First Ever Criminal Arrest For Domain Name Theft 294
Domain Name News writes "Until recently, there hasn't been a case of a domain theft where the thief was caught and arrested. However, on July 30th, Daniel Goncalves was arrested at his home in Union, New Jersey and charged in a landmark case, the first criminal arrest for domain name theft in the United States. 'Cases of domain name theft have not typically involved a criminal prosecution because of the complexities, financial restraints and sheer time and energy involved. If a domain name is stolen, the victim of the crime in most cases would need experience with the technical and legal intricacies associated with the domain name system. To move the case forward, they would also need a law enforcement professional who understands the case or is willing to take the time to learn. For example, the Angels told us that in their case they called their local law enforcement in Florida who sent a uniformed officer in a squad car to their home. The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?"'"
Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Met One of The OG Domain Thiefs (Score:4, Funny)
Wow, what an amazing but totally unverifiable story!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Back in 1995, I was working as a salesman at Circuit City and sold a VCR to Steve Cohen, the guy who stole sex.com. He was bragging to me about how he'd been offered a million bucks for it but wasn't going to sell. Then he ended up returning the VCR. What a tool.
Aren't you a little old to be believing in the porn fairy?
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Racist, my ass. I've never seen or heard the name Goncalves used anywhere except in reference to this one guy. Surely the name isn't unique - it came from somewhere. GP posted, apparently wondering where it DID come from. Your post satisfied my curiosity about the origin of the name. Thank you for that.
Beyond the origin of a name, there ARE TIMES when it helps to know an ethnic background. People all the time make reference to the fact that this an Ameri-centric board. Knowing ethnic background can t
Re: (Score:2)
I never understood the relevance of the cedilha. Doesn't it basically make the "s" sound? Seems kinda redundant to me. There might be a nuance that I am not picking up on, but I live in a Brazilian/Portuguese neighborhood and I've yet to get a good explanation.
Re:What is the ethnic background of Daniel Goncalv (Score:4, Funny)
Asking a question about the ethnicity of a name does not automatically make one a racist.
I know. Calm down people. Go have some beers and make up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not racist, it's just -completely- off topic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
+5 Insightful? What the hell?
Raising questions of ethnicity that would be irrelevant to anything but a racist sentiment is, in fact, racist. Take your rules-lawyer morality and shove it up your ass.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:5, Funny)
The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?".'"
Why can't they be smart and well-versed in all things, like IT Professionals?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Because people who dedicate themselves to the service of others, the improvement of their community, and betterment of society are stupid fascist pigs, and should be treated as such.
No, those are the good cops and deserve to be treated with as much respect as they treat the public with. However, not all cops are good ones. It would be pretty naive to think that there aren't at least a small percentage of stupid fascists who are also cops. It would also be naive to think ALL cops fit into this category. Right common sense?
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, one not being the other doesn't limit the other from being one.
It may not be a requirement to be a fascist pig to be a police officer but often fascist pigs become police officers and they are the ones getting the media attention forming out opinions.
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If the criminal knows, or suspects that your armed they know to shoot you inorder to guaruntee their own safety.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most criminals are scared of being shot so they will move on to something else or attempt the break in when you are not home.
About the only way they will shoot you first knowing you have a gun is if you are specifically targeted before hand. In that case, I'm not sure how many people will be in a different situation with or without a gun.
Seriously, think about it. How many cops who wear their guns on their side in plain view are mugged each year? It isn't the hat the protects them more then anyone else. The
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, no. They know to try next door where there's a chance that the owner is not armed.
To test, put this sign on your lawn: "No guns in the house" Get back to us.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If the criminal knows, or suspects that you're armed they know they'd be better off going after a different target.
Re: (Score:2)
Urban legend.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If someone is breaking into my home at 2am, they better hope they can run faster than buckshot. The call is for the cops or coroner to come clean up the mess.
And then the cop will arrest you for manslaughter. You do realize that self defense requires the application of only that amount of force necessary?
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And you clearly don't realize that the laws of a particular jurisdiction may very well be different from the applicable laws where you live.
Well yes, if he lives in the jungles of Bolivia I guess he could get away with shooting a trespasser.
Here's an interesting discussion on self defense justification if you are interested: http://law.jrank.org/pages/1470/Justification-Self-Defense-Necessary-force.html [jrank.org]
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:5, Interesting)
Well yes, if he lives in the jungles of Bolivia I guess he could get away with shooting a trespasser.
Or he could live in Texas. See Make My Day Law or Castle Doctrine. [wikipedia.org] Of note is it gives you the right to defend your property against intrusion which may lead to violent attack.
I've often wondered does this mean that if someone sneaks into your back yard at 2 in the morning and drown in your pool, are you responsible? But if you shoot them as they come onto your property then are you within your rights?
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:4, Informative)
If someone is breaking into my home at 2am, they better hope they can run faster than buckshot. The call is for the cops or coroner to come clean up the mess.
And then the cop will arrest you for manslaughter. You do realize that self defense requires the application of only that amount of force necessary?
I live in Texas. If I fear for my life or am afraid for my property, pretty much I can use whatever force is necessary to make the bad man go away. [dallasnews.com]
(Yes, some terrible abuses of castle laws have happened. Doesn't mean they don't exist)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
and enforce the fucked up laws we have in the United States is a stupid, fascist pig
Like, you know, the abolition on murder, rape, theft, a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If (haha) homosexuality was illegal and the duty of police was to arrest and imprison those 'mos, would they still just be doing their job? Or would they be signing up to do something wrong?
If I get paid to spam people, am I just doing my job when I spam your email? What if I get paid to write anti-Semitic propaganda? Would you say a certain type of person takes those jobs?
There is a moral imperative not to accept a job the duties of which are corrupt. That's pretty easy to understand.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now the next time you see a police officer, whether it is because you got pulled over for speeding or just that they happen to be in a store at the same time you are, tell them THANK YOU for doing the job they do.
Should I thank the homophobe pig for busting queers in the park while letting the straight people go (because straight people having sex in the park is romantic)?
Should I thank him for arresting people that buy too much cold medicine because we make the assumption that they'll make meth with it?
Sh
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:4, Funny)
National Association for the Ascendancy of Crappy People
Guy 2:
No, cops are NOT good people. Cops are immoral scumbags, and they shouldn't be thanked.
WTF? In a rare departure from form, both sides of the discussion are morons. I don't know who to root for!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As perplexing as it is for me to disagree with someone who links to Jeff Cooper, even if it is Wikipedia, the idea that cops need to be better armed for safety reasons is far overblown.
In the US being a cop is safer than being a fisherman. And the relatively few cops who are hurt or killed on the job get it from traffic accidents, not suspects shooting them or beating them or the like. So if you really want to help keep cops safe you should argue to abolish high speed chases. But since traffic accidents don
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:4, Insightful)
Basically I think we should pay our police better and demand they follow the letter of the law they are hired to enforce. But arguing that their job is hard so we should let them act illegally just unacceptable.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem ends up in extreme cases, like the one in BC, Canada with the Polish guy that couldn't speak English. He was tazed *8 times* until he has a seizure and died.
There are a lot of cops that are using things like tazers at times when they wouldn't use a gun. Got a perp that is cooperating, but yelling at you? I've got the solution! Threaten to taze him if he doesn't shut up! Can you tell me that at anytime in history a cop would have pulled a gun on someone that was yelling and arguing with them, but
Re: (Score:2)
The goal is to make it impossible for the police to ever do their jobs... It's all about the fact that they hate the cops.
Citations needed. I'm a member of the ACLU, I didn't get the memo that we hate cops. I was under the impression that we appreciated law enforcement and laws, but that both need careful pruning to keep them from getting overgrown. But hey, you sound like you know better than I do, it probably ISN'T that you and I disagree over the best way to do so, it's that we hate them all. So much simpler than trying to figure out what's reasonable for law enforcement to do and what is overly intrusive.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Next time you see your local Garbage Collector, be sure to tell them THANK YOU for doing the job they do.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Robert Peel would disagree:
Re: (Score:2)
use a taser on people without knowing if they have a heart condition
Because shooting them is so much better than tazing them??
Or how about requiring the officer to say 'excuse me sir, would you mind singing this form stating you do not have a heart condition, understand the risks of electric shock, and agree to hold the police force not responsible for any possible injury before i tazer you? Thank you for your cooperation.'.
Re: (Score:2)
Because shooting them is so much better than tazing them??
You're assuming that, when faced with a difficult situation, a police officer's two options are to 1) shoot the person or 2) taze the person. Many police officers are increasingly taking the view that tazing is justified when the person is disagreeing or arguing with the officer. Neither shooting nor tazing is justified at that point, police need to realize that dialogue is still an option.
What a stupid shit storm (Score:2)
Seriously, you tell the average person that your domain name was stolen and they'll look at you like your speaking Martian.
Big Fucking Deal, someone implied that a Police Officer may have as much of a grasp of how the internet works as the average person.
When the Police send a uniformed Police Officer to your location after telling the police that your domain was stolen I would imagine that one question that would be asked would be "What is a domain?". This is not a jab at cops for being dumb, because they
Re: (Score:2)
>
When the Police send a uniformed Police Officer to your location after telling the police that your domain was stolen I would imagine that one question that would be asked would be "What is a domain?". This is not a jab at cops for being dumb, because they tend not to be dumb.
If someone sent a police officer to your location after telling the police that your African Basengi was stolen, I would imagine the officer would ask, "What's a Basengi?"
But I think the OP's jab was at IT professionals and how all-knowing they are. Next time I need to secure a crime scene, pursue a suspect, or arrest someone safely, I'll be sure to ask the nearest geek. ;-)
Funny thing is, IT professionals (at the trenches level) and cops have similar pay. One has to know what a domain name is, the other
Re: (Score:2)
Because they don't always have a good range of free reading materials at Dunkin' Donuts?
Re:Oh, Those Dumb Police Officers! (Score:5, Funny)
I don't think it was intended to be calling police officers dumb. Rather, I think the whole idea is that of law enforcement having to deal with obscure technical things that are totally outside of their expertise. Which is why this story is so interesting. The line is starting to blur between cyberspace and meatspace.
So long as the cop never uses the term "meatspace" he'll be a better man than both of us.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, this is little more then identity theft and espionage.
Some grunt officer will have to take a report and do some preliminary investigation before it goes to a DA's office.
nice stereotype. (Score:5, Funny)
The first thing you can imagine the officer asked was, "What's a domain?".
Right before the cop knocked your pocket-protector-wearing geek ass out.
What he actually did (Score:5, Informative)
Quoth TFA:
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
According to Slashdot in every piracy article, this is actually "theft", because you are taking away something from its rightful owner, who will not be able to make use of it any more. Thanks for playing.
Re: (Score:2)
When your take a persons domain your are denying them something that is rightfully theirs.
Re: (Score:2)
According to Slashdot in every piracy article, this isn't "theft," because you're not taking anything physical. So I'm confused about the headline.
Did you notice it was based on the headline of TFA? And is the actual verdict laid out by the judge? It's not like slashdot tried him.
You need to work on your straw-men, this one was pitiful.
Come on... (Score:5, Insightful)
I get it! Cops are all dumb, lazy, and technically illiterate!
Seriously, everyone. I know we all resent cops, but to imply that a whole department can't find a single officer who knows what a domain is is ridiculous and insulting. Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.
Re:Come on... (Score:5, Interesting)
You know, it didn't sound like they were trying to imply the cop was dumb. But that the legal system itself isn't able to redirect these kinds of reported crimes to the proper people within. Such as this, where for a domain name theft, they sent a officer, to the door of a house. Obviously that would be his first question, because he was the incorrect layer of law enforcement to even have responded to such a report, not because he was dumb. Now on the flip side, they probably shouldn't have been calling local police over it in the first place, but instead probably (and this is my guess, I may very well be incorrect myself) the FBI. But that's more the point, depending on the "crime" one may have to contact any of a number of different places and it's not all that clear, I think even to law enforcement professionals, let alone those -not- in law enforcement, on who to contact for what.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ICANN will only respond to trademark disputes.
Re: (Score:2)
GoDaddy told them they should have protected themselves better. FWIW, he hacked into the owner's AOL email account in order to get access to their GoDaddy account.
Re: (Score:3)
Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.
Yes, we should all just roll over and pretend to be happy when criminal charges are brought against breaches of civil law. It's the new game in the US, has been for the past decade or so. I'm happy that the rate of violent crime in the US is so low that law enforcement has time to tase 70 year olds because their sons were speeding, tase and pepper spray epileptics having seizures, and arrest people for
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
If what I've read is true, he commited several crimes... breaking into the AOL account (computer trespass) to gain access to the godaddy account (computer trespass, fraud, wire fraud, ...), creating false transactions to cloud the picture and give the false impression that the domain was bought (fraud, banking fraud, CC fraud, ...) -- not sure what was involved there, and then sold the stolen property on ebay for a huge profit. This is indeed a matter for criminal court.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Its easy to make these jokes when they have been known to actively turn down applicants with high IQs.
Just being smart is not enough. Do you think they would/should accept Stephen Hawking for a street cop if he applied?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I get it! Cops are all dumb, lazy, and technically illiterate!
They won't hire you if you're too smart.
No I'm not trolling I'm serious:
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_56314.html [ananova.com]
http://northernmuckraker.blogspot.com/2008/08/too-smart-to-be-cop.html [blogspot.com]
http://irradiatedcat.blogspot.com/2008/06/too-smart-to-be-cop.html [blogspot.com]
http://www.thepostroad.com/news/2000/20000912.new.london.pd.robert.jordan.html [thepostroad.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I get it! Cops are all dumb, lazy, and technically illiterate!
Seriously, everyone. I know we all resent cops, but to imply that a whole department can't find a single officer who knows what a domain is is ridiculous and insulting. Let's try to keep our government/authority-hate at least sort of grounded in reality.
I find it very interesting that your defense of the intelligence of the police is to insist that there surely must have been an officer somewhere in the department who knew what a 'domain' is.
Rath
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah closure. thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
Not even close...
http://www.trinityairsoft.com/p-356-custom-urban-assault-gunship-p90x-tr-aeg-airsoft-gun.aspx [trinityairsoft.com]
one domain, if you might remember. (Score:2)
sex.com
DNN? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the same after stumbling onto it in 2007. Now it seems surprising that that there is surprise, especially after the mainstream coverage of ireport.com, toys.com and property.com sales.
So if you're interested, check out http://www.dnjournal.com/ [dnjournal.com] and look at the "Domain Sales" and "YTD Sales Charts".
http://www.dnforum.com/ [dnforum.com] is the largest forum for domaining.
http://www.domainnamewire.com/ [domainnamewire.com] is an insightful news source.
http://www.namebio.com/ [namebio.com] is fun to peruse for past sales.
Auctions for drops and end-
Headline should read... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Headline should read... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, I was thinking that too. There really aren't any good guys in this case.
I know it would open up a huge can of worms, but I've often thought that domain name ownership ought to be like land owenership under the Homestead Act. That is, if you're the first person to apply for a domain, you get it for free, but you have to "improve" it, i.e., do something with it other than just sitting on it and hoping someone will pay you a bunch of money, in a certain amount of time or you don't get to keep it. Impractical, I know, but the whole idea of domain name squatting is just irritating as hell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, except that the cybersquatter is apparently a multi-millionaire professional athlete. So, I expect very little sympathy for him.
Re: (Score:2)
GPP never said that everyone who gets a domain name stolen is sleazy. He did say that these particular guys who got their domain name stolen are sleazy, and as far as it's possible to tell from the TFA, he's right.
Re: (Score:2)
No, he's saying the speculators that he stole the domain from (and unlike, say, copyright infringement, someone was deprived of their use of the intellectual property, therefore, it was theft,) are the victims, but that they're sleazy for being speculators.
RTFPA - the _victim_ is basically a cybersquatter (Score:2)
The parent article wasn't saying that the AOL-hacking Paypal-record-falsifying thief was a poor victim. It was saying that the domain name speculator who the thief ripped off was in the scummy cybersquatting business himself.
Domain names are supposed to let people who have actual interesting content make it findable and memorable by people who want to use those sites. Most of the "domainer" industry isn't taking names that are already in use (except by buying them right when they expire, taking advantag
Obligatory grammar Nazism (Score:3, Informative)
Several references to "Angel's" in TFA should be "Angels'," meaning the possessive form of the plural proper noun Angels.
So much for my positive karma... [sigh]
Re: (Score:2)
A slightly different way to resolve this (Score:3, Interesting)
Mind you, I heard the story from the person who had the domain name stolen and then returned. The story may have been embellished for effect. But it's still darn good.
Someone I know owns a highly profitable and highly desirable domain name for shall we say, marital aids. He got smart and registered it in the early days and it's very much a thriving site. One day, someone stole it along with about a dozen other highly profitable domains.
This gentleman contacted some of the other victims and they were willing to help out with catching who did this and with getting their domains back.
The thieves were employees of Network Solutions and had planned on skipping the country very soon after the incidents. However, the victims pooled their money and hired a 'bounty hunter' to track down and find the thieves. He did, and for a little extra money the domains were returned without question.
The person who told me the story has been silent on what happened to the thieves. He's leaving that to the imagination but I have a feeling they're at least quite sorry that they tried this stunt.
I think that was much more satisfying than going through the court systems, etc. Not that I endorse taking the law into your own hands but when the courts aren't set up to deal with this type of crime sometimes you have to deal with it through side channels.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Poor passwords, poor password procedures... (Score:3, Interesting)
And this is why businesses shouldn't email out customer passwords in emails.
I get angry every time I get an email sayign "thanks for joining, your password is : xtyzseh85". REALLY? Like I just didn't enter that on your site. Also it suggests that the password is stored in clear text in their database, a big worry.
What if you forget your password, you might ask? Well then you email out a temporary password, and set a flag in your database that the person is required to change their password when they log in. This vastly reduces the window of opportunity a thief would have (technically they could follow the "forgotten email?" path on the website, and intercept the emailed temporary password. Maybe the solution is temporary passwords sent by text to account holder phone, or one of those "what is your favourite colour?" questions before the password email is sent).
Second issue - people using poor passwords. These people clearly had the keys to their $100k+ accounts available behind a paper screen door. Should we blame Yahoo! for this?
Note that the crime is still entirely down to the criminal who did it, and not the people for having poor passwords, nor the registrar who allowed the domain transfer in good faith (although there must be questions asked about their notification procedures, the owners should have got an email about the transfer, and thus should have been able to get this sorted out BEFORE the domain auction was finished).
Re: (Score:2)
No, one time use password reset link.
1) They only send you a link.
2) You click on link, reset password to new value.
3) Link no longer works after password reset.
If link is not used to reset password withing an hour, it no longer works.
No need to send password, ever.
No need to store password in clear, ever.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And what do you think the RIAA would do at the first whiff of this being legal again?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Having a policy like loser pays legal bills of both sides would go a long way to making the court system fair. Right now its often richest guy wins because he can outlast the poor guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Having a policy like loser pays legal bills of both sides would go a long way to making the court system fair. Right now its often richest guy wins because he can outlast the poor guy.
You still have the system in place to do that, you know. The judge could make a ruling in equity (I think that's the right term) that the loser should pay the winner's reasonable costs. Indeed, this is usually the case in UK courts and as I understand it there's enough similarity between legal systems for that to be potentially carriable-over. I've no idea why US courts don't seem to like to do it.
Sorry brief rant -- 'loser pays' is a terrible ide (Score:2)
Having a policy like loser pays legal bills of both sides would go a long way to making the court system fair. Right now its often richest guy wins because he can outlast the poor guy.
The richest would still win because they could still outlast the poor guy because they would still be paying out the arse for the best lawyers around while the poor guy couldn't afford to. The whole point of "loser pays" is that you only get paid if you win, and thus only makes the situation you're talking about worse. Becau
Re:Sorry brief rant -- 'loser pays' is a terrible (Score:3, Informative)
"Loser pays" solves nothing. It was an idea created by those who benefit from the current system and wanted to make it even more lopsided, sold as a reform to help make the courts "fair." It's anything but.
I disagree
If I was poor and had to pay legal bills to a lawyer upfront, I'd probably not even try even if I knew I was right as either I couldn't afford a good lawyer or maybe if I was lucky an inexperienced one.
If I knew I was right and the loser pays, I'd get a good laywer and the playing field is now even.
Where's the FBI? (Score:2, Interesting)
Isn't this something that would have FBI jurisdiction, if anything - unless the "crime" requires the help of the Interpol/Europol...
Questions:
- How is this a theft? (I'm sure that Cisco didn't accuse Apple of "theft" for the iPhone name...)
- How is this relevant in the XXI century? Surely it would take another couple of centuries before judges and juries would know anything about digital technologies... (no
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for one thing, Apple didn't deprive Cisco of the use of the iPhone name.
This guy did deprive the legitimate owners of the use of their domain names.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, that was a trademark case. And Apple sued Cisco (aka Linksys) who did not have a product on the market using the iPhone trademark.
grrrr (Score:4, Interesting)
we had a domain stolen a few years ago at a board i mod. it was active and we lost all traffic instantly. like tfa it was also a p2p domain and also an email diversion. to get back up the admins registered "p2p-zone.com" and felt lucky to get it, but it wasn't the same. i was so po'd i wanted to throttle the arrogant nyc prick who did the snatch. instead i handed it off to the cops and eventually got it back through negotiation, but it took many months. it was our identity for years and we felt terrible when it was taken from us. what a pita. unfortunately because of the time that passed and a new name we were forced to adopt, we have never formally reincorporated it. we resolve to it but it really isn't "us" anymore as far as the public's concerned.
- js.
hmmm (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If this were 1940s Germany, the same people that are cops now would be concentration camp guards.
Indeed. They are "only enforcing the laws" and "Don't like the laws? Cheang them... Blaw, blaw, blaw". No moral compass at all, they might as well be replaced with robots.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, you should. So when this happens to you, we'll apply the same logic... "you're a nobody. why should we care?"