Sex.com Ruling

from the give-it-back dept

We've always been careful to make sure that we've kept you updated on the continuing saga concerning sex.com, the apparently stolen domain name. So, the latest news is that a judge has ordered the domain returned to its original owner. The interesting part about the ruling is that previously the judge had ruled that a domain cannot be property. Apparently, while not property, it can still be worth something. I'm not quite sure how that works. Chances are the current owner of sex.com will appeal, and we'll be able to continue following this story that we started following in early 1999. By the time they finish maybe ICANN will have finally gotten around to approving ".sex" and it won't matter any more.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Gary Boone, 28 Nov 2000 @ 12:18pm

    pyrrhic victory?

    It's about time this obvious theft was resolved. Perhaps someone could explain the issue of the "tangibility" of the property. Aren't there many kinds of intangible, but valuable property, such as copyrights, IP, and even reputation (ie slander/libel)? Is the issue even relevant? Isn't enough that the plaintiff suffered financial losses due to the fraudulent actions of the defendant?

    Due to the obvious shadiness of the defendant, the judge ordered that the defendant pony up $25 million to the court to insure that a settlement could be made. But won't the defendant just declare bankruptcy and walk away?

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.