Domainer weekend quickly approaching

You did save the date, right?

The Austin Domainers’ Weekend will take place November 12 and 13th right here in the Live Music Capital of the World.

We’re still finalizing event locations (thanks to Lisa Box of Oversee.net for her help!) but here’s what you have to look forward to:

Friday, November 12

-Dinner at a fun downtown location
-Drinks and entertainment on 6th Street

Saturday, November 13

-Tailgate party or pregame event
-Football game University of Texas vs. Oklahoma State (we still haven’t been able to get a block of tickets, so we might be on our own for this.)

Spouses and significant others are welcome.

More details and a registration form will be available soon. Make your hotel reservations now!

World’s largest domain name registrar supposedly no longer for sale.

The Wall Street Journal, which originally reported that domain name registrar GoDaddy was for sale, is now saying the company is off the market.

The Journal reports that the sales process was cut off last week. A number of private equity companies were in the mix, and the story suggests a sale price of $1.5 billion to $2.0 billion was possible.

So Bob Parsons will continue to control the company. He just made another move that he wouldn’t be able to do (under the company’s name) if he sold out: Go Daddy recently donated $1 million to the George W. Bush presidential library. Go Daddy founder Bob Parsons isn’t shy about leaning to the right.

Although I suppose Parsons could easily make a donation by himself instead of on behalf of the company.

Panelist’s decision doesn’t add up.

A recent National Arbitration Forum decision for MovieInsider.com has me scratching my head. Is it another case of a cut-and-paste panelist? You decide.

The complainant owns TheMovieInsider.com and successfully won MovieInsider.com. The complainant argued (in panelist’s words):

Complainant claims that it has used the THEMOVIEINSIDER.COM mark since July 2, 1999. Complainant registered the themovieinsider.com domain name on September 10, 2000.

Come again? The complainant was using the mark TheMovieInsider.com for over a year before it registered the domain name?

Where it gets more confusing is the question of what the registrant of MovieInsider.com was doing with the domain name.

First, the panelist writes:

Complainant asserts that Respondent’s disputed domain name resolves to an inactive website. The Panel finds that Respondent’s failure to make an active use of the disputed domain name is not a bona fide offering of goods or services…

OK, but the very next paragraph reads:

The disputed domain name resolves to a website that features pay-per-click hyperlinks and advertisements. The Panel finds Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name for the purpose of receiving click-through fees is not a bona fide offering goods or services…

Then again under the “registration and use in bad faith” header, the first paragraph reads:

Complainant alleges that Respondent is not making an active use of the disputed domain name…

And the second paragraph reads:

Since Respondent receives click-through fees from the links displayed on its resolving website, Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users by creating a likelihood of confusion as to the sponsorship or affiliation with Complainant…

I’m confused.

Oh, and MovieInsider.com was registered a couple months before TheMovieInsider.com.

Controversial Australian Senator urges further review of .xxx top level domain name.

Australian Senator and Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Stephen Conroy has written a letter to ICANN denouncing plans to introduce a .xxx top level domain name.

In the letter (pdf), Conroy argues against the introduction of .xxx because “of the lack of identified public benefit”. Conroy says the the board should consult the Governmental Advisory Council (GAC) about the revised .xxx contract with ICM Registry.

Conroy is well known for his support of plans for a sort of internet censorship firewall in Australia. This has created quite a backlash in the internet community, including a Wikipedia page that satirically suggested:

Conroy was extradited to the People’s Republic of China in September 2010 after being found guilty of violating the UN charter of human rights, of which Australia is a signatory.

In China he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Oppression for his continued attempts to thwart imperialist freedom of expression, and for general lunacy.

While in China he fell off a bridge.

Conroy’s Wikipedia profile has since been removed.

NYC socialite struggles to control domain names.

New York real estate developer and socialite Janna Bullock has filed another cybersquatting lawsuit to recover domain names she says are similar to her name. Bullock filed the case against BullockJanna.com and Bullock-Janna.com in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia. Her official web site is JannaBullock.com.

According to the complaint (pdf), Bullock brought a similar action against several domain names in May. The court granted summary judgment and ordered the domains transferred to Bullock. The two domain names at issue in the new complaint were registered shortly after the court ordered the previous domains transferred. Which means this could be a long game of whack-a-mole for Bullock, and she might consider going on the offensive to register similar domain names.

Bullock is a rags-to-riches story, moving from nanny to real estate mogul. But earlier this year the socialist became ensnared in a Russian scandal.

The sites appear to target the scandal, linking to the latest updates and news. The suit alleges that the domains currently at issue are made to look like Bullock’s official web site. Both sites are down at the time of writing, but a cache is available.