Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Businesses

The History of Sex.com, the Most Contested Domain On the Internet 72

Posted by samzenpus from the what's-in-a-name dept.
sarahnaomi writes On its face, sex.com looks like a no-frills Pinterest for porn, but behind the site lies an ongoing grudge match between the man who invented online dating and a con artist who stole the crown jewel of the internet out from under him. The history of the domain is well documented, with two books and dozens of articles written on the subject. It was first registered in 1994 by Gary Kremen, the entrepreneur who founded Match.com and was savvy enough to buy up several generic domains, including jobs.com and housing.com, in the early days of the internet.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The History of Sex.com, the Most Contested Domain On the Internet More

The History of Sex.com, the Most Contested Domain On the Internet

Comments Filter:

  • TLDR (Score:5, Funny)

    by NotInHere ( 3654617 ) on Monday February 23, 2015 @10:05AM (#49110999)

    dude A registered sex.com
    dude B fucked girl @ registry company of dude A and used further tricks to get sex.com
    dude B made millions with the domain name
    dudes C and D founded google, resulting in loss of "random visitors"
    dude A got sex.com back from B through court descision, demanded $64 million
    dude B didn't pay, fled to mexico, was turned over, spent time in prison, still didnt pay until today

    • Re:TLDR (Score:5, Insightful)

      by msauve ( 701917 ) on Monday February 23, 2015 @10:27AM (#49111195)
      It's all very confusing. Are we supposed to support the domain squatter or the con artist?

      • Sex isn't trademarked, so domain squatting doesn't apply. It's a domain that he bought and owned and as a result had a right to do whatever he wanted with it.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by drinkypoo ( 153816 )

          Sex isn't trademarked, so domain squatting doesn't apply.

          Uh no. That's not how it works. Domain squatting is buying a domain for the purposes of speculation, and trademark is irrelevant. It would help if you knew what we were talking about.

          • Re:TLDR (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Registered Coward v2 ( 447531 ) on Monday February 23, 2015 @02:16PM (#49113319)

            Sex isn't trademarked, so domain squatting doesn't apply.

            Uh no. That's not how it works. Domain squatting is buying a domain for the purposes of speculation, and trademark is irrelevant. It would help if you knew what we were talking about.

            It's a perfectly legitimate thing to do. It's no different than someone buying apiece of land hoping it will be valuable some day. He got there first and bought it so when someone comes around and wants i they have to pay for it. That's different than, as you point out, registering trademarks and holding the domain hostage. The first is a legitimate form of speculation and the latter simple extortion.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by msauve ( 701917 )
              You're a net newbie, aren't you. Domain squatters are scum. Right there with spammers and con artists.

              • You're a net newbie, aren't you. Domain squatters are scum. Right there with spammers and con artists.

                Nah, been here since before eternal September. It's the late arrivers who are pissed at those who got there first and grabbed the good land. Same story, different century.

                • Same story, different century.

                  Yes, and what the internet needs is to be the same old shit all over again! That'll really provide the most value to We The People Who Paid For It.

                  • Same story, different century.

                    Yes, and what the internet needs is to be the same old shit all over again! That'll really provide the most value to We The People Who Paid For It.

                    Correct. On this we agree.

            • It's a perfectly legitimate thing to do.

              Yay, moving the goalposts! I spoke to whether it had anything to do with trademark, not as to the legitimacy of the act — although the specific act of squatting a domain which is also a trademark is especially illegitimate because there is no legitimate argument that it was for any purposes other than extortion.

              The purpose of the domain name service is to help us find things. When that system is subverted by people who are just standing in between customers and legitimate commerce, that's not legitima

              • The purpose of the domain name service is to help us find things. When that system is subverted by people who are just standing in between customers and legitimate commerce, that's not legitimate at all. The fact that it's legal doesn't make it any less sleazy.

                You may not like it but it sure isn't sleazy. It's no different than buying a plot of land and holding on to it hoping someone will want to build on it. People seem to think because "it's the internet" that different rules need to apply and normal activities somehow are no longer relevant.

                He simply looked at some property, decided some would be valuable some day and bought them before someone else did. The next person could have simply said,"Gee xyz.com is used, I'll use something else" instead of buying a

  • NSFW and no American Singles (Score:4, Insightful)

    by michaelmalak ( 91262 ) <michael@michaelmalak.com> on Monday February 23, 2015 @10:08AM (#49111027) Homepage

    Link is NSFW.

    Also, even if we take "online" as a euphemism to mean "web" and ignore UseNet singles newsgroups and who knows what else before that, the article makes no mention of Dan Bender [onlinedatingpost.com], who launched American Singles on Feburary 14, 1995.

    • Link is NSFW.

      The link is NSFW because it shows a girl's bum in a bikini? Or because it has "sexual relationship" in the text?

      How many cities allow men and women to be topless in public and we are still worried about seeing women's swimwear?

      ~~

      • It doesn't matter what other cities allow. I meant NSFW in the most literal sense -- whether it is safe to click the link at work (in the U.S., since as the Slashdot FAQ says, it is a U.S.-based site).

  • "The history of the domain is well documented" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by richy freeway ( 623503 ) on Monday February 23, 2015 @10:10AM (#49111045)

    So why are we going over it again?

    • Dude, it's the closest I've been in years so shut up and don't ruin this for most of us!!!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Toad-san ( 64810 )

      Because I for one hadn't read the full story. It's good to be reminded that (1) there are thieving lying scumbags out there, (2) there always will be. I'm also personally pleased to see the victim continue to screw with this particular scumbag's life, forever and ever, ad infinitum.

      Everyone needs a hobby, right?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by GroeFaZ ( 850443 )
      What's the point of recording history, if not going over it again?

  • the best thing to do is cut all your losses

    you will never get anything from someone who resists all attempts at a constructive life

    After losing the case, Cohen fled across the border to Tijuana to avoid paying the settlement. Kremen responded by posting “wanted” signs all over the Mexican town with Cohen’s photo and information. McCarthy said Cohen claimed this resulted in bounty hunters showing up at his door and instigating a firefight with the Mexican police.

    Eventually Cohen was extradited from Mexico and sent back to the US, where he sat in jail for six months until a judge gave up on trying to make him pay up. To this day, Cohen has refused to pay a penny of the $64 million he owes Kremen, according to McCarthy. The only thing Kremen was able to wrest from Cohen in the end was one of his properties, which he paid people to destroy before Kremen took ownership of it. And the petty fight continues.

    “Kremen pays a set of lawyers just to follow anything Cohen does,” McCarthy said. “So they’ve been playing this cat and mouse game for 10 years. He chases Cohen around the world trying to get the money off of him, and Cohen flees around the world refusing to pay him.”

    Kremen needs to just walk away. yes, he deserves much from this douchebag Cohen

    but it begins to define your life, your identity, and your legacy, if you stay attached to such a piece of shit, even just antagonistically

    cut your losses, move on

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kokuyo ( 549451 )

      I find it highly interesting that an individual could just decide not to pay and a judge would just quit trying to make him.

      I mean, when someone like you or me doesn't pay their bills, just not paying AND keeping all my assets aren't options, either, are they?

      Also the thought comes to mind: At what point in time has the law failed you enough that, ethically speaking, you're well in your rights to just go bash the other guy's head in to at least get some satisfaction?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by vakuona ( 788200 )

        The judge should have kept him in prison for contempt of court.

        If you will not respect the laws of the land, then you should be locked up. Anything else is a recipe for lawlessness.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Contempt of court in a civil case can only be remedial, not punitive. If the judge determined that no amount of jail time will compel Cohen to pay up, he was obligated to let him go. That IS the "law of the land".

      • We don't have our wealth stashed in numbered bank accounts ... although I think if it was the IRS which wanted the money they'd have it by now.

      • Cohen's a con man, he knows how to hide assets

        you and i have a house a job and a bank account. in our names. simple and plain

        this guy has accounts in friend's names, accounts in countries with opaque banking practices, houses owned by trusts or shell corporations or family members, etc

        to liquidate your assets or my assets would be easy, any forensic accountant could do it in 15 minutes. because we're financially transparent, honest and straightforward people. but some douchebag who tries very hard to squirrel away their assets can make it a full time job just tracking it all down

        Also the thought comes to mind: At what point in time has the law failed you enough that, ethically speaking, you're well in your rights to just go bash the other guy's head in to at least get some satisfaction?

        well, from the article:

        After losing the case, Cohen fled across the border to Tijuana to avoid paying the settlement. Kremen responded by posting “wanted” signs all over the Mexican town with Cohen’s photo and information. McCarthy said Cohen claimed this resulted in bounty hunters showing up at his door and instigating a firefight with the Mexican police.

        this sounds very close to "oops, poor guy got shot dead by accident"

        so either Kremen has thought about the possibility of doing the guy in, or, at the very least, Kremen doesn't mind how his actions might endanger Cohen (i'm not saying he should)

        lowlifes in seedy areas with sketchy financial assets and the need to avoid the law often wind up dead and robbed. hard to tell the difference between that happening and being accidental, or arranged

        which is why it is good to be you and me with our boring plain finances. when your finances are squirrely, squirrely things can happen to you. but if someone messes with you and i, we can complain and get justice. the question of who is in the right and who is in the wrong isn't very grey

        black and white absolutes don't exist in this world. but when it comes to your finances, it's best to be as close to black and white as possible. or you can get fucked with

        the best target for con men and thieves, is other con men and thieves

        because there's no honor in that world. pure dog eat dog

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by swb ( 14022 )

          You'd think Kremen would just have the guy kidnapped and torture the info out of him.

          • 1. Cohen probably doesn't have that much, and it will probably cost more to do what you suggest than anything you can recover

            3. by acting with such impunity, you can get in trouble with the law. never mind blackmail by shady thugs. once you gain the attention of certain low like characters, and you demonstrate to them a brutality and mendacity they recognize in themselves, they get their hooks into you, and they don't let go

            better to stay clean

            • acting with such impunity, you can get in trouble with the law

              ... um, acting with impunity means not getting in trouble with the law. That's why it's called impunity.

  • No surprise ... the link is blocked by the company firewall !

  • Eeew (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I shrivel up at the sight of naked flesh. The only thing that will induce my erection is reading kernel change logs.

  • Despite Kremen having layered and sued successfully, the ass-hat Cohen just fled with the money. This is why libertranism cannot work : bad guys can have a policy of burned bridge after getting the money, and good luck then for your grievance.

  • The history of the domain is well documented, with two books and dozens of articles written on the subject.

    Coming soon, Woody Allen's first new comedy in decades: "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About sex.com But Were Afraid to Ask".

    • I just realized I missed an opportunity to put two jokes into that:

      Coming soon, Woody Allen's first new comedy in decades: "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About sex.com But Were Afraid to ask.com."

  • Charles Carreon (Score:3)

    by Dynamoo ( 527749 ) on Monday February 23, 2015 @11:57AM (#49112001) Homepage
    One interesting footnote is that one of the legal team on Kremen's side was Charles Carreon [wikipedia.org] who later gained notoriety through the The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute [wikipedia.org].

  • I can think of very few things that upset me more than domain squatters. Up there with child molesters and corrupt politicians.

  • Savvy? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Because the author is too lazy to do the research doesn't mean the guy was savvy. It didn't used to cost a thing to register so all you needed to do to register hundreds of them was be a selfish prick. It didn't occur to most of us to register domains we didn't need. Or perhaps the author is equating 'savvy' and 'selfish prick'?

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Close