Directnic drama... why is everyone complicating this?
 

I haven't read every single thread and post about this so maybe I'm missing something. Or I'm plain stupid.

But if it were me that got a complaint, looking into it, saw those thumbs, I would have put a lock on it (not threaten to shut them down) and turned it into the authorities and let them investigate it. Let THEM determine whether there are 2257 docs in existance and whether the thumbs were from a traffic trade from somewhere else or what.

I think he should consider himself lucky that he was contacted at all.

My personal opinion that is based soley on the thumbs that I saw. I keep seeing people talk about how some of the content was "questionable". I personally found it disgusting.

I don't get what the big deal is.

congrats on your own directnic thread!

Congrats, you just joined me and all the other "idiots" who think the same thing :)

I know how dumb. Actually texasdreams can you delete this? I should have just posted my lame opinion in one of the other threads..

I agree with you... why add to the madness

Moniker would've handled it right. Call Chris Leggatt and save yourself this nonsensical bullshite.

What's the "right" way to handle this?
a. do what directnic did?
b. do nothing?
c. forward the complaint to some gov agency?

there's people who would burn the owner of karupspc at the stake because porn PERIOD is disgusting....

But I know you'll be the first to volunteer to get strung up and get doused with lighter fluid for the good of your company.

I will explain the problem..

Directnic is not the police, no matter how "questionable" the content , they dont have the right to ask for id's of models.. nor to take the domain hostage..

They certainly have the right to refuse service to anyone for anything but they dont have the right to make some stay with them because they feel something is questionable..

It would be like a photo place taking your film refusing to print the pictures until you give them 2257 info AND not letting you have the film back..

They should do what any business should do, refuse them service if they dont feel comfortable being their registrar report them to the fbi and to their local police and let a court handle it..

Haha fuck that!! I'd be like Karups who?? :upsidedow

I agree with Smokey on the company policy and procedure end. I haven't read though the hundreds of replies on the issue, but what I have not read who filed the original complaint against the site for the images and what information is necessary to lodge a viable complaint. Has that been stated? Are "compliants" going to be filed for every single site that shows those images? Each and everyone of those images is on an INCREDIBLE amount of sites.

Why was he targetted? A competitor perhaps?

Every one of the thumbs I checked belonged to a gallery of a sponsor that posts here on GFY. Most of those sponsors are processed by CCBill, Visa approved and have been in business for sometime now.

One thing is certain: More businesses will shift their operations to areas without this unnecessary intrusion.

lol

:upsidedow

:thumbsup

I like where your head is at

It's possible that he might have been better off if they contacted the appropriate authorities instead. As it stands now, hey locked him out and shut him down, possibly without finding out he was actually guilty of anything and with no recourse.

I feel like such an idjit today.

For those of you that think the thumbs are questionable, click on each gallery a few times and actually go to them. Every one I've seen has come from a legit sponsor. Who gives a fuck what the thumbs look like? All of this content is legit.

All those discussions are pretty pointless without knowing the whole background.

It certainly wasn't like "Let's look at a random domain registered with us, ohhhh, look at the thumbs, there, that's bad, let's beat down this guy".

The site must have been reported to them and I wonder if it was reported elsewhere. Maybe some government three letter agency has contacted them. They first offered a grace period, then acted quick, shut Slick down, noone in their legal department was available for him, no more public comments from them...maybe it's just my paranoia, but I doubt DN would take that drastic measures without a good reason and for me it looks like there is alot more going on in the background.

I think the whole point is that Directnic CAN turn to drastic measures for ANY reason they want to. They don't owe anyone investigation time or any sort of fairness. If it were my business and complaints were made and attention drawn to my company because of it, that would be plenty for me to say "screw this NOT worth it goodbye too bad so sad".

That would be all well and good if they didnt TAKE his domain.

It does not have to be complicated, but if a site is generally made underage themed with legal models, then it can, and will, get complicated.

:thumbsup
Thats what should have happened, but didnt. they instead took his domain based on no legal authority or wrongdoing. When they should have just reported him to the police and forced him to transfer his domain.

ironic thread

They don't TAKE his domain... the contract for registry is null, and it goe son registrar hold... and then likely to delete status, and ready for re-registry at some later date. It might also sit on hold until the term runs out, depending on circumstances, or they might relent and allow the domain to be moved.

"take" implies theft, and there is no theft here... just contact rules and ToS being applied (some might feel with a very heavy hand).

Could not agree more on that.

If they received a complaint and felt there was a legal issue - that should be reported to the appropriate authority.

Instead, the policy of DirectNic is to protect the public morals and be the decider of what should or should not appear on websites - despite they are only domain registrars operating under ICANN.

There are too many do-gooders floating around this planet assuming rights they do not have despite their TOS - and then telling clients who have removed domains that they are supporting child pornography. How pathetic and amateur.

The issue of Slick is another matter and may require investigation - by an appropriate authority - not by a domain registrar.

And. despite praises to the contrary, I contacted DirectNic today and the service and response was pathetic. This is a company who are unable to state a telephone number for a legal representative, say who the officers of the company are, or say where they may be contacted. Personally, I would not trust DirectNic with a dollar - nevermind any domain names.

There is obviously some defective thought hanging around DirectNic - they need external legal advice.

Whatever happens, it would be appropriate if DirectNic did account for their conduct in court and stand for appropriate liability they assumed upon themselves.

Whoa. Are you saying that every registar or host should now contact our friends in law enforcement every time they think a model ***could*** be under age? That would shake up our industry a bit when entire programs get locked out of their servers.

Webby, want some fun? try to find out who the officers are or the direct phone number to the legal department of, I dunno, GoDaddy or Network Solutions. See exactly how far you get. You will get an email or if you are really lucky, a fax number.

Rochard, please remember that this apparently all started with a third party complaint to Directnic. They didn't randomly select domains and lock them out.

If I was presented with a complaint and had personal doubts, hell yeah. I'm not saying I'd be in business very long :winkwink: I'm just saying what I would do.

I'm also a mother of a 9 year old girl. The thumbs that "I" personally saw, didn't look much older than her. I couldn't sleep at night if I turned the other way. That's just me.

RRRED, are you ok with registrars determining what is legal and not legal? I think that is really the question we should be asking. Whether or not the content was legit or not, the registrar played the role of the police. To some that is ok, to others it is not. But I think the issue really boils down to that simple question.

No I don't think they should have done that. Like I said, I think they should have turned it into the feds immediately and let THEM decide what should be done.... and without a big email warning. Then they wouldn't have had to worry about the dude freaking out and moving his domain.

fax: 480.624.2546

Upon the receipt of a valid civil subpoena, Go Daddy will promptly notify the customer whose information is sought via e-mail or U.S. mail. If the circumstances do not amount to an emergency, Go Daddy will not immediately produce the customer information sought by the subpoena and will provide the customer an opportunity to move to quash the subpoena in court. Go Daddy reserves the right to charge an administration fee to the customer by charging the Payment Method the customer has on file with Go Daddy.

https://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/legal... hdr=&ci=1534

Let the spin begin!!!!