back to article Snapchat domain squatter loses comedy £1m URL sellback attempt

"I thought we [could] change one letter of a big brand and make a business and it [would be] alright," wailed a photographer who tried to blag £1m from Snapchat before Nominet stripped him of his ripoff domain name. The dot-UK domain name registrar published a dispute judgment earlier this month detailing the comedy of errors …

  1. JimboSmith Silver badge

    Words fail me, did none of his family or friends try and point out what was wrong with this 'new business idea'? And if not why not?

    1. Version 1.0 Silver badge

      There are plenty of sites with common names that post completely unrelated contents - do you really think that Boris owns (or should sue) the company running the Tory web site ?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Note the Tori gate in the 2014 picture.

        Plus, it's a dot.com, and "tory" in the UK sense is actually a term of abuse.

        I doubt he would have standing.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      People like that don't accept advice that they have a flaw in their business "plan". They believe they're just so much more clever than everyone else, and that the naysayers are just jealous of their superior intellect.

      Conversations start with "why don't the scientists just do ___...?".

      See also injecting disinfectant. Why didn't doctors think of that? Well, it must be cauz I'm so smarter than them, not cuz it's not a good/practical/safe/sane idea.

      Sorry, not meant to get political, just trying to come up with an explanation.

  2. trolleybus

    He could have a bright future as an advisor in the White House.

    1. monty75

      Someone registered TrumpBleach.com a couple of days ago. Could be the same guy.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I love that Bleach comment - down here in the South most cops are right-wingers so I can now drive around drinking my beer out of an old one gallon bleach bottle (I washed it out well before filling it up, I'm not that stupid)

      2. Rich 11

        TrumpBleach. Kills 99% of all known truths, dead.

      3. Version 1.0 Silver badge

        The guy who registered whitehouse.com originally was making about a million a year when he sold the site, mostly by serving adverts to bad typists.

  3. andy 103
    Joke

    Jog on chancer

    That last quote should just read "I didn't realise the law applied to me"

    Isn't it interesting how these people are apparently capable of setting up and running a business... Yet, when it comes to something that doesn't work out how they wanted, they're completely oblivious?

    It's almost like he's talking out of his arse.

  4. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    There is scum, and there are idiots

    If you "add one letter" to a domain name and honestly believe that you're doing nothing wrong, you truly are a wonder of stupidity.

    On the other hand, if you fail to track your domain renewal dates, you're just run-of-the-mill stupid and you deserve to learn the hard way.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: There is scum, and there are idiots

      I suppose you could maybe, possibly dismiss his choice of domain as a derivative work for the purpose of satire. But in this case he's just a fool.

    2. deadlockvictim

      Re: There is scum, and there are idiots

      I would have taken the domain name catsnap.co.uk (snapcat.co.uk brings me to Y-Combinator), put up pictures of cats and see what happens. There may even be a market for pictures of cats in some surreal universe.

  5. xeroks

    do you feel lucky, punk?

    The tone of that message suggests to me that he maybe received a friendly letter from snapchat's lawyers, possibly outlining in simple terms the implications of them taking him to court. like being asked to pay costs when they inevitably won.

    With some realistic numbers attached, shit would have gotten real, I reckon.

  6. Mr Dogshit

    Hmm

    Looks like snaptwat.co.uk is available, someone should tell him.

  7. Edward Clarke

    As I recall...

    Whitehouse.com used to be a porn site. It's still not affiliated with the US government.

    1. Wilseus

      Re: As I recall...

      Well that's ironic!

  8. Dave 32
    Pint

    Trademarks

    Trademark law is complex and not intuitively obvious. For example, the same name can be use in different fields with no conflict. The prototypical example is Delta Airlines and Delta plumbing fixtures. Another example is Nissan Computers and Nissan Motors, over which a long running legal spat emerged.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Motors_v._Nissan_Computer

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Joke

      Re: Trademarks

      So that explains why whenever I call my plumber to ask why they have not turned up to finish the job they say they are on holiday on some tropical island?!

    2. Patched Out
      Facepalm

      Re: Trademarks

      Not to mention the trademark dispute between Apple Corps, the Beatles' record label, and Apple Computer. As I recall, the dispute was resolved when Apple Computer agreed not to have anything to do with creating, publishing, or distributing music.

      Oh wait ...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

      1. Sgt_Oddball
        Paris Hilton

        Re: Trademarks

        I wonder if things would have been better if they were just on drugs and decided to mellow out?

        Oh...wait.....maybe if they weren't on drugs.. Yeah... That one.

    3. Santa from Exeter

      Re: Trademarks

      Or when Hitler's Tailors took Boss Brewing Company to court for selling Boss Brewing t-shirts

  9. diver_dave

    I seem to remember a BOFH where this was the PHB's idea.

    Unsurprisingly a merry jape followed.

  10. William Old
    Flame

    He was unfortunate not to get away with it... others do!

    It wasn't such a bad idea... there's a bloke(?) called "Skybeans" in a terraced house in a residential area of Swindon who registered him/herself with Nominet as a UK individual some years ago, and is making good money picking up orders from UK customers for cheap eyewear via a Web site at goggles4u.co.uk.

    But he or she is committing criminal offences in breach of UK consumer protection legislation by pretending to be American Eye Vision Inc., an American eyewear company that runs an affiliation programme and sells eyewear through goggles4u.com - he/she just pockets the affiliation payments and, whenever a customer complains about late/missing/shoddy products, points them at the US company's complaints contacts. A trawl of consumer forums reveals many unhappy customers.

    An additional requirement for VAT-registered entities is for the VAT number to be displayed - again, this information is missing, because of course a US-based trader doesn't charge VAT, but a UK customer is liable for VAT and duty if either or both is levied when the ordered eyewear arrives in the UK. It's no surprise that the goggles4u.co.uk site is almost identical to the real one, but carefully states in the "small print" that "Goggles4u Eyeglasses (www.Goggles4u.co.uk) has been acknowledged as American Eye Vision in 2010, registered in the state of California... The company itself has been operating since 2002-2003."

    The important difference is, of course, that Skybeans is in Swindon, England, which - unless there has been a thermonuclear explosion in Wiltshire between this being posted and you reading it - is in England and thus subject to English law, and ought to be prosecuted and the domain closed down, but the registrar (123-Reg Ltd) says it's Nominet's responsibility. Nominet (you can see where this is going, can't you?) won't take any action because "it's not their responsibility" even though the registrant is breaking Nominet rules and... well, you get the idea.

    So one might assume from the Snapchat result that in this case, Nominet's soporific sense of responsibility was awoken by a handsome payment from Snapchat for its assistance. Ordinary British people, even when being routinely hoodwinked by a "Third Millennium Del Boy", don't merit a similar standard of service...

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like