After Microsoft Returns All Of No-IP's Seized Domains And Settles Lawsuit, No-IP Is Still Angry

from the reasonably-so dept

Fri, Jul 11th 2014 9:58am — Mike Masnick

We recently wrote about Microsoft going to court and convincing a judge to (with no adversarial hearing) allow it to seize a bunch of domain names from No-IP, redirecting all traffic to them through Microsoft's own servers. Those servers quickly encountered problems, meaning that many people who relied on No-IP's dynamic DNS system, found that they couldn't access their sites. Microsoft later blamed this on a "technical error" but it still appeared that the seizure effort was a gross abuse of the legal process. Remember, in the lawsuit that allowed Microsoft to seize the domains, it had claimed that No-IP parent Vitalwerks had been breaking the law.

Either way, it appears that Microsoft has now returned all the domains to No-IP and settled the lawsuit. According to a joint statement by the companies:

Microsoft has reviewed the evidence provided by Vitalwerks and enters into the settlement confident that Vitalwerks was not knowingly involved with the subdomains used to support malware. Those spreading the malware abused Vitalwerks’ services.

Microsoft identified malware that had escaped Vitalwerks’ detection. Upon notification and review of the evidence, Vitalwerks took immediate corrective action allowing Microsoft to identify victims of this malware. The parties have agreed to permanently disable Vitalwerks subdomains used to control the malware.

In the process of redirecting traffic to its servers for malware detection, Microsoft acknowledges that a number of Vitalwerks customers were impacted by service outages as a result of a technical error. Microsoft regrets any inconvenience these customers may have experienced.

No-IP for its part has also put out a more detailed explanation for how all of this happened. It's worth reading. It also takes apart a number of Microsoft's claims, including the company's claim that, prior to returning the domains, it had "fixed" the problems people were having accessing their sites. No-IP reiterates that if Microsoft had just contacted the company first, it would have taken down the abusive customers. Clearly, even though the situation was settled, No-IP is reasonably upset that it happened in the first place:

While we are extremely pleased with the settlement terms, we are outraged by Microsoft’s tactics and that we were not able to completely and immediately restore services to the majority of our valuable customers that had been affected.

At No-IP, we are firm believers that the Internet should be free and open. We will continue to fight for the rights of our users and our business. Moving forward, we have provisioned a solution that will reduce the risk of domain seizures.

Later it notes:

We hope that Microsoft learned a lesson from this debacle and that in the future they will not seize other companies domains and will use appropriate channels to report abuse.

Wouldn't that be nice.

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

Filed Under: domain seizures, dynamic dns, ex parte
Companies: microsoft, no-ip, vitalwerks

31 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Michael, 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:05am

We hope that Microsoft learned a lesson from this debacle and that in the future they will not seize other companies domains and will use appropriate channels to report abuse.

We also hope that Jason Lee Van Dyke will apologize to everyone, quit his job as an attorney, and spend the remainder of his days volunteering for community projects.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:20am

Re:
"We also hope that Jason Lee Van Dyke will apologize to everyone, quit his job as an attorney, and spend the remainder of his days volunteering for community projects."

do you hate community projects so much that you want to purposefully sabotage them?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:25am

Re:
We also hope Chris Dodd befriend Pete Sunde and starts lobbying for the legalization of filesharing.

And also, for a more probable hope, that Superman is cured from his kryptonite weakness.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:32am

"Microsoft regrets any inconvenience these customers may have experienced."

Of course Microsoft isn't going to go so far as to express their regret with monetary compensation for the people damaged and/or inconvenienced. They're just going to go "Sorry we fed the judge a line of bullshit that he bought instead of contacting the company that could have fixed the problem without incident. We didn't mean to screw ya'll over, but hey, we're Microsoft, we do what we want, so tough luck."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josh (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:32am

Judge
Doesn't the judge take any blame for allowing Microsoft to go though with this?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:38am

Re: Judge
Some, but garbage in, garbage out still applies. The judge is unlikely to be computer savvy enough to grasp what exactly No-IP's service would be used for, and Microsoft was saying they were complicit in distributing malware. So naturally the judge made the mistake of trusting Microsoft.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PRMan, 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:41am

Re: Re:
"Superman is cured from his kryptonite weakness"

That's actually happened a few times.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David, 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:45am

Re: Re: Judge
So naturally the judge made the mistake of trusting Microsoft.

The majority of computer users does, equally incomprehensibly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SolkeshNaranek (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:49am

Re: Re: Re: Judge
"Superman is cured from his kryptonite weakness"

"That's actually happened a few times".

In that case can we hope for politicians to turn honest and actually represent the people that elected them?

Maybe we could toss in a wish of imprisonment for the ODNI head and his minions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:50am

Re: Re:
Let's see...on one leg a ball and chain, on the other a GPS device, a rake, a trash bag, a uniform that will help him blend into the background*, and a 30 mile stretch of the most dangerous road in Texas to keep clean, alone. The community will enjoy and appreciate that.

* Helps chances that some driver might do the legal profession a favor, and run him over.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blaine (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 10:51am

I want in on this process
Every single virus I've ever had to deal with, on all my family/friends computers, has been delivered to and enabled by Microsoft Windows....

Where do I go to get the Microsoft.com domain turned over to me so I can fix this problem?

I think I'll put a penguin on it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 11:14am

Re: Re: Re:
See, more probable than my other example or even his hopes!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 11:28am

Re: Re: Re:
At first after reading this I was worried about trauma to the hypthetical driver, but then I changed my mind. I mean, it's not like he'd be running over a collie or something.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 11:31am

Re: Re: Judge
Well, it has the word "No" in its name, so it must be bad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 11 Jul 2014 @ 11:34am

Re: Re: Re: Judge
That is balanced out by IP being their name - which we all know is universally good for everyone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 11 Jul 2014 @ 11:34am

Re: I want in on this process
that's a 'feature'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 12:00pm

Re: Judge
Doesn't the judge take any blame for allowing Microsoft to go though with this?

The Ex Parte TRO in the earlier Techdirt article, was signed by United States District Judge Gloria M. Navarro.

I have no idea whether Microsoft has bothered to tell her that she cut service to about four million sites which were owned by about two million people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
orbitalinsertion (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 12:00pm

Moving forward, we have provisioned a solution that will reduce the risk of domain seizures.

Ah, yes. Inverted responsibility. They will also stop being Black whenever they plan on driving anywhere, and stop being women whenever they dress for hot weather, just to avoid future problems.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 12:16pm

Re: I want in on this process
Sadly, I agree 100%. It was a malware program that only ran on Microsoft computers, which easily could have been updated through Microsoft's own update software to eliminate the malware or stop it from running. Why they went to court to fix an issue that was caused by themselves is a mystery to me.

I really hope all of the customer's of no-ip.com services that were effected start a class action suit against Microsoft. It wasn't as bad as the DoJ calling everyone on mooo.com services a pedophile, but still just as bad an idea to do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John85851 (profile), 11 Jul 2014 @ 12:43pm

Which lawsuit
When you said "Microsoft... settled the lawsuit", I was thinking they already settled with No-IP so No-IP wouldn't sue their pants off for the gross abuse of the law.

Is it safe to assume the No-IP will be suing Microsoft over this issue?

I mean, really, how can any company (no matter now large) just seize the property of another company if they suspect criminal behavior?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 12:52pm

Yet another reason to switch over to decentralized DNS.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Techanon, 11 Jul 2014 @ 1:31pm

Re:
No, that's unrealistic, they will carry a taser and a pepper spray can instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
New Mexico Mark, 11 Jul 2014 @ 4:08pm

Re: Re: Re: Judge
That's because too many users have clicked the "Always trust Microsoft" check box.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2014 @ 7:19pm

there are a lot of other companies/industries that would do well to take notice of this, not that they will!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mcinsand, 12 Jul 2014 @ 3:32am

Re: Judge
Exactly! What if you or I were so negligent, irresponsible, or incompetent in our jobs that we let something like this slip by? That this judge is not even on suspension is more proof of how flawed our legal system has become.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Whatever (profile), 12 Jul 2014 @ 4:56am

Re: Which lawsuit
No, it reads like it's a settlement, end of discussion. Microsoft could very easily run these guys into the ground if the decided to sue, sending the in legal circles until the bleed money and die. Microsoft "admission" that No-IP was not "knowingly involved" is likely all the settlement they will get.

I think that both parties learned something here. Microsoft has found out that they are not above the law, no matter how noble their cause. No-IP has learned that they need to do a better job checking their clients lest the find themselves in some serious trouble again in the future.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2014 @ 7:29am

Re: Re: Which lawsuit
How about you stop sucking up to MS and admit they just wanted to intimidate No-IP in a stupid way instead of being like everyone else and going through proper channels.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2014 @ 8:38am

Re: Re: Which lawsuit
No-IP has learned that they need to do a better job checking their clients lest the find themselves in some serious trouble again in the future.

That is about as sane as saying the phone company should be careful about who they give phone numbers to, to prevent criminals using the phone system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2014 @ 10:57am

No-IP, meet http://www.opennicproject.org/.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reality bites, 12 Jul 2014 @ 3:50pm

Why hasn't the judge been disbarred?
Until the lapdog mindless puppet judges start paying a personal price for their pretend farcical kangaroo courts nothing will ever change.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Avatar28 (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:58am

Re: Re: I want in on this process
It's not that easy. The malware was installed and it's not that easy to just remove it since Windows isn't a sandboxed platform. What MS did was cut off the command and control system of the botnets to kill them. It's basically like how when the military launches an invasion, one of the first things they do is take out the enemy's communication capabilities.
[ link to this | view in thread ]