(Ed) New domain name for stopsylviabrowne = stopsylvia.com

[RSL's better half]

Well, Folks, apparently I paid for the "hosting" but not the domain name. Notifications were sent to Robert's email, which I have not had access to. I was told a mailing went out as well, but I never got it.

The domain was sold - legally. I still think it was pretty crappy customer service. All they could do for me was give me StopSylviaBrowne.net. The lady told me that StopKaz.com was coming up for renewal in Dec, as well as a few others, so I went ahead and paid for all of it. She was kind enough to give me a whopping 20% discount. More domain names are coming due in Jan, but I will receive the email notifications at my email address.

Please pass the word:

The ORIGINAL StopSylviaBrowne.com is now StopSylviaBrowne.net.
It should be up in 8 - 48 hours.

Edited by chillzero:

Update since this OP. The address is actually now finalised as www.stopsylvia.com.

[thaiboxerken]

Hmm. I wonder who bought the original domain.

[SkeptiChick]

Out of curiosity, is "stop sylvia browne" a trademark of any sort? If it is, you can file a petition to have the original site returned to you.

See http://www.icann.org/en/dndr/udrp/policy.htm for more information. I personally believe that the current owner of the old site may be guilty of "Registration and Use in Bad Faith."

[SimonD]

What to know more?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127491

[thaiboxerken]

The site almost looks skeptical. As skeptical as a true believer will be.

[Madalch]

Originally Posted by SkeptiChick

Out of curiosity, is "stop sylvia browne" a trademark of any sort?

If it's not, you'd better trademark it ASAP, before the "new owner" does.

[Kaylee]

Originally Posted by RSL's better half

Well, Folks, apparently I paid for the "hosting" but not the domain name. Notifications were sent to Robert's email, which I have not had access to. I was told a mailing went out as well, but I never got it.

The domain was sold - legally. I still think it was pretty crappy customer service. All they could do for me was give me StopSylviaBrowne.net. The lady told me that StopKaz.com was coming up for renewal in Dec, as well as a few others, so I went ahead and paid for all of it. She was kind enough to give me a whopping 20% discount. More domain names are coming due in Jan, but I will receive the email notifications at my email address.

Susan, what the woman at GoDaddy has told you doesn't match what is in the whois database which is maintained by ICANN (the corporation ultimately responsible for managing IP addresses and domain name registration) . As I understand it, according to that database, both domain names were paid up through August 2009. (The whois database is only concerned with infomation in regard to domain names, not hosting services.) Based on the whois database, I don't agree that the domain name was sold legally.

Some folks who said they have experience with domain names and etc. appeared to have the same understanding in the other thread.

I understand that ICANN has an inexpensive procedure set up to contest an illegal transfer.

But you obviously have a lot to deal with now, so if you don't want to take this on in addition to everything else, I'm sure that everyone will understand.

[AndyD]

Quote:

The site almost looks skeptical. As skeptical as a true believer will be.

Yep. It has an air of skepticism about it until you read the individual articles on the various forms of paranormal services. These all contain words and phrases linked to one website offering such services. The links are clearly optimised for search engines (page rank). Essentially it looks like a link farm dressed up as a quasi-skeptical website.

Sad that it's happened but at least we have an answer now and can go about re-directing old links where possible. It'd be nice if we could get a bit of pharyngula action happening so as to get an immediate boost in page ranking for the new address

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by Kaylee

But you obviously have a lot to deal with now, so if you don't want to take this on in addition to everything else, I'm sure that everyone will understand.

No doubt, Susan, but if you want forumites to pursue the issue, take 30 seconds to say so and I'll bet knowledgeable folks here will pick up the issue.

[erlando]

Originally Posted by Kaylee

Based on the whois database, I don't agree that the domain name was sold legally.

Some folks who said they have experience with domain names and etc. appeared to have the same understanding in the other thread.

I understand that ICANN has an inexpensive procedure set up to contest an illegal transfer.

But you obviously have a lot to deal with now, so if you don't want to take this on in addition to everything else, I'm sure that everyone will understand.

I have to change my stance regarding this. According to GoDaddys FAQs it may very well have been sold legally. 25 days after expiration it will be put up for auction:

Quote:

In many cases, soon-to-be-expired domains are auctioned. If the current registrant fails to renew the registration within the allotted grace and subsequent redemption periods, you can attempt to acquire the domain by placing a bid for it.

If sold on this auction the domainname will be renewed as if it was automatically renewed. The expiration date will be an anniversary of the creation date.

It is a truly unfortunate coincidence that this occurred when RSL was out of commision.

Word of advice: Put stopsylviabrowne.net on automatic renewal.

[Ducky]

Um.

stopsylviabrowne.net is not what you bought, Susan.

stopsylviabrown.net is.

Guess who owns the correctly spelled one?

Quote:

Registrant:
kreimanchess
6633 Yucca st apt1 05
Hollywood, California 90028
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: STOPSYLVIABROWNE.NET
Created on: 30-Oct-08
Expires on: 31-Oct-09
Last Updated on: 30-Oct-08

Administrative Contact:
Kreiman, Boris kreimanchess@yahoo.com
kreimanchess
6633 Yucca st apt1 05
Hollywood, California 90028
United States
(323) 302-3777

Technical Contact:
Kreiman, Boris kreimanchess@yahoo.com
kreimanchess
6633 Yucca st apt1 05
Hollywood, California 90028
United States
(323) 302-3777

There should be a rethinking of what name to use now. .org may be good if open. .us etc.

Then again, who knows what that jackass bought up. He may own them all.

ETA: He does.


I'd suggest migrating to SSB.com/net/us whatever.

[Ducky]

I managed to snag stopsylviabrowne.us

Let me know if you want it.



NOTE:

Please everyone do not start buying up domains and offering them

[Ocelot]

Well it looks like StopSylviaBrowne.com is now legitimately under new ownership. Have you asked the new owners if they'd consider selling it back to you?

[dbalsdon]

Quote:

Well it looks like StopSylviaBrowne.com is now legitimately under new ownership. Have you asked the new owners if they'd consider selling it back to you?

Whoever owns it won't sell it cheaply. Going by the text on the new site, they most likely believe in psychics, so probably won't be wanting to sell it to a skeptic.

[Tanja]

How about stopsylvia.com? Is that available? That would go nicely with stopkaz.com.

[Ducky]

Originally Posted by Tanja

How about stopsylvia.com? Is that available? That would go nicely with stopkaz.com.

That one's in place.

Stopsylvia.net

stopsylviabrowne.us and www.stopsylviabrowne.us is all a redirect to stopsylviabrown.net


Allow up to 48 hours for propagation please.

[dbalsdon]

Quote:

How about stopsylvia.com?

I think the Lancasters already own that one. Its already directing to the new address.

[Ducky]

Originally Posted by dbalsdon

I think the Lancasters already own that one. Its already directing to the new address.

see my above post.

[chillzero]

So ... what is the best address for me to put on the merchandise that's being sold to fundraise for the Lancasters? Is there a definite answer for that yet?

[Ducky]

Originally Posted by chillzero

So ... what is the best address for me to put on the merchandise that's being sold to fundraise for the Lancasters? Is there a definite answer for that yet?

Susan or RSL will need to decide if stopsylvia.net is enough, or if they want me to transfer stopsylviabrowne.us to them to use permanently.

[chillzero]

OK, cheers.

[krelnik]

More importantly, we need to know which of these many domains to be google-bombing in place of the old one. It is very important that we all link to the same one to get the original site back up to its old place right next to Browne's actual site for searches on "sylvia browne".

It seems to me that STOPSYLVIA.COM works pretty well. It actually has the advantage of being easier to type, and avoids the whole issue of "is there an E?"

[Kaylee]

I’m still skeptical that all hope is lost.

1) Susan says in her OP:

Quote:

The lady told me that StopKaz.com was coming up for renewal in Dec, as well as a few others, so I went ahead and paid for all of it. She was kind enough to give me a whopping 20% discount.

But if you take a look at the whois info through domaintools.com one can see that StopKaz.com doesn’t expire until August 30, 2009. So if the godaddy.com CSR was inaccurate about that ... what else was she inaccurate about?

2) Also, StopKaz.com has these status codes:

Registrar Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Registrar Status: clientRenewProhibited
Registrar Status: clientTransferProhibited
Registrar Status: clientUpdateProhibited

Frankly, I don’t understand these status codes as well as I would like to, but I do know that the basic intent is to prevent someone else from initiating a transfer of a domain name to their control. My understanding is that under the current rules anyone can request that a domain name be transferred to their control. It’s up to the person or business that owns the domain name to protest this request upon being notified about it otherwise it will take place. One way to prevent that is for the domain name owner to request that their domain registrar put a lock on their domain name. That is basically what the above status codes do. This prevents a transfer from a domain name taking place where the relinquishing domain name owner is passive in the process. With these status codes in place, a transfer can only take place if the relinquishing domain name owner is active in the process or initiates it.

So, if Robert took these precautions for StopKaz.com, I think its safe to assume that he did the same for StopSylviaBrowne.com Therefore I think we can rule out that Boris Kreiman (the current supposed owner of the stopsylviabrowne.com domain name) legitimately obtained the domain name by requesting it, and then automatically getting ownership when Robert declined to say no for obvious reasons.

3) I couldn’t find the information that erlando found on godaddy.com about auctions. I did see this though:

http://help.godaddy.com/article/795

Quote:

Can I transfer an expired domain?

There is a 45-day grace period for expired .COM, .NET, .ORG, .INFO, .BIZ, .US, .CC, .TV, .NAME, and .WS domains. During this time, you can renew your domain and then follow the procedure for transferring it to your new registrar. Or, your new registrar can initiate a transfer request if you provide the required authorization for the expired domain.

If your expired domain is not transferred or renewed during the 45-day grace period, your old registrar may release the domain near the end of the grace period. Once your expired domain is released, it enters a separate 35-day redemption grace period in which the domain is unavailable for registration. After the redemption period, the domain becomes available for registration.

Based on the above godaddy didn’t follow their own procedures to have a total of an 80 day grace period. (45 +35 = 80) It's still not 80 days since August 21, the anniversary date of the domain name creation.

So perhaps if Susan or if someone else on Robert’s behalf protests this at ICANN (the regulating body for IP addresses and domain names), Robert can still keep ownership of the domain name.



Also I found this:
http://www.bitlaw.com/internet/domain.html

Quote:

…
This policy has now been replaced with a Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy created by ICANN and used by all accredited registrars. Under this new policy, a trademark owner can initiate a relatively inexpensive administrative procedure to challenge the existing domain name. In order to prevail, the trademark owner must show:
1. that the trademark owner owns a trademark (either registered or unregistered) that is the same or confusingly similar to the registered second level domain name;
2. that the party that registered the domain name has no legitimate right or interest in the domain name; and
3. that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith.

If the trademarkIf the trademark owner successfully proves all three points in the administrative proceeding, then the domain name can either be cancelled or transferred to the prevailing trademark owner. If the trademark owner fails to prove one of these points, the administrative panel will not cancel nor transfer the domain name.

Among the ways that a domain name owner can prove a legitimate right or interest in a domain name is by showing:
• use or preparations to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services prior to any notice of the dispute;
• that the domain name owner has been commonly known by the second level domain name; or
• that the domain name owner is making legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent of (i) commercial gain, (ii) misleadingly diverting consumers, or (iii) tarnishing the trademark at issue

A trademark owner can show that a domain name was registered and used in bad faith in a variety of ways, including by showing that the domain name owner:
• registered the name primarily for the purpose of selling or transferring the domain name to the trademark owner or a competitor of the trademark owner for a price greater than out of pocket costs;
• engaged in a pattern of registering trademarks of others to prevent the use of the domain name by the trademark owner;
• registered the domain name primarily to disrupt the business of a competitor; or
• is attempting to attract users to a web site for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with the trademark owner's trademark.

At this point it may be easiest to have a lawyer who specializes in domain name conflicts to handle this. Given the nature of what Robert’s web sites are all about – non-profit sites that are free and whose only intent is to help protect people from fraud it’s very possible that a lawyer may be willing to do this on a pro bono basis. I would imagine that the potential of the PR value for such a lawyer could be very high.

I'm just tossing these ideas out there because I really hate it when the scumbags win.

[RSL's better half]

The jerk who is doing this is watching this forum. He just purchased stopsylviabrowne.net yesterday.

Let me speak directly to you, Bastard. You think you can stop Robert Lancaster? Think again. The truth ALWAYS prevails. You CANNOT shut him up - not you, not SB. This fight has only begun. Trust me.

[Kaylee]

That being the case, is there someone we can PM our ideas to? No reason to make things easier for that jerk.

I doubt that I will have anymore ideas about this, but perhaps others will.

[RSL's better half]

Originally Posted by chillzero

So ... what is the best address for me to put on the merchandise that's being sold to fundraise for the Lancasters? Is there a definite answer for that yet?

Sorry, Chill. Could you please hold up the order until this mess is cleared up?

[RSL's better half]

If Kaylee is correct, we need legal advice.

If there is an attorney in the house who wants to do battle for truth and justice, please pm me.

I have 4 days left to get a refund on stopsylviabrown.net.

[chillzero]

Originally Posted by RSL's better half

Sorry, Chill. Could you please hold up the order until this mess is cleared up?

That's no problem. I just wasn't clear if it was sorted yet or not. All customers are aware, and happy to wait.

[monoman]

Originally Posted by RSL's better half

The jerk who is doing this is watching this forum. He just purchased stopsylviabrowne.net yesterday.

Let me speak directly to you, Bastard. You think you can stop Robert Lancaster? Think again. The truth ALWAYS prevails. You CANNOT shut him up - not you, not SB. This fight has only begun. Trust me.

Sorry about that Susan, I posted that suggestion in the other thread.

As KayLee said, any other ideas should be pm'd to Susan. (I'm not talking to you Ducky as you've already registered your ideas).

[AndyD]

When I had my tiny brush with a legal threat, a number of forum members advised me as to how they would love to post stuff that would annoy a "psychic" enough to draw such a threat. Perhaps one of those people now has an appropriate target.

NOTE: I am not advising illegal activity here - just a close skeptical analysis, Robert Lancaster style, of the site to which the new "stopsylviabrowne" site links.

[Sherman Bay]

Wait a gosh-darn minute. If RSL's better half has purchased stopsylviabrowne.net, how can someone else purchase it afterwards? Am I missing something here? Or did she announce it before purchasing?

[Ocelot]

She didn't, she thought she did but turns out that she got stopsylviabrown.net instead (brown not browne)

[Eos of the Eons]

Sorry to hear. Were there monthly payments being made that lapsed? I'm still confused about why the date wasn't changed to reflect when the new registrar took over. And why are they using a chess players name???

[Loss Leader]

As skeevy as all this is, there is no trademark issue. Robert wasn't actually selling anything, so he wasn't using he name in trade.

I will be glad to help RSL in any way I can.

[Moochie]

Originally Posted by RSL's better half

The jerk who is doing this is watching this forum. He just purchased stopsylviabrowne.net yesterday.

Let me speak directly to you, Bastard. You think you can stop Robert Lancaster? Think again. The truth ALWAYS prevails. You CANNOT shut him up - not you, not SB. This fight has only begun. Trust me.

You could do worse than contact/approach the EFF about this issue:


http://www.eff.org/


M.

[Ocelot]

It's usually a yearly payment. One was due in late August and Robert was notified by e-mail. Being in no position to respond the invoice wasn't paid. That left Go Daddy with a domain they thought Robert no longer wanted so in accordance with their terms and conditions they auctioned it off. The date wasn't changed because no new registrar took over - it's still with Go Daddy. They've just transfered it to a different owner.

Presumably whoever it is uses their own name. Perhaps they are the chess player in question, being a grandmaster earns respect but it's not like being a football star, they've got to earn a living somehow. Perhaps they're just a namesake. If they are using a false name that might be one avenue of getting the name back, but if not they're just running a legitimate internet business speculating on domains.

[dbalsdon]

Quote:

Presumably whoever it is uses their own name. Perhaps they are the chess player in question, being a grandmaster earns respect but it's not like being a football star, they've got to earn a living somehow. Perhaps they're just a namesake. If they are using a false name that might be one avenue of getting the name back, but if not they're just running a legitimate internet business speculating on domains.

I think this was covered in the other thread. The whois street address for ssb.com, is the same as the address for multiple other sites. While the address is the same, the names seem to differ.

ETA: Oh, if the new main url was up for debate(which i don't think it is), i'd have agree with krel. stopsylvia.com for the reasons he mentioned.

[AndyD]

kreimanchess.com, lifepsychic.com, stopsylviabrowne.com all share the same registration details.

As a matter of interest, has any attempt been made to contact the new owner and negotiate return of the domain? Whilst it might all look very suspicious, especially with the apparently belated registration of the .net address, those of us looking in from the outside shouldn't jump to conclusions about intent. It might be a simple case of opportunism.

As much as it all looks like an act of sheer bastardry at first glance, what I see is a very clever strategy to use a well-grounded skeptical shop front to question one very prominent psychic, to cast some doubts on the industry in general then offer the reader a "safe" and "genuine" alternative at the psychic reading site - and to use the site as an SEO link-farm for that other site.

If Susan or her assistants can confirm any attempt to negotiate, it would help with regards to documenting the saga in blogs, etc. If the new owner really is reading this forum then, since he is well and truly identified anyway, he may as well join and state his case.

[ExMinister]

Have any of you actually read the articles section on the site? It's hard for me to read them without my blood pressure going up dangerously high. What he appears to be doing is pretending to ask questions about Sylvia's Browne validity and then arguing against pretty much everything RSL had covered on his site, concluding that Sylvia Browne is the real deal. For example, bringing up the Shawn Hornbeck case, explaining that away, and basically excusing or otherwise justifying every criticism that's been brought up on RSL's site regarding SB. It's a travesty. He claims she is 80% accurate; when he discusses Sylvia's ex-husband who came forward, he points out that the man was probably bitter; he essentially says people are afraid to accept her teachings about the other side out of fear of knowing the truth. Yes, the worst form of woo, very much like the deceitful chapter on skeptics in Sylvia Browne's latest book that was so infuriating and so untrue. If someone in her camp isn't behind this, I will be surprised.

[Eos of the Eons]

http://www.kreimanchess.com/WhoWeAre.html

Quote:

Kreiman Chess Academy is an organization dedicated to establishing competitive chess programs along the west coast, as well as promoting the use of chess as an educational tool in the school system.

I don't understand the association with a pro-psychic website. But, whatever.