Comments on: Virgle.com – how Google and Virgin forgot a domain

By: Andrew J Scott

Andrew J Scott — Mon, 05 May 2008 16:15:22 +0000

Boris and Patrick are nice guys IMHO; I’m sure they’ll do the right thing.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 03 May 2008 20:50:25 +0000

On what basis can they ask for the name back? Virgle isn’t a trademark, and if I hadn’t read this post I wouldn’t associate it with either Virgin or Google off the top of my head!

By: Mr P

Mr P — Thu, 01 May 2008 13:22:05 +0000

The letter is a classic lawyer ruse –
They ask for it back and then offer to pay some money.
The holder of the domain then replies back, “ok how much?”

Then G&V going running to the domain name authority and say, “look look, this guy is trying to extort money out of us!”

It’s the oldest trick in the book, but loads fall for it.
(Most lawyers belong in prison – and I’m married to one !)

That said I have no time for domain name squatters and trolls, they deserve all the grief coming their way. They are carpetbaggers.

Boris looks like a decent bloke and has a good reputation.
I think he should ask G&V to donate a decent sum to a recognised charity and pass it over.

I think G&V can afford to cough up some money, particularly as V puts the majority of it’s profits offshore.

By: Si Jobling

Si Jobling — Thu, 01 May 2008 12:22:19 +0000

ah well, theres alway googin.com

Not any more. Someone was just as quick as Mr Veldhuijzen van Zanten there, weren’t they?

By: rtrthrthhrth

rtrthrthhrth — Thu, 01 May 2008 11:51:35 +0000

ah well, theres alway googin.com

By: Dan Lester

Dan Lester — Thu, 01 May 2008 11:43:40 +0000

Love the undertone of their letter that implies something like: “Ha ha, you joker! Let’s have it back now the laughter’s died down… By the way, it would ruin the joke if you try to charge us loads of money.”

By: david cushman

david cushman — Thu, 01 May 2008 11:31:50 +0000

aint urls irrelevant in these disaggregated times?