the contract you agreed to. Again, you don't seem to understand the point. Your entire claim to have rights in these domain names rests upon the fact that you entered into a registration contract with Enom in order to register them.
You don't have a problem with the Enom registration contract - just the parts that were applied here, and which you don't like. A court is not going to sit down with the contract and redline it for "stuff we like, and stuff we don't like." LMK when they get around to reading the contract in question: http://www.enom.com/terms/agreement.asp.
We and your Primary Service Provider may reject your domain name registration application or elect to discontinue providing Service(s) to you for any reason within 30 days of a Service initiation or a Service renewal.
You further acknowledge and agree that your registration of a domain name is subject to suspension, cancellation or transfer by any ICANN procedure, by any registrar or registry administrator procedures approved by an ICANN-adopted policy, to correct mistakes by us, another registrar or the registry administrator in administering the domain name or for the resolution of disputes concerning the domain name. Heaven forfend, please, don't let me stand in your way. Forge ahead, win a huge victory, and prove I'm an idiot. Yes. And if you run that fact pattern, and nothing else, by just about any attorney, that attorney is going to tell you Enom can't do that. If I wasn't familiar with domains, even I would say they couldn't do that.
After that attorney reads the registrant agreement, and also understands the usual pricing for .tv domain names, then the attorney will go one of four ways:.
1. The attorney will say you are SOL under the agreement.
2. The attorney will say you are probably SOL under the unilateral mistake doctrine.
3. The attorney will answer poitn 1, by forging ahead with an "unconscionability" theory - i.e. that the 30 day revocation or express mistake clause are so "shocking to the conscience" that, as a matter of public policy these terms should not be enforcible.
4. The attorney will forge ahead under some theory based on false advertising, or else a theory based on the Uniform Commercial Code (not realizing this was not a sale of goods in the first place).
I'm curious to know what form of remedy you want from Enom, though. Your options would be:.
A. Specific Performance - i.e. you want the domain names..
B. Refund - well, that's out, since you already got that..
C. Monetary Award - presumably what you think the domains are worth.
As I said, option B is out, since you already got that. Option C would be pretty funny, since your entire point is that you are claiming they screwed you out of $XXX,XXX by not selling you the domains for $10. Plus, Option C would really cut into your claim that they were the ones seeking unconscionable terms.
The real problem with option A is that legal theories 3 and 4 are usually brought by people who are trying to get out of a contract. Here, what you are seeking is performance of selective bits of a contract, while at the same time claiming that other bits & pieces of the contract are not enforcible.
But, heck yeah, I have no doubt that your attorneys support your position 100%. That's what attorneys get paid to do...
Many thanks for your input jberryhill.
Thread re-opened but in legal issues - no spiders here.
However, there were too many good points made to just let this disappear into nothingness.
Any flames directed at me will likely find kindling.
Jberryhill is correct. I am an attorney besides a domainer/developer. This was a textbook example of a unilateral mistake. A unilateral mistake is not grounds for recission (canceling the contract) unless the non-mistaken party knew or should have known of the mistake. Unfortunately, CashCow knew or should have known those names were premium names and therefore should have been priced at more than the $10 fee. Enom simply made a mistake.
You'd get more flamage from me if the thread had remained deleted. I do try to educate, and don't intend my posts to be thrown away...
Threatening me is not the best way to get your wishes, CCD.
I wish you the best,.
If this ain't a lesson in Contracts 101, I don't know what this is.
If you're going to sue eNom for what happened here, you might want to read.
The "IF LAWSUIT(S) ARE THREATENED" clause you also agreed to. Good luck...
To that end, CCD you are welcome to remove yourself from this thread (You have already edited all of your posts), but our members spend time to educate everyone, not just you.
Again, all the best to you,.
It's not yours either. You have no ownership interest in the material posted here, nor do you have the right to tell other people what to do with THEIR website.
So now you are threatening namepros?.
Just keeping those attorneys of yours hopping this week, eh?.
Something else I've seen often based on long experience. Just as there were children who have invisible friends, there are adults who have "invisible attorneys". These people go along through life threatening other people with legal action that is going to happen, oh, just any day now.
Let's run the CashCowDomains "threat down", shall we?.
First, he wants to sue Enom and Verisign because they didn't sell him a raft of premium .tv domains for less than the registration cost of non-premium domains. He doesn't believe the registration contract to which he agreed actually applies to him. Knowing that the price was unusually low, he cannot fathom that a mistake was made. Knowing that any registration can be revoked for any reason for 30 days, that part of the contract is, um, written in magic ink that a judge can't see.
Second, he wants to sue anyone who subsequently registered any of the domain names that he believes he should be entitled to for $10. That's right, even if you never heard of him or his $10 ownership claim, if you subsequently went to Enom and bought a premium name, the invisible attorneys are coming after you because you, um, are bad.
Third, if you disagree with his invisible attorneys using colloquial terms, you are unprofessionally "mocking" his invisible attorneys.
Fourth, when he wanders onto your public website and uses it to post things, he becomes a part owner of your website, and if you do not henceforth do what he tells you to do then, you guessed it, the invisible attorneys fly out of his butt to go after you.
I sense another "PRECEDENT SETTING LEGAL RULING" from Canadian small claims court in the making. Baloney. If you do not wish to have data on a public forum then don't post it there. Namepros is not in the business of making your wishes come true. For that, you need Tinkerbelle and her magic wand.
I hope it is generally appreciated how funny this is.
This guy believes he is entitled to monetary damages if Namepros doesn't take down the stuff he posted here.
This is very close the black hole of wrong, around which the wrong galaxy revolves in the wrongest part of the wrong universe. This reasoning is so wrong, it can only be handled in a glove box while wearing a full environment suit. The last time one molecule of this much wrong escaped from the laboratory, it damaged the brains of people within a 500 mile radius...
CCD, though I understand why you are upset, I do believe you are too wrapped personally in this to be objective. I am not a lawyer, but I have written many contracts in my time. Unfortunately, the registration agreement is written in a way where domainers do not get much out of it. Like it or not, you agreed with the TOS and are bound by it. John is being helpful and is stating the arguements to be used in deciding if what Verisign/Enom did was correct. And still unfortunately, domainers will have no leg to stand on...
I won't post what you originally wrote in this space - but you do need to think long and hard about what you write from now on, instead of just deleting everything you think better of.
Do you have any idea how many veterinarians are bitten by the animals they are trying to cure?..
But how many of them can claim that the animal was a "rabid cow"?..
I think we already got the idea about this main issue, well explain by respected lawyer in domain business. Cheers to everyone.
I swear I almost fell off my chair when I read that JB!.
I remember that old thread. It was one of the first threads I ever read here at Namepros. I read it again when Allan reopened and bumped it recently. I once played some gigs with ol' Googlee. Man that bear could play!..
Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and The Googlee Bear might yet succumb to mad cow disease...
Thanks to everyone for their input and help.
Now that is a good call-back! That was something!..
Stop posting vitriolic rants only to have to go back and edit them out! Again, use your better judgment before posting, not after...
Oh you're quite welcome. But you're not getting any sympathy around here if.
That's what you're now looking for.
You brought this upon yourself when you started ranting without using your.
My vote for "POST of the WEEK!".
I can't believe that CCD is taking it this far. I wish good luck to everyone getting sued by CCD.