286
Judge hands Lambo.com to Lamborghini after ruling owner acted in bad faith (www.techradar.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
100 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 9 months ago (8 children)

That judge is a dumbass and any precedent that 'justifies' this ruling should be reviewed and struck down. This is called theft. And do eminent domain too while we're at it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    A domain name is explicitly not property.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Cornell Law disagrees.

    Property is anything (items or attributes/tangible or intangible) that can be owned by a person or entity. Property is the most complete right to something; the owner can possess, use, transfer or dispose of it.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/property

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Why not? You can't hold it, but why should that be a limit?

    Note, phd's can easially be written on this subject defending either side. Some of those will say things like domains are not generally property, but for some situations we should treat them like property and in other situations not. I'm not expecting a response. I'm expecting everyone to think about the question.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    This isn't about an intangible thing being property. This is about the way domains are controlled. Nobody owns a domain, they register the right to use a domain. All domains are controlled and "owned" by ICANN, which allows registrars to handle who can use domains.

    They are not anyone's property.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago

    That is part of what a phd can argue about....

    I would argue that the registration cost is just a tax and you own it. But remember I'm arguing as a philosopher and not someone who can't see both sides or even thinks there needs to be one correct side.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    Theft is when something you own is taken away. The squatter never owned the domain, only registered to use it. In this case, ICANN owns the domain and allows a registrar to handle who can use that domain. ICANN sets strict rules on how domains can be used, and the squatter broke those rules.

    Maybe the judge is a little smarter on actual laws than you are.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent