Question for Nominet

[sneezycheese]

Erm, what is there to understand? We make a mistake and so we correct it.

...Jay - Can you point out in the contract where it allows you to take a domain off someone if you make a "mistake"???

 

[Jay Daley]

...Jay - Can you point out in the contract where it allows you to take a domain off someone if you make a "mistake"???

No, I'm not a lawyer.

 

[sneezycheese]

An Admission...

No, I'm not a lawyer.

...So Jay - You're not a Lawyer, BUT also you're not a Layman (Nominet DIRECTOR) - The contract is 'SUPPOSED' to be in 'PLAIN ENGLISH', yet you 'ADMIT' that you 'CANNOT DECIPHER' the contract on this point because you're not a Lawyer!!! :shock:

Anyone see anything WRONG here???

 

[rob]

Anyone see anything WRONG here???

just THE capslock TO make SURE points are ENFORCED!!!11eleven

*ducks*

 

[Hazel Pegg]

...So Jay - You're not a Lawyer, BUT also you're not a Layman (Nominet DIRECTOR)

Jay Daley is NOT one of the Nominet Board of Directors. He is not a Company Director of Nominet. He may have some kind of title like Director of IT but that does not make him one of the Board of Directors of the company.

Hazel

CAPSLOCK intentional to stress the point and not 'cos I'm in the habit of shouting for the sheer joy of it

 

[sneezycheese]

Jay Daley is NOT one of the Nominet Board of Directors. He is not a Company Director of Nominet. He may have some kind of title like Director of IT but that does not make him one of the Board of Directors of the company.

...Did I say he was? - Nope.

Getting to the point though - In his position of Nominet Director of IT - he should either know the answer or could easily get hold of the answer - the answer given was in effect to say that it needs a Lawyer to understand the contract!!! - So that's all alright then?!

Regards,

Sneezy.

PS: May I just add that there's people on this thread that have lost domains as a result of Nominet's actions on this point - I think they deserve to know 'if' there has been any breach of contract by Nominet or not! - If not, where does it say in the contract this action can be taken?? - Nice 'simple' question!

 

[Beasty]

Jay Daley is NOT one of the Nominet Board of Directors. He is not a Company Director of Nominet. He may have some kind of title like Director of IT but that does not make him one of the Board of Directors of the company.

Hazel

CAPSLOCK intentional to stress the point and not 'cos I'm in the habit of shouting for the sheer joy of it

If someone is not a "de jure" director of a company does not mean that they can not be a "de facto" director. Both are "directors" for the purposes of large parts of company law.

If someone is held out as a "Director" in their job title, it might be a factor to encourage a court to hold that they were a de facto director and so subject to the responsibilities of a "director". I am not commenting on the specific case - merely pointing out that not being on the Board is not the end of the question.

 

[Jay Daley]

...So Jay - You're not a Lawyer, BUT also you're not a Layman (Nominet DIRECTOR) - The contract is 'SUPPOSED' to be in 'PLAIN ENGLISH', yet you 'ADMIT' that you 'CANNOT DECIPHER' the contract on this point because you're not a Lawyer!!! :shock:

Anyone see anything WRONG here???

Despite your usual aggressive and rude manner (which does you no favours), I agree that this is not as clear as it could be in the contract. This is one for me to take away and see if it can be made much clearer in the next version.

If you wish to challenge whether or not it is covered by our contract then you will definitely need a lawyer for that.

 

[domaingenius]

Withdrawn for now and we shall see how things proceed !

DG

 

[grandin]

fit

Yes Paullas, not fit for its purpose.....the right to derive the benefit of its undefined use.

Nominet sell a right of use that is undefined in contract but the 'right of use' can be abusive under the DRS.

I am still waiting for Nominet to confirm which condition within the contract was broken that then gave them a right to cancel my contract?

Lee

 

[sneezycheese]

Despite your usual aggressive and rude manner (which does you no favours), I agree that this is not as clear as it could be in the contract. This is one for me to take away and see if it can be made much clearer in the next version.

If you wish to challenge whether or not it is covered by our contract then you will definitely need a lawyer for that.

...Lets keep it simple:

1. I think it's more rude what you've done to some of these guys here - people on this thread have lost domains and money because of 'your' mistakes - it seems Nominet doesn't compensate for their cock up - Very Nice! - NOT

2. The contract may not be clear, but we'd like to see where in the contract it says such actions can be taken - NO LAWYER REQUIRED - Just quote the relevant bit and let us work it out!!!

3. It sounds to me that because the very defensive way you're behaving, that it's NOT included in the contract - so hence we get the quote about the "next version" - how about telling us about the current version, as this is the one that is relevant NOW!!! - Trying to 'fudge' things are we??? :twisted:

It's not personal Jay, I'm a straight talking kinda guy, who just wants straight and honest answers backed with proof (and no bullshit)! - Is this too much to ask? :???:

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[grandin]

Guilty until proven human

My opinion is this....IF Nominet were confident about the way they do business they would have instigated court action against one or many of acorn users....as its goes they haven't....surely a clear sign off guilt in some way or another?

Lee

 

[Jay Daley]

...Lets keep it simple:

1. I think it's more rude what you've done to some of these guys here - people on this thread have lost domains and money because of 'your' mistakes - it seems Nominet doesn't compensate for their cock up - Very Nice! - NOT

2. The contract may not be clear, but we'd like to see where in the contract it says such actions can be taken - NO LAWYER REQUIRED - Just quote the relevant bit and let us work it out!!!

3. It sounds to me that because the very defensive way you're behaving, that it's NOT included in the contract - so hence we get the quote about the "next version" - how about telling us about the current version, as this is the one that is relevant NOW!!! - Trying to 'fudge' things are we??? :twisted:

It's not personal Jay, I'm a straight talking kinda guy, who just wants straight and honest answers backed with proof (and no bullshit)! - Is this too much to ask? :???:

Let me keep this simple

1. I've already said that as a non-lawyer I cannot tell you which part of the contract covers this (though I can guess) and so I will take that back to be looked at for the next version.

2. I'm not being defensive, in fact I've already said 1. above twice. Being defensive would be very different.

3. I'm not fudging things either. Do you want me to make up an answer?

4. You are being rude by claiming 2 and 3 even when I have said 1 twice.

I have a strong feeling it doesn't matter what I say, you are still going to say the same things in the same way.

If you really want me to believe that you are just a straight talking guy then you can drop the insults and listen to what I say. I'm more than happy to talk.

 

[Jay Daley]

.1. I think it's more rude what you've done to some of these guys here - people on this thread have lost domains and money because of 'your' mistakes - it seems Nominet doesn't compensate for their cock up - Very Nice! - NOT

I have checked the policy before answering this to be sure. We do compensate people when we have to take a name back after we have cancelled error. What we compensate for is provable lost expenditure. This is standard practice for many companies.

 

[Jay Daley]

My opinion is this....IF Nominet were confident about the way they do business they would have instigated court action against one or many of acorn users....as its goes they haven't....surely a clear sign off guilt in some way or another?

That is complete and utter rubbish. We have decided on several occasions not to take legal action against people on this board, or to ask admin to take posts down because we are a genuine open organisation that engages with our stakeholders.

To be blunt, that means we take a lot more crap than many others would put up with. But to us maintaining the dialogue, understanding the varied points of view and using those to improve is very important.

I bet if we did take legal action against some of the defamatory things people say about us then you would be the first to cry blue murder.

 

[sneezycheese]

I have checked the policy before answering this to be sure. We do compensate people when we have to take a name back after we have cancelled error. What we compensate for is provable lost expenditure. This is standard practice for many companies.

...Maybe you should have a word with Nigel then, as he seems to have a very different story:

This happened to us quite a while back. Two very nice domains caught by a dropcatching service and registered in our name. But then contacted by Nominet...very sorry...registered owner had paid for the domains and we've made a big mistake...should never have been released. I remember arguing our corner (and even speaking to the Chief Exec) and finally asking for some compensation. But we got nothing at all. A sham.

Do you know something - just looked up the two domains and both dropped two years later - one snapped up by a well known catcher. Hopefully they've not made a mistake this time...but who can tell. My view is that if a large corporation makes a big mistake then they should pay some monetary compensation. We didn't even get the fee we paid to the dropcatching service!!

I look forward to the outcome!

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[domaingenius]

What a lot of energy is wasted in pointless arguments .All I would ask is that Nominet say "ok we accept that DRS is not as good as it could be and we welcome suggestions as to how to improve it" ,rather than a "consultation" that gives you option of 2 answers ,neither of which one would agree with. That would be and open and honest Nominet. As it is I see the new Chairman taking Nominet as far away as possible from its members and best customers in order to float it and make as much money as possible for as few as possible, including himself of course.

DG

 

[Hazel Pegg]

As it is I see the new Chairman taking Nominet as far away as possible from its members and best customers in order to float it and make as much money as possible for as few as possible, including himself of course.

He'll either have to change a company law or two or get the membership to agree to such a plan. Neither of which seem likely IMO.

Hazel

 

[grandin]

That is complete and utter rubbish.

Ok Jay, your comment 'That is complete and utter rubbish.' I respect.

I hope you respect my comment...The DRS 'is complete and utter rubbish.'

Lee

 

[Beasty]

I have checked the policy before answering this to be sure. We do compensate people when we have to take a name back after we have cancelled error. What we compensate for is provable lost expenditure. This is standard practice for many companies.

There is no specific provision for cancelling a subsequent registration (because of an earlier mistake) in the T&Cs - at least there was not in the version used in 2001. I confess I have not looked at every version of the T&Cs - and it is the version that applied when the registration took place that is relevant.

Likewise if you deny someone of an asset without good cause, compensation is not limited to their out of pocket expenses - it includes the value of the lost asset. This applies to a lost contractual right, a chose in action, which is the very least a .uk domain registration is. Of course you can try to limit it in the contract, but that may or may not be effective.

If anyone thinks they have had a domain cancelled within the last 6 years due to an error by Nominet in relation to a previous registrant, please PM me if you want me to look into obtaining full and proper compensation for you.