Comments on: Man Charged with Bilking Lumber Liquidators with Domain Purchases

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 15:02:12 +0000

@ Mr. Domains – the issue of conflict of interests within domain companies is something domain companies grapple with all day. When I talk to various large domain companies asking if they’re going to get into “this business” or “that business”, they often say they tread carefully because it might put them into a position to compete with partners.

By: Stephen Douglas

Stephen Douglas — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:57:48 +0000

@Kelly

Searched my contact database for “Kelly” and came up with Kelly Lieberman. This can’t be you, is it?

“Shill bidders, registrars/markets/auctions/promoters(“conference organizers”) who self deal, TM jockies, WIPO leeches…”

That’s some cynical talk and finger pointing I wouldn’t expect… but the comments of somebody who thinks they know the inside dealings of big domain sales.

It doesn’t really address the fact that the escrow service isn’t supposed to be an investigatory service for civil attorneys or law enforcement, either. That doesn’t say they can’t bring in the law if they think THEY’VE been cheated, but assessing a business deal themselves is bad news for ANYONE selling something and using their escrow service.

By: Mr. Domains

Mr. Domains — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 22:20:31 +0000

My concern would be that the company would “investigate” every transaction – especially when a new buyer spends $XXX,000 for a domain name that is similar to a domain name owned by a company principal. Or perhaps a domain owner is selling too cheaply, and someone wants to clean him out while he is eager to sell?

It seems like a conflict of interest when the escrow company is owned by a guy who for all intents and purposes is a competitor of every domain investor. Heck, it seems like the perfect way to get transactional data that otherwise would be confidential. Again, not saying that they do this, but saying that it could be done. All could be above board, but just the impression that the company could be creating a client list leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Reminds me of my “friend” who gave me the secret link to his analytics software, which almost certainly means he is spying on my searches.

By: Theo

Theo — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:51:54 +0000

“Who do you think LumbLiq would come after when/if they eventually figured it out? The person with the big pockets (or bigger pockets than the seller).”

I doubt that…LumLiq had to agree to the TOS to even use EscrowDNS in the first place which obviously wrote the TOS to have indemnifications in place from both sides…

By: Kelly

Kelly — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 04:40:56 +0000

This thread is like singing cum bye ya at some reality tv tryout. I can screw you over better than you can screw me. And it’s all part of the game. If you don’t like it, you suck.

Let’s get real.

Those against Escrow – are you the people who watch the blind person get shorted on returned change at the store, and say: it’s not my business to call it out. The blind person should be able to distinguish the currency?, or stay at home.

This is America, and it’s litigious. Everyone involved gets sued; why – so the litigant can get some free money. Who cares where it comes from. Who do you think LumbLiq would come after when/if they eventually figured it out? The person with the big pockets (or bigger pockets than the seller).

This whole “industry” is still in wild west mode. Shill bidders, registrars/markets/auctions/promoters(“conference organizers”) who self deal, TM jockies, WIPO leeches…

Register a domain name and do something with it. Stop flipping crap. If you don’t have the talent, find another “industry” to manipulate. If you act fast, you can be the godfather of the next bubble.

By: Theo

Theo — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:13:58 +0000

Bottom line is everyone in this industry probably knows of or has received the hilarious low ball automated email offers from Justin Godfrey. To trust that guy to handle your DNS after this story would just be foolish. They are obviously not a professional company. If he cared about Lumber Liquidators, he should have kept this whole thing quiet to respect their name instead of making them look foolish. All he wanted was free press and more business. I know a lot of people who will never even consider using their service. On top of that, if Godfrey is such a hero, he should return every dime that his company earned from that fradulent transaction back to Lumber Liquidators. Maybe that would make for better PR than shameless self promotion that backfires. Andrew, I like your blog but am not sure why you are fighting so hard to defend his reputation. It is probably better for DNW to have an active thread where the readers make the call without having to argue with the editor.

By: Stephen Douglas

Stephen Douglas — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 08:18:06 +0000

Dub – A,

You know my history of late night posting… I forgive anyone who posts at 3am after having a few… but you, I’ve never seen you fall down, like I have seen a few others I won’t name here….lol

I’m on the fence about your position still, but leaning towards the “I HATE BUSINESS INSTITUTIONS WHO THINK THEY ARE LEGAL INVESTIGATORS”. Unless you are caught with stolen credit cards, preaching on a college campus with underage girls and you have a predator “tag”, nobody should take it upon themselves to make a CRIMINAL judgement about their clients.

I could be wrong… but it just seems like Big Brother because every corporation wants to be on good terms with the big law agencies… I’ve seen it///