Hacker News Reader

Comment by ohashi | Hacker News Reader

This right is why I don't see a constructive solution ever coming from you. Buying something with intent to profit is bad faith. That's bullshit, plain and simple. We live in a capitalist society. We buy things with the intent to profit all the time. That's what our whole society is BUILT ON. We spend money on labor and capital in hopes of earning a greater return.

You twist this idea by saying someone has registered it with the bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of an entrepreneur looking to create a service. Goodwill doesn't exist until it is created. It's been show time and time again that you cannot buy something in bad faith before something exists. That's just not possible. How can you simply assume it's blocking something to be created for the public as well? You make way too many broad and wrong assumptions to try and reach a conclusion you simply want for your own selfish reasons disguised as a greater good.

View on HN

Don't take this the wrong way, I actually appreciate the dialogue you and I are having. I like debating with an opposing view in order to bring more issues to the surface. My argument is that domain squatters provide very little value in comparison to potential alternative users of that domain. That's the thing, a domain squatter's sole intention is to profit from buying and reselling domains, while a startup's intention is to profit by creating external value through a service utilizing that domain.

Most domainers I know also plan on creating services on their domains. Why does anyone else have a more legitimate right to want to build something on a domain name? What if I own cats.com and just want to put a picture of my cat fuzzy wuzzy? Why shouldnt I be allowed if I registered it first or paid for it? What if your startup isnt making any/much money and mine is and we're doing the same thing. Do I have more rights to that name than you?

What if I own cats.com and just want to put a picture of my cat fuzzy wuzzy?

I'm sure a .meow domain would suit your personal purposes just fine. A .com, however, would be better suited for commercial purposes if you intend to profit off of your fuzzy wuzzy photos.

You're really not worth it anymore. You're reaching for ridiculous arguments about how something was originally planned over two decades ago. Things changed, you can't realistically regress to some original purpose when it is outdated. Sorry. You're wrong.

Okay, we can agree to disagree my friend.

> That's the thing, a domain squatter's sole intention is to profit from buying and reselling domains, while a startup's intention is to profit by creating external value through a service utilizing that domain.

This is my problem with your solution. It seems to think that there are only two groups registering domains: squatters and startups. Even if we expand "startups" to "companies", this is clearly bullshit.

It seems to think that there are only two groups registering domains: squatters and startups. Even if we expand "startups" to "companies", this is clearly bullshit.

When speaking of startups/companies registering domains I clearly stated that they would be reserved .coms, for commercial organizations. This was actually their original intended purpose until they were open for unrestricted registration:

The domain name com is a generic top-level domain (gTLD) in the Domain Name System of the Internet. Its name is derived from commercial,[1] indicating its original intended purpose for domains registered by commercial organizations. However eventually the distinction was lost when .com, .org and .net were opened for unrestricted registration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.com

Reply on news.ycombinator.com