<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_04_022220</id>
	<title>Buying a Domain From a Cybersquatter</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1244116620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Nevo writes <i>"A partner and I are in the planning stages of a business. We've decided on a name that we'd like to use but the domain name is already registered. The owner has a single 'search' page up (similar to the one at www.goggle.com)... clearly not a legitimate business interest, but since we don't own a trademark on this name it doesn't qualify as bad faith, I don't think. Does anyone have any experience buying domains from these operators? Do you have any advice on how to approach the owners of these domains to get them at a reasonable cost?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevo writes " A partner and I are in the planning stages of a business .
We 've decided on a name that we 'd like to use but the domain name is already registered .
The owner has a single 'search ' page up ( similar to the one at www.goggle.com ) ... clearly not a legitimate business interest , but since we do n't own a trademark on this name it does n't qualify as bad faith , I do n't think .
Does anyone have any experience buying domains from these operators ?
Do you have any advice on how to approach the owners of these domains to get them at a reasonable cost ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevo writes "A partner and I are in the planning stages of a business.
We've decided on a name that we'd like to use but the domain name is already registered.
The owner has a single 'search' page up (similar to the one at www.goggle.com)... clearly not a legitimate business interest, but since we don't own a trademark on this name it doesn't qualify as bad faith, I don't think.
Does anyone have any experience buying domains from these operators?
Do you have any advice on how to approach the owners of these domains to get them at a reasonable cost?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209039</id>
	<title>Re:no</title>
	<author>joeasian</author>
	<datestamp>1244128080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.mikeindustries.com/blog/archive/2005/03/how-to-snatch-an-expiring-domain" title="mikeindustries.com" rel="nofollow">How to snatch an expiring domain</a> [mikeindustries.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>How to snatch an expiring domain [ mikeindustries.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How to snatch an expiring domain [mikeindustries.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207911</id>
	<title>Re:Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244122380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I would suggest finding another Domain that they own and first asking them if you could buy that one. That will give you a high end price. Tell them no thank you. Wait a day and say you also like the real one. Then offer to buy it at 1/2 the price they gave for the first one.</p></div><p>Above all else, be prepared to <em>walk away</em>.  It's only a domain name, there are lots of others, and if the guy isn't willing to give you a decent price you can afford to pay, tell him you're not interested.  It's like buying a car:  there's lots of wiggle room (even more than there is with a car!).  Just like in poker, you always wait until the absolute last minute to show 'em your cards.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would suggest finding another Domain that they own and first asking them if you could buy that one .
That will give you a high end price .
Tell them no thank you .
Wait a day and say you also like the real one .
Then offer to buy it at 1/2 the price they gave for the first one.Above all else , be prepared to walk away .
It 's only a domain name , there are lots of others , and if the guy is n't willing to give you a decent price you can afford to pay , tell him you 're not interested .
It 's like buying a car : there 's lots of wiggle room ( even more than there is with a car ! ) .
Just like in poker , you always wait until the absolute last minute to show 'em your cards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would suggest finding another Domain that they own and first asking them if you could buy that one.
That will give you a high end price.
Tell them no thank you.
Wait a day and say you also like the real one.
Then offer to buy it at 1/2 the price they gave for the first one.Above all else, be prepared to walk away.
It's only a domain name, there are lots of others, and if the guy isn't willing to give you a decent price you can afford to pay, tell him you're not interested.
It's like buying a car:  there's lots of wiggle room (even more than there is with a car!).
Just like in poker, you always wait until the absolute last minute to show 'em your cards.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208201</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1244124060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message. We get loads of offers which are too low by <b>two-three orders of magnitude</b> and reading all off them is not really an option.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Emphasis mine, the fact that there's two-three orders of magnitude should tell you what prices we're talking about. "I'll give you 10 bucks" "We want 10 grand" For a startup? forget it, find something not taken.</p></div></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer , but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message .
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.Emphasis mine , the fact that there 's two-three orders of magnitude should tell you what prices we 're talking about .
" I 'll give you 10 bucks " " We want 10 grand " For a startup ?
forget it , find something not taken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.Emphasis mine, the fact that there's two-three orders of magnitude should tell you what prices we're talking about.
"I'll give you 10 bucks" "We want 10 grand" For a startup?
forget it, find something not taken.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213303</id>
	<title>Users don't understand subdomains</title>
	<author>kkrajewski</author>
	<datestamp>1244145660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree.  People will get the order wrong even if they've visited the site before.  They'll type "blah.greatsite.com," not even think about autocomplete not kicking in, and then get redirected to the squatter before they try the other way around.  Think about how often you've seen people try "google.translate.com" instead of "translate.google.com."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
People will get the order wrong even if they 've visited the site before .
They 'll type " blah.greatsite.com , " not even think about autocomplete not kicking in , and then get redirected to the squatter before they try the other way around .
Think about how often you 've seen people try " google.translate.com " instead of " translate.google.com .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
People will get the order wrong even if they've visited the site before.
They'll type "blah.greatsite.com," not even think about autocomplete not kicking in, and then get redirected to the squatter before they try the other way around.
Think about how often you've seen people try "google.translate.com" instead of "translate.google.com.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207857</id>
	<title>Three pieces of advice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244122020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a quick warning: there's a lot of scamming in the domain marktplace. It's easy for scammers to get you to buy, then never transfer the domain.</p><p>1. Set your PayPal account to draw against a credit card, not your bank account. You have both your credit card's consumer protections as well as PayPal's this way, the difference being you can actually get someone on the phone at your credit card company.  When they yank the money from PayPal, suddenly PayPal will care.<br>2. Use an escrow service.  Buyer puts the money in, you transfer the domain, and then you get paid. Most scams happen when people do direct purchases.  Lots of domainers use escrow.com.  It works.<br>3. Make sure you are dealing with a legitimate business or a real person.  A little due diligence goes a long way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a quick warning : there 's a lot of scamming in the domain marktplace .
It 's easy for scammers to get you to buy , then never transfer the domain.1 .
Set your PayPal account to draw against a credit card , not your bank account .
You have both your credit card 's consumer protections as well as PayPal 's this way , the difference being you can actually get someone on the phone at your credit card company .
When they yank the money from PayPal , suddenly PayPal will care.2 .
Use an escrow service .
Buyer puts the money in , you transfer the domain , and then you get paid .
Most scams happen when people do direct purchases .
Lots of domainers use escrow.com .
It works.3 .
Make sure you are dealing with a legitimate business or a real person .
A little due diligence goes a long way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a quick warning: there's a lot of scamming in the domain marktplace.
It's easy for scammers to get you to buy, then never transfer the domain.1.
Set your PayPal account to draw against a credit card, not your bank account.
You have both your credit card's consumer protections as well as PayPal's this way, the difference being you can actually get someone on the phone at your credit card company.
When they yank the money from PayPal, suddenly PayPal will care.2.
Use an escrow service.
Buyer puts the money in, you transfer the domain, and then you get paid.
Most scams happen when people do direct purchases.
Lots of domainers use escrow.com.
It works.3.
Make sure you are dealing with a legitimate business or a real person.
A little due diligence goes a long way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208681</id>
	<title>In the domain owners' defense...</title>
	<author>BlueDjinn</author>
	<datestamp>1244126580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...they may not necessarily be a cybersquatter (at least, not intentionally).</p><p>I own a couple dozen domains that used to belong to clients or ex-clients of mine. In some cases, they went out of business and failed to pay for the domain renewals, so I decided to transfer them over to myself; in other cases, they changed their minds about the name of their business and decided not to hold on to the other domains.</p><p>So, I now have about 2 dozen of these domains under my control; since I have no use for them, where's the harm in asking a reasonable price (anywhere from $50-$100) for them?</p><p>Finally, in one case, the client went out of business *and* screwed me out of a good $1,000 in development payments, so trying to recoup some of that with a domain that I now legally own seems reasonable.</p><p>Not saying this is the case here, just noting that it may be a similar situation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...they may not necessarily be a cybersquatter ( at least , not intentionally ) .I own a couple dozen domains that used to belong to clients or ex-clients of mine .
In some cases , they went out of business and failed to pay for the domain renewals , so I decided to transfer them over to myself ; in other cases , they changed their minds about the name of their business and decided not to hold on to the other domains.So , I now have about 2 dozen of these domains under my control ; since I have no use for them , where 's the harm in asking a reasonable price ( anywhere from $ 50- $ 100 ) for them ? Finally , in one case , the client went out of business * and * screwed me out of a good $ 1,000 in development payments , so trying to recoup some of that with a domain that I now legally own seems reasonable.Not saying this is the case here , just noting that it may be a similar situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...they may not necessarily be a cybersquatter (at least, not intentionally).I own a couple dozen domains that used to belong to clients or ex-clients of mine.
In some cases, they went out of business and failed to pay for the domain renewals, so I decided to transfer them over to myself; in other cases, they changed their minds about the name of their business and decided not to hold on to the other domains.So, I now have about 2 dozen of these domains under my control; since I have no use for them, where's the harm in asking a reasonable price (anywhere from $50-$100) for them?Finally, in one case, the client went out of business *and* screwed me out of a good $1,000 in development payments, so trying to recoup some of that with a domain that I now legally own seems reasonable.Not saying this is the case here, just noting that it may be a similar situation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212663</id>
	<title>Approach them for a DIFFERENT domain</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1244143140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Approach them for a DIFFERENT domain name (if you can find another one or two they also have).  Make the approach seem like some teenager wanting a vanity name for his pr0n or r1pz site.  Offer a lower amount and see if they will sell it.  If you get their interest in selling, try "changing your mind" and switch to another domain name (still not the one you are really interested in, yet) and see how they respond to that (since you'll eventually have to do that to get the interest you want).  You'll need to make a special Google, Hotmail, or Yahoo email address for the communication.  If they seem interested in selling at a reasonably low price, switch (again) to the desired name and cross your fingers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Approach them for a DIFFERENT domain name ( if you can find another one or two they also have ) .
Make the approach seem like some teenager wanting a vanity name for his pr0n or r1pz site .
Offer a lower amount and see if they will sell it .
If you get their interest in selling , try " changing your mind " and switch to another domain name ( still not the one you are really interested in , yet ) and see how they respond to that ( since you 'll eventually have to do that to get the interest you want ) .
You 'll need to make a special Google , Hotmail , or Yahoo email address for the communication .
If they seem interested in selling at a reasonably low price , switch ( again ) to the desired name and cross your fingers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Approach them for a DIFFERENT domain name (if you can find another one or two they also have).
Make the approach seem like some teenager wanting a vanity name for his pr0n or r1pz site.
Offer a lower amount and see if they will sell it.
If you get their interest in selling, try "changing your mind" and switch to another domain name (still not the one you are really interested in, yet) and see how they respond to that (since you'll eventually have to do that to get the interest you want).
You'll need to make a special Google, Hotmail, or Yahoo email address for the communication.
If they seem interested in selling at a reasonably low price, switch (again) to the desired name and cross your fingers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208639</id>
	<title>My experience</title>
	<author>egcagrac0</author>
	<datestamp>1244126340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We had been waiting for someone else's registration on a domain to lapse (they wanted something like $15k), when it got sniped by a squatter who owned a registrar.</p><p>He promptly contacted us, and offered us the domain for about $700.  We replied with a counteroffer of $250.</p><p>He accepted, we have the domain now.</p><p>The hardest part was waiting the 60 days to transfer the domain to another registrar - we didn't want to be lining his pockets indefinitely.</p><p>My advice to management was "just wait, we can get it for free in a month".  Their reply was "It's cheap at $1000, just buy it."</p><p>How much is having that domain worth to you?  $250?  $1000?  ZW$100,000,000,000?  Offer 1/3rd of what it's worth to you, see what they counter with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We had been waiting for someone else 's registration on a domain to lapse ( they wanted something like $ 15k ) , when it got sniped by a squatter who owned a registrar.He promptly contacted us , and offered us the domain for about $ 700 .
We replied with a counteroffer of $ 250.He accepted , we have the domain now.The hardest part was waiting the 60 days to transfer the domain to another registrar - we did n't want to be lining his pockets indefinitely.My advice to management was " just wait , we can get it for free in a month " .
Their reply was " It 's cheap at $ 1000 , just buy it .
" How much is having that domain worth to you ?
$ 250 ? $ 1000 ?
ZW $ 100,000,000,000 ? Offer 1/3rd of what it 's worth to you , see what they counter with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We had been waiting for someone else's registration on a domain to lapse (they wanted something like $15k), when it got sniped by a squatter who owned a registrar.He promptly contacted us, and offered us the domain for about $700.
We replied with a counteroffer of $250.He accepted, we have the domain now.The hardest part was waiting the 60 days to transfer the domain to another registrar - we didn't want to be lining his pockets indefinitely.My advice to management was "just wait, we can get it for free in a month".
Their reply was "It's cheap at $1000, just buy it.
"How much is having that domain worth to you?
$250?  $1000?
ZW$100,000,000,000?  Offer 1/3rd of what it's worth to you, see what they counter with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209601</id>
	<title>Re:Your customers won't care</title>
	<author>too2late</author>
	<datestamp>1244130180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True... but Google's ranking system likes it when the domain name is the same as what you are searching for. Also, having your company name<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com makes it a lot easier for your customers to remember the site and easily get back to it. example.com is a lot easier to remember and looks a lot more professional than myexampleweb.biz</htmltext>
<tokenext>True... but Google 's ranking system likes it when the domain name is the same as what you are searching for .
Also , having your company name .com makes it a lot easier for your customers to remember the site and easily get back to it .
example.com is a lot easier to remember and looks a lot more professional than myexampleweb.biz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True... but Google's ranking system likes it when the domain name is the same as what you are searching for.
Also, having your company name .com makes it a lot easier for your customers to remember the site and easily get back to it.
example.com is a lot easier to remember and looks a lot more professional than myexampleweb.biz</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207935</id>
	<title>Web Resources</title>
	<author>muphin</author>
	<datestamp>1244122620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Theres plenty of help out there, especially at the WIPO: <a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/" title="wipo.int" rel="nofollow">http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/</a> [wipo.int] <br>
<br>
For an example of people who have lost domains check out: <a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cases/index.html" title="wipo.int" rel="nofollow">http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cases/index.html</a> [wipo.int] <br>
I actually found this an interesting read from all the responses cybersquatters have.<br>
<br>
There is an article at WIPO about cybersquatting, can be found at: <a href="http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2009/article\_0005.html" title="wipo.int" rel="nofollow">http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2009/article\_0005.html</a> [wipo.int] <br>
<br>
in my opinion, if you really want the domain and it isn't being used, and you made a proper offer for the domain (not something like $1 million dollars) and they refused, i suggest you either threaten to take it up with WIPO and get it transferred to you to lower the cost, or actually take it up with WIPO<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. keeping in mind a case with WIPO can set you back $1500-$4000 USD (http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/fees/index.html)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Theres plenty of help out there , especially at the WIPO : http : //www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/ [ wipo.int ] For an example of people who have lost domains check out : http : //www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cases/index.html [ wipo.int ] I actually found this an interesting read from all the responses cybersquatters have .
There is an article at WIPO about cybersquatting , can be found at : http : //www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2009/article \ _0005.html [ wipo.int ] in my opinion , if you really want the domain and it is n't being used , and you made a proper offer for the domain ( not something like $ 1 million dollars ) and they refused , i suggest you either threaten to take it up with WIPO and get it transferred to you to lower the cost , or actually take it up with WIPO .. keeping in mind a case with WIPO can set you back $ 1500- $ 4000 USD ( http : //www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/fees/index.html )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Theres plenty of help out there, especially at the WIPO: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/ [wipo.int] 

For an example of people who have lost domains check out: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cases/index.html [wipo.int] 
I actually found this an interesting read from all the responses cybersquatters have.
There is an article at WIPO about cybersquatting, can be found at: http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2009/article\_0005.html [wipo.int] 

in my opinion, if you really want the domain and it isn't being used, and you made a proper offer for the domain (not something like $1 million dollars) and they refused, i suggest you either threaten to take it up with WIPO and get it transferred to you to lower the cost, or actually take it up with WIPO .. keeping in mind a case with WIPO can set you back $1500-$4000 USD (http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/fees/index.html)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207699</id>
	<title>Ideas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244120940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One option already noted is giving a reasonable offer and sticking with it.</p><p>Another option is simply asking for a quote, but don't for the love of god tell them you're planning a business. Rather just send an informal message in the style of "I think $domain is a cool name, yadda yadda...".</p><p>Personally I'd opt for trying to figure out a name for the business that's not taken. Nonsense words that are easy to learn and not profanity in major languages are good bets.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One option already noted is giving a reasonable offer and sticking with it.Another option is simply asking for a quote , but do n't for the love of god tell them you 're planning a business .
Rather just send an informal message in the style of " I think $ domain is a cool name , yadda yadda... " .Personally I 'd opt for trying to figure out a name for the business that 's not taken .
Nonsense words that are easy to learn and not profanity in major languages are good bets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One option already noted is giving a reasonable offer and sticking with it.Another option is simply asking for a quote, but don't for the love of god tell them you're planning a business.
Rather just send an informal message in the style of "I think $domain is a cool name, yadda yadda...".Personally I'd opt for trying to figure out a name for the business that's not taken.
Nonsense words that are easy to learn and not profanity in major languages are good bets.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207695</id>
	<title>It's not going to happen</title>
	<author>Lord Byron II</author>
	<datestamp>1244120940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you think the name is worth? $100? $500? They'll want at least 10x that much. If you're willing to pay through the nose, then go ahead, but these people will do whatever is necessary to squeeze every last penny from you.</p><p>I would suggest either a different TLD, a different name, or a variation on the name: "MyBizInc.com" instead of "MyBiz.com".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you think the name is worth ?
$ 100 ? $ 500 ?
They 'll want at least 10x that much .
If you 're willing to pay through the nose , then go ahead , but these people will do whatever is necessary to squeeze every last penny from you.I would suggest either a different TLD , a different name , or a variation on the name : " MyBizInc.com " instead of " MyBiz.com " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you think the name is worth?
$100? $500?
They'll want at least 10x that much.
If you're willing to pay through the nose, then go ahead, but these people will do whatever is necessary to squeeze every last penny from you.I would suggest either a different TLD, a different name, or a variation on the name: "MyBizInc.com" instead of "MyBiz.com".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215165</id>
	<title>Recession = haggling time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244110920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got a domain name listed at $8,000 for $350 with some hardball tactics. First, I called the 1800, I didn't go through email. You need the human connection. Then, I said that I'd already registered a buch of other domains and that I wanted this one to complete the set. For instance {name}inc.com, {name}inc.org,  {name}.de etc. what I really wanted was {name}.com. Asked the operator to pull how many hits the website had received since registration, (2 or 3) mentioned that half the hits were me checking it out. Told him I'd offer $350, go ahead and check with your boss, supervisor, etc. Then deliver the killing line:  You can keep the domain with the $8,000 price tag and have zero dollars in hand, or you can have $350 in your account in the next 15 minutes. If business is good and you can afford to leave $350 on the sidewalk don't call me back. And I'm doing YOU guys the favor, I already have backup domains. I'm basically calling you up to give you money for little to no effort on your part.</p><p>A day later they called to say they'd accepted my offer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got a domain name listed at $ 8,000 for $ 350 with some hardball tactics .
First , I called the 1800 , I did n't go through email .
You need the human connection .
Then , I said that I 'd already registered a buch of other domains and that I wanted this one to complete the set .
For instance { name } inc.com , { name } inc.org , { name } .de etc .
what I really wanted was { name } .com .
Asked the operator to pull how many hits the website had received since registration , ( 2 or 3 ) mentioned that half the hits were me checking it out .
Told him I 'd offer $ 350 , go ahead and check with your boss , supervisor , etc .
Then deliver the killing line : You can keep the domain with the $ 8,000 price tag and have zero dollars in hand , or you can have $ 350 in your account in the next 15 minutes .
If business is good and you can afford to leave $ 350 on the sidewalk do n't call me back .
And I 'm doing YOU guys the favor , I already have backup domains .
I 'm basically calling you up to give you money for little to no effort on your part.A day later they called to say they 'd accepted my offer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got a domain name listed at $8,000 for $350 with some hardball tactics.
First, I called the 1800, I didn't go through email.
You need the human connection.
Then, I said that I'd already registered a buch of other domains and that I wanted this one to complete the set.
For instance {name}inc.com, {name}inc.org,  {name}.de etc.
what I really wanted was {name}.com.
Asked the operator to pull how many hits the website had received since registration, (2 or 3) mentioned that half the hits were me checking it out.
Told him I'd offer $350, go ahead and check with your boss, supervisor, etc.
Then deliver the killing line:  You can keep the domain with the $8,000 price tag and have zero dollars in hand, or you can have $350 in your account in the next 15 minutes.
If business is good and you can afford to leave $350 on the sidewalk don't call me back.
And I'm doing YOU guys the favor, I already have backup domains.
I'm basically calling you up to give you money for little to no effort on your part.A day later they called to say they'd accepted my offer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28214985</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>dogmatixpsych</author>
	<datestamp>1244110020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or, he'll make a ton in ad revenue (assuming we don't all block ads - I don't at least), see that the site receives a lot of traffic, and charge a lot more.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , he 'll make a ton in ad revenue ( assuming we do n't all block ads - I do n't at least ) , see that the site receives a lot of traffic , and charge a lot more .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, he'll make a ton in ad revenue (assuming we don't all block ads - I don't at least), see that the site receives a lot of traffic, and charge a lot more.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169</id>
	<title>Re:My suggestion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244123880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>MurderInTheFirst.com was already registered.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MurderInTheFirst.com was already registered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MurderInTheFirst.com was already registered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212399</id>
	<title>Re:low ball</title>
	<author>tgrigsby</author>
	<datestamp>1244141940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>they are going to use the car salesman mentality by "hit em really high... then scrape them off the ceiling so you can get the price you want to sell for".</i></p><p>That's exactly what they're doing.  And just like when you go to buy a car, do your research, figure out what it's worth to you and what you can afford to pay *before* you start the negotiation.  Low ball them, then scrape them off the floor so you can get the price you're comfortable with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they are going to use the car salesman mentality by " hit em really high... then scrape them off the ceiling so you can get the price you want to sell for " .That 's exactly what they 're doing .
And just like when you go to buy a car , do your research , figure out what it 's worth to you and what you can afford to pay * before * you start the negotiation .
Low ball them , then scrape them off the floor so you can get the price you 're comfortable with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they are going to use the car salesman mentality by "hit em really high... then scrape them off the ceiling so you can get the price you want to sell for".That's exactly what they're doing.
And just like when you go to buy a car, do your research, figure out what it's worth to you and what you can afford to pay *before* you start the negotiation.
Low ball them, then scrape them off the floor so you can get the price you're comfortable with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208963</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244127720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this any different than buying up real-estate? I buy some land next to a dump it's worth much less, if I buy beach front property, it's worth more. If I buy land on the speculation that it will be worth more because of recent developments, I'm investing.</p><p>I don't get how this is any different?</p><p>Now I agree that buying up someone&#226;(TM)s land from the bank then trying to extort money from them is bullsh#t, and so is the same practice on domains. But buying unregistered domains that are not copies or typo's of popular domains and hanging onto them until they sell is just legitimate business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this any different than buying up real-estate ?
I buy some land next to a dump it 's worth much less , if I buy beach front property , it 's worth more .
If I buy land on the speculation that it will be worth more because of recent developments , I 'm investing.I do n't get how this is any different ? Now I agree that buying up someone   ( TM ) s land from the bank then trying to extort money from them is bullsh # t , and so is the same practice on domains .
But buying unregistered domains that are not copies or typo 's of popular domains and hanging onto them until they sell is just legitimate business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this any different than buying up real-estate?
I buy some land next to a dump it's worth much less, if I buy beach front property, it's worth more.
If I buy land on the speculation that it will be worth more because of recent developments, I'm investing.I don't get how this is any different?Now I agree that buying up someoneâ(TM)s land from the bank then trying to extort money from them is bullsh#t, and so is the same practice on domains.
But buying unregistered domains that are not copies or typo's of popular domains and hanging onto them until they sell is just legitimate business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715</id>
	<title>My suggestion</title>
	<author>C\_Kode</author>
	<datestamp>1244121060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Murder in the first.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Murder in the first .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Murder in the first.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208577</id>
	<title>Google</title>
	<author>BiggoronSword</author>
	<datestamp>1244126040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>More and more, domains are becoming less relevant.  Instead, people are using search engines as their primary navigation tool.  I don't think it matters what domain you actually purchase.  I think focusing on your Google PageRank will grant you a better return on invested time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More and more , domains are becoming less relevant .
Instead , people are using search engines as their primary navigation tool .
I do n't think it matters what domain you actually purchase .
I think focusing on your Google PageRank will grant you a better return on invested time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More and more, domains are becoming less relevant.
Instead, people are using search engines as their primary navigation tool.
I don't think it matters what domain you actually purchase.
I think focusing on your Google PageRank will grant you a better return on invested time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209893</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Arathrael</author>
	<datestamp>1244131380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message. We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Riiiiight... if you really wanted 'fair offers', wouldn't it be more productive to give some actual indication of what you think a fair offer is? It's all well and good to say "it's based on this, this, and this" and "we get offers that are two-three orders of magnitude out", but that's not saying much really without any kind of starting point (are people offering you one instead of a 1000 dollars/euros/whatevers or what?). If you can't/won't give an actual example of a fair offer, or even an indication of the ranges a fair offer might fall into, how can you expect others to?<br>
<br>
You gave examples of three domains, "ghdn.com, geen.com, geek.com", what would you regard as fair offers - ballpark figures - on those for example?<br>
<br>
Having asked that, I reckon you're trying for more of a generic "There's loads of demand, honest! Offer me loads of money or you won't get it! Muahahahaha!" approach here, rather than an actually helpful and informative approach, so I'm not really expecting an answer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer , but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message .
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option .
Riiiiight... if you really wanted 'fair offers ' , would n't it be more productive to give some actual indication of what you think a fair offer is ?
It 's all well and good to say " it 's based on this , this , and this " and " we get offers that are two-three orders of magnitude out " , but that 's not saying much really without any kind of starting point ( are people offering you one instead of a 1000 dollars/euros/whatevers or what ? ) .
If you ca n't/wo n't give an actual example of a fair offer , or even an indication of the ranges a fair offer might fall into , how can you expect others to ?
You gave examples of three domains , " ghdn.com , geen.com , geek.com " , what would you regard as fair offers - ballpark figures - on those for example ?
Having asked that , I reckon you 're trying for more of a generic " There 's loads of demand , honest !
Offer me loads of money or you wo n't get it !
Muahahahaha ! " approach here , rather than an actually helpful and informative approach , so I 'm not really expecting an answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.
Riiiiight... if you really wanted 'fair offers', wouldn't it be more productive to give some actual indication of what you think a fair offer is?
It's all well and good to say "it's based on this, this, and this" and "we get offers that are two-three orders of magnitude out", but that's not saying much really without any kind of starting point (are people offering you one instead of a 1000 dollars/euros/whatevers or what?).
If you can't/won't give an actual example of a fair offer, or even an indication of the ranges a fair offer might fall into, how can you expect others to?
You gave examples of three domains, "ghdn.com, geen.com, geek.com", what would you regard as fair offers - ballpark figures - on those for example?
Having asked that, I reckon you're trying for more of a generic "There's loads of demand, honest!
Offer me loads of money or you won't get it!
Muahahahaha!" approach here, rather than an actually helpful and informative approach, so I'm not really expecting an answer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211775</id>
	<title>Re:Your customers won't care</title>
	<author>Wannabe Code Monkey</author>
	<datestamp>1244139180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com. They will type your company name into google and click on the result. If they're recurring customers, they will bookmark your page.</p></div></blockquote><p>You're right and you're wrong. I know that what many people do is this: type their query into google which might contain multiple words, it might be a full sentence, it might be in question form... And then they will add<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com to it. Many people apparently think, "If it's on the internet, I have to add<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com". So you'll see queries like [where can I buy shoes.com]. They will type in the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com, it's been drilled into them. However it might be in the wrong text box. It's probably still beneficial to get yourcompanyname.com as people will type that in where ever they see a text input box.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add .com .
They will type your company name into google and click on the result .
If they 're recurring customers , they will bookmark your page.You 're right and you 're wrong .
I know that what many people do is this : type their query into google which might contain multiple words , it might be a full sentence , it might be in question form... And then they will add .com to it .
Many people apparently think , " If it 's on the internet , I have to add .com " .
So you 'll see queries like [ where can I buy shoes.com ] .
They will type in the .com , it 's been drilled into them .
However it might be in the wrong text box .
It 's probably still beneficial to get yourcompanyname.com as people will type that in where ever they see a text input box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add .com.
They will type your company name into google and click on the result.
If they're recurring customers, they will bookmark your page.You're right and you're wrong.
I know that what many people do is this: type their query into google which might contain multiple words, it might be a full sentence, it might be in question form... And then they will add .com to it.
Many people apparently think, "If it's on the internet, I have to add .com".
So you'll see queries like [where can I buy shoes.com].
They will type in the .com, it's been drilled into them.
However it might be in the wrong text box.
It's probably still beneficial to get yourcompanyname.com as people will type that in where ever they see a text input box.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209123</id>
	<title>Assumptions</title>
	<author>LordGibson</author>
	<datestamp>1244128500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The post is a little light on details, so I'm taking some liberties here. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.<br>
<br>
Just because the website for a domain doesn't have anything unique or interesting on it doesn't mean the owner is a cybersquatter.  The owner could just as easily be using the domain for e-mail only.  Or for un-Iinked web pages for personal (or private business) use.  I own several domains like this.  Public websites are only one single (potential) aspect of a domain.  It could legitimately and happily be used in other ways.  Or maybe he really plans to put a site up some day but hasn't gotten around to it yet.<br>
<br>
My advice to the submitter is to first and foremost keep these things in mind.  Unless you know for certain the domain is being squatted on, don't approach negotiations from that standpoint.<br>
<br>
I would suggest deciding up front what the domain is worth to you.  If you're eventually unable to agree on a price in that neighborhood (or below), you need to be prepared to move on.  You have no leverage.  Period.<br>
<br>
If you're unwilling to move on, then clearly the value you initially placed on the domain is too low.  Just because you don't want to pay more, doesn't mean you're entitled to get it for less.  The domain is worth exactly what someone who wants it is willing to pay for it.  Not a penny less.  Not some arbitrary "fair" amount.  That's how free market economics works.<br>
<br>
Start by soliciting an offer.  Do your best to get the owner to throw out a number first.  If you absolutely must make the first offer, start low, but don't be unreasonable or insulting.  I wouldn't expect any half-decent domain to go for less than $100.<br>
<br>
Pretend you're buying a used car and you should make out OK.<br>
<br>
A tangential issue is to CYA after an agreement is reached.  Take the necessary steps to protect your payment and ensure full transfer of ownership.<br>
<br>
LG.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The post is a little light on details , so I 'm taking some liberties here .
. .
Just because the website for a domain does n't have anything unique or interesting on it does n't mean the owner is a cybersquatter .
The owner could just as easily be using the domain for e-mail only .
Or for un-Iinked web pages for personal ( or private business ) use .
I own several domains like this .
Public websites are only one single ( potential ) aspect of a domain .
It could legitimately and happily be used in other ways .
Or maybe he really plans to put a site up some day but has n't gotten around to it yet .
My advice to the submitter is to first and foremost keep these things in mind .
Unless you know for certain the domain is being squatted on , do n't approach negotiations from that standpoint .
I would suggest deciding up front what the domain is worth to you .
If you 're eventually unable to agree on a price in that neighborhood ( or below ) , you need to be prepared to move on .
You have no leverage .
Period . If you 're unwilling to move on , then clearly the value you initially placed on the domain is too low .
Just because you do n't want to pay more , does n't mean you 're entitled to get it for less .
The domain is worth exactly what someone who wants it is willing to pay for it .
Not a penny less .
Not some arbitrary " fair " amount .
That 's how free market economics works .
Start by soliciting an offer .
Do your best to get the owner to throw out a number first .
If you absolutely must make the first offer , start low , but do n't be unreasonable or insulting .
I would n't expect any half-decent domain to go for less than $ 100 .
Pretend you 're buying a used car and you should make out OK . A tangential issue is to CYA after an agreement is reached .
Take the necessary steps to protect your payment and ensure full transfer of ownership .
LG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The post is a little light on details, so I'm taking some liberties here.
. .
Just because the website for a domain doesn't have anything unique or interesting on it doesn't mean the owner is a cybersquatter.
The owner could just as easily be using the domain for e-mail only.
Or for un-Iinked web pages for personal (or private business) use.
I own several domains like this.
Public websites are only one single (potential) aspect of a domain.
It could legitimately and happily be used in other ways.
Or maybe he really plans to put a site up some day but hasn't gotten around to it yet.
My advice to the submitter is to first and foremost keep these things in mind.
Unless you know for certain the domain is being squatted on, don't approach negotiations from that standpoint.
I would suggest deciding up front what the domain is worth to you.
If you're eventually unable to agree on a price in that neighborhood (or below), you need to be prepared to move on.
You have no leverage.
Period.

If you're unwilling to move on, then clearly the value you initially placed on the domain is too low.
Just because you don't want to pay more, doesn't mean you're entitled to get it for less.
The domain is worth exactly what someone who wants it is willing to pay for it.
Not a penny less.
Not some arbitrary "fair" amount.
That's how free market economics works.
Start by soliciting an offer.
Do your best to get the owner to throw out a number first.
If you absolutely must make the first offer, start low, but don't be unreasonable or insulting.
I wouldn't expect any half-decent domain to go for less than $100.
Pretend you're buying a used car and you should make out OK.

A tangential issue is to CYA after an agreement is reached.
Take the necessary steps to protect your payment and ensure full transfer of ownership.
LG.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208759</id>
	<title>In Australia...</title>
	<author>missileman</author>
	<datestamp>1244126880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to show proof to the registrar that you have the company name registered, (for a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com.au), and for others, such as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org.au you must show your organisation is substantially tied to that name.</p><p>Personally I think it's a much better system than being able to randomly register anything. Owning a domain name you have no legitimate claim to can result in you losing your registration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to show proof to the registrar that you have the company name registered , ( for a .com.au ) , and for others , such as .org.au you must show your organisation is substantially tied to that name.Personally I think it 's a much better system than being able to randomly register anything .
Owning a domain name you have no legitimate claim to can result in you losing your registration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to show proof to the registrar that you have the company name registered, (for a .com.au), and for others, such as .org.au you must show your organisation is substantially tied to that name.Personally I think it's a much better system than being able to randomly register anything.
Owning a domain name you have no legitimate claim to can result in you losing your registration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28221305</id>
	<title>Re:Your customers won't care</title>
	<author>pbhj</author>
	<datestamp>1244211840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Be careful of trademark issues. If the domain holder has any type of business dealings using a domain then that is a trademark for that business. It could invalidate your registration of a mark; IANA TradeMark Lawyer.</p><p>Also as your business grows and becomes established then their domain name becomes more valuable. They have an established right to use it (YMMV as might theirs) and could do well skimming off any type-in-traffic (assuming your gamble of getting top of the SERP listings works). Also if they then SEO the domain they're likely to beat you (at the moment domain name keywords are very strong), they have the prior right to use the name as their trademark<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... you market their business for them and they take [some of] the profit.</p><p>If you have a choice I don't think it's worth the risk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Be careful of trademark issues .
If the domain holder has any type of business dealings using a domain then that is a trademark for that business .
It could invalidate your registration of a mark ; IANA TradeMark Lawyer.Also as your business grows and becomes established then their domain name becomes more valuable .
They have an established right to use it ( YMMV as might theirs ) and could do well skimming off any type-in-traffic ( assuming your gamble of getting top of the SERP listings works ) .
Also if they then SEO the domain they 're likely to beat you ( at the moment domain name keywords are very strong ) , they have the prior right to use the name as their trademark ... you market their business for them and they take [ some of ] the profit.If you have a choice I do n't think it 's worth the risk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be careful of trademark issues.
If the domain holder has any type of business dealings using a domain then that is a trademark for that business.
It could invalidate your registration of a mark; IANA TradeMark Lawyer.Also as your business grows and becomes established then their domain name becomes more valuable.
They have an established right to use it (YMMV as might theirs) and could do well skimming off any type-in-traffic (assuming your gamble of getting top of the SERP listings works).
Also if they then SEO the domain they're likely to beat you (at the moment domain name keywords are very strong), they have the prior right to use the name as their trademark ... you market their business for them and they take [some of] the profit.If you have a choice I don't think it's worth the risk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210701</id>
	<title>Well, yeah...</title>
	<author>Deadstick</author>
	<datestamp>1244134800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Do you have any advice on how to approach the owners of these domains to get them at a reasonable cost?</i> <p>
I believe Al Pacino does.</p><p>
rj</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have any advice on how to approach the owners of these domains to get them at a reasonable cost ?
I believe Al Pacino does .
rj</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have any advice on how to approach the owners of these domains to get them at a reasonable cost?
I believe Al Pacino does.
rj</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209077</id>
	<title>$100 to $500?</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1244128320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have owned criv.com since 1998.  It's short, pronounceable (sort of), and on the com tld.  Check it out, it's my wife's flower farm (<b>C</b>oos <b>Riv</b>iera).<br>
<br>
Over the years I've had a few people asking if I'm looking to sell.  Since I am not looking to sell, I have always quoted the same price: $48,000.  After reading these negotiating tactics, I understand why I still own it!  As for the price, I figure my wife would be angry if I sold the domain, but she'd be mollified by the new car I'd buy with the proceeds.<br>
<br>
Anyone else have a pronounceable, 4-letter dot com?  What would it take for you to sell?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have owned criv.com since 1998 .
It 's short , pronounceable ( sort of ) , and on the com tld .
Check it out , it 's my wife 's flower farm ( Coos Riviera ) .
Over the years I 've had a few people asking if I 'm looking to sell .
Since I am not looking to sell , I have always quoted the same price : $ 48,000 .
After reading these negotiating tactics , I understand why I still own it !
As for the price , I figure my wife would be angry if I sold the domain , but she 'd be mollified by the new car I 'd buy with the proceeds .
Anyone else have a pronounceable , 4-letter dot com ?
What would it take for you to sell ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have owned criv.com since 1998.
It's short, pronounceable (sort of), and on the com tld.
Check it out, it's my wife's flower farm (Coos Riviera).
Over the years I've had a few people asking if I'm looking to sell.
Since I am not looking to sell, I have always quoted the same price: $48,000.
After reading these negotiating tactics, I understand why I still own it!
As for the price, I figure my wife would be angry if I sold the domain, but she'd be mollified by the new car I'd buy with the proceeds.
Anyone else have a pronounceable, 4-letter dot com?
What would it take for you to sell?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28218459</id>
	<title>Massive Markups</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244136480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried to purchase a jemson.com as you can see its doing nothing at present...<br>Being an obscure name, I though I might get away with it for a few hundred dollars.<br>On contacting the owner they asked for US$50,000 and not a penny less!</p><p>I laughed my head off and then decided on a different name that was available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to purchase a jemson.com as you can see its doing nothing at present...Being an obscure name , I though I might get away with it for a few hundred dollars.On contacting the owner they asked for US $ 50,000 and not a penny less ! I laughed my head off and then decided on a different name that was available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to purchase a jemson.com as you can see its doing nothing at present...Being an obscure name, I though I might get away with it for a few hundred dollars.On contacting the owner they asked for US$50,000 and not a penny less!I laughed my head off and then decided on a different name that was available.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210647</id>
	<title>Re:Surname</title>
	<author>BOFslime</author>
	<datestamp>1244134620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to own my surname, owned it for 5 years or so, I forgot to renew it and it expired.  I attempted to purchase it as it went out to the wild (it was in the deleted status but not released yet, about a 30 day period), but it got snatched by a squatter who is now attempting to sell it.  Big group, doesn't care about the name, only that it was previously registered and that they want to sell it back to the owner (me).  There are other TLD's open with my surname (its very very uncommon), but I had a lot of stuff tied to my particular TLD.</p><p>I researched back when this happened, but $1300 was ridiculous to dispute on something that I just administrated for my family.  I attempted to contact the law firm that registered and was promptly ignored.  This was a year ago, I waited to see if they would let the domain go, nobody's going to buy it from them, but they renewed it for another 1 year.</p><p>I honestly believe icann can do more about this issue, obvious squatters should pay more to hold the name space.  Something to deter large organizations from simply owning domain names that was once previously owned.   I could register some random text<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com "jdklajflkda.com" let it expire, and I bet you a squatter picks it up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to own my surname , owned it for 5 years or so , I forgot to renew it and it expired .
I attempted to purchase it as it went out to the wild ( it was in the deleted status but not released yet , about a 30 day period ) , but it got snatched by a squatter who is now attempting to sell it .
Big group , does n't care about the name , only that it was previously registered and that they want to sell it back to the owner ( me ) .
There are other TLD 's open with my surname ( its very very uncommon ) , but I had a lot of stuff tied to my particular TLD.I researched back when this happened , but $ 1300 was ridiculous to dispute on something that I just administrated for my family .
I attempted to contact the law firm that registered and was promptly ignored .
This was a year ago , I waited to see if they would let the domain go , nobody 's going to buy it from them , but they renewed it for another 1 year.I honestly believe icann can do more about this issue , obvious squatters should pay more to hold the name space .
Something to deter large organizations from simply owning domain names that was once previously owned .
I could register some random text .com " jdklajflkda.com " let it expire , and I bet you a squatter picks it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to own my surname, owned it for 5 years or so, I forgot to renew it and it expired.
I attempted to purchase it as it went out to the wild (it was in the deleted status but not released yet, about a 30 day period), but it got snatched by a squatter who is now attempting to sell it.
Big group, doesn't care about the name, only that it was previously registered and that they want to sell it back to the owner (me).
There are other TLD's open with my surname (its very very uncommon), but I had a lot of stuff tied to my particular TLD.I researched back when this happened, but $1300 was ridiculous to dispute on something that I just administrated for my family.
I attempted to contact the law firm that registered and was promptly ignored.
This was a year ago, I waited to see if they would let the domain go, nobody's going to buy it from them, but they renewed it for another 1 year.I honestly believe icann can do more about this issue, obvious squatters should pay more to hold the name space.
Something to deter large organizations from simply owning domain names that was once previously owned.
I could register some random text .com "jdklajflkda.com" let it expire, and I bet you a squatter picks it up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207839</id>
	<title>trade don't buy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Find a more valuable domain name, especially one the owner would be interested in, and propose a trade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Find a more valuable domain name , especially one the owner would be interested in , and propose a trade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Find a more valuable domain name, especially one the owner would be interested in, and propose a trade.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28216815</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244119980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or the squatter could jack up the price to infinity for all the traffic it's receiving.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or the squatter could jack up the price to infinity for all the traffic it 's receiving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or the squatter could jack up the price to infinity for all the traffic it's receiving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208087</id>
	<title>Re:Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>DiceRoller</author>
	<datestamp>1244123520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You could also try waiting till the domain expires and they have to renew and try to register it then before they do.  That takes time and cunning skills.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could also try waiting till the domain expires and they have to renew and try to register it then before they do .
That takes time and cunning skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could also try waiting till the domain expires and they have to renew and try to register it then before they do.
That takes time and cunning skills.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28216595</id>
	<title>We screwed it up</title>
	<author>btempleton</author>
	<datestamp>1244118720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Strangely, it was the trademark lawyers who figured out, centuries ago, that ownership rights should only be given in names without inherent value, for which you create the value.   Generic terms, with meaning and inherent value, can't be owned.</p><p>We should have listened to their wisdom (odd to say that) but instead we built a space where an infinite resource became scarce, because we made just one prime area,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com, for commerce, so owning word.com was as good, or better than owning "word" -- and nobody should own words.</p><p>And thus all our domain troubles, and speculation, were born.  The only way out of it would be to remove the specialness of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com, which is a lot harder to do now than in the past.  If there were a modest number of equally valuable TLDs -- themselves with no special meaning, made up terms -- so that no one was inherently better than another, and so you could always find what you wanted, it would be good.  But com means commercial and so will be special for decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Strangely , it was the trademark lawyers who figured out , centuries ago , that ownership rights should only be given in names without inherent value , for which you create the value .
Generic terms , with meaning and inherent value , ca n't be owned.We should have listened to their wisdom ( odd to say that ) but instead we built a space where an infinite resource became scarce , because we made just one prime area , .com , for commerce , so owning word.com was as good , or better than owning " word " -- and nobody should own words.And thus all our domain troubles , and speculation , were born .
The only way out of it would be to remove the specialness of .com , which is a lot harder to do now than in the past .
If there were a modest number of equally valuable TLDs -- themselves with no special meaning , made up terms -- so that no one was inherently better than another , and so you could always find what you wanted , it would be good .
But com means commercial and so will be special for decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strangely, it was the trademark lawyers who figured out, centuries ago, that ownership rights should only be given in names without inherent value, for which you create the value.
Generic terms, with meaning and inherent value, can't be owned.We should have listened to their wisdom (odd to say that) but instead we built a space where an infinite resource became scarce, because we made just one prime area, .com, for commerce, so owning word.com was as good, or better than owning "word" -- and nobody should own words.And thus all our domain troubles, and speculation, were born.
The only way out of it would be to remove the specialness of .com, which is a lot harder to do now than in the past.
If there were a modest number of equally valuable TLDs -- themselves with no special meaning, made up terms -- so that no one was inherently better than another, and so you could always find what you wanted, it would be good.
But com means commercial and so will be special for decades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211481</id>
	<title>I agree</title>
	<author>DriveMelter</author>
	<datestamp>1244137920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just because your business is different to a domainer, does not mean that their business is not a valid one. Advertising on an unused domain is a perfectly reasonable business and is really no different from advertising on the side of a building whilst you are waiting to sell it. If I visit "flea.com" because I'm interested in getting cheap meds for my pets then it provides exactly what I am looking for. Would that be more or less valid a use if it had "Freds Light Entertainment Associates" hosted on it.

Squatting implies that the domains are gained for no effort or that they are free. Yes, some of them are bought at a low price and some of them have a large mark up. However, it's not an easy business to be in, advertising has to be arranged, hosting paid for, design work done and portfolios managed. It's still a business, same as yours.

Why should different domains not have different values? Is this any different to the price of a square foot of land having different prices dependant on it's location?

To answer the origional question, my tips would be to find out what other businesses have paid for their domain names. The price will depend on the things listed above, the number of others who have enquired about the same name, price of similar names, current googlepage rank, links in, age and lastly and rather unfairly how much the seller thinks you will pay for it. Check archive.org to see what the site has been used for previously.

I don't buy or sell domains as a business but I've chatted to some people who do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because your business is different to a domainer , does not mean that their business is not a valid one .
Advertising on an unused domain is a perfectly reasonable business and is really no different from advertising on the side of a building whilst you are waiting to sell it .
If I visit " flea.com " because I 'm interested in getting cheap meds for my pets then it provides exactly what I am looking for .
Would that be more or less valid a use if it had " Freds Light Entertainment Associates " hosted on it .
Squatting implies that the domains are gained for no effort or that they are free .
Yes , some of them are bought at a low price and some of them have a large mark up .
However , it 's not an easy business to be in , advertising has to be arranged , hosting paid for , design work done and portfolios managed .
It 's still a business , same as yours .
Why should different domains not have different values ?
Is this any different to the price of a square foot of land having different prices dependant on it 's location ?
To answer the origional question , my tips would be to find out what other businesses have paid for their domain names .
The price will depend on the things listed above , the number of others who have enquired about the same name , price of similar names , current googlepage rank , links in , age and lastly and rather unfairly how much the seller thinks you will pay for it .
Check archive.org to see what the site has been used for previously .
I do n't buy or sell domains as a business but I 've chatted to some people who do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because your business is different to a domainer, does not mean that their business is not a valid one.
Advertising on an unused domain is a perfectly reasonable business and is really no different from advertising on the side of a building whilst you are waiting to sell it.
If I visit "flea.com" because I'm interested in getting cheap meds for my pets then it provides exactly what I am looking for.
Would that be more or less valid a use if it had "Freds Light Entertainment Associates" hosted on it.
Squatting implies that the domains are gained for no effort or that they are free.
Yes, some of them are bought at a low price and some of them have a large mark up.
However, it's not an easy business to be in, advertising has to be arranged, hosting paid for, design work done and portfolios managed.
It's still a business, same as yours.
Why should different domains not have different values?
Is this any different to the price of a square foot of land having different prices dependant on it's location?
To answer the origional question, my tips would be to find out what other businesses have paid for their domain names.
The price will depend on the things listed above, the number of others who have enquired about the same name, price of similar names, current googlepage rank, links in, age and lastly and rather unfairly how much the seller thinks you will pay for it.
Check archive.org to see what the site has been used for previously.
I don't buy or sell domains as a business but I've chatted to some people who do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208673</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1244126520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.</p></div></blockquote><p>Why do they need to make an offer? Why can't you put a selling price on it? That way I would know what the price is. I will also know if it is in my price range or if I should go elsewhere.</p><p>The situation now is as it seems: Say you would sell for $500. When I am offering $1.000 I am sure you won't say that you only want $500, so you steal $500 from me. When I say $200 you do not even look at the offer, even if I would be willing to go to $500.</p><p>So why not put the price on the website? It is a con (yes a con) that is done with many things where people have no idea and you just rob them of as much money as possible. Be upfront and make a website where they can look up ALL your domains and the prices you ask for them. Only then I would start to believe that you try to run an honest business.</p><p>Otherwise it is just a scam.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer , but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.Why do they need to make an offer ?
Why ca n't you put a selling price on it ?
That way I would know what the price is .
I will also know if it is in my price range or if I should go elsewhere.The situation now is as it seems : Say you would sell for $ 500 .
When I am offering $ 1.000 I am sure you wo n't say that you only want $ 500 , so you steal $ 500 from me .
When I say $ 200 you do not even look at the offer , even if I would be willing to go to $ 500.So why not put the price on the website ?
It is a con ( yes a con ) that is done with many things where people have no idea and you just rob them of as much money as possible .
Be upfront and make a website where they can look up ALL your domains and the prices you ask for them .
Only then I would start to believe that you try to run an honest business.Otherwise it is just a scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.Why do they need to make an offer?
Why can't you put a selling price on it?
That way I would know what the price is.
I will also know if it is in my price range or if I should go elsewhere.The situation now is as it seems: Say you would sell for $500.
When I am offering $1.000 I am sure you won't say that you only want $500, so you steal $500 from me.
When I say $200 you do not even look at the offer, even if I would be willing to go to $500.So why not put the price on the website?
It is a con (yes a con) that is done with many things where people have no idea and you just rob them of as much money as possible.
Be upfront and make a website where they can look up ALL your domains and the prices you ask for them.
Only then I would start to believe that you try to run an honest business.Otherwise it is just a scam.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28220557</id>
	<title>Cybersquatter ...No Problem!</title>
	<author>Chiindi</author>
	<datestamp>1244206800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Make them an offer they can't refuse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Make them an offer they ca n't refuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make them an offer they can't refuse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208217</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244124060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh my, a genuine cybersquatter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh my , a genuine cybersquatter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh my, a genuine cybersquatter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28253459</id>
	<title>How fair is first come, first serve?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244487720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone else think that first come, first serve isn't exactly the most fair system, either? I mean it seems to me that the guy who got pants.com or sneakers.com because he was first to register it really isn't necessarily that much more deserving than a guy who can pay $10k for it but didn't come along until a bit later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else think that first come , first serve is n't exactly the most fair system , either ?
I mean it seems to me that the guy who got pants.com or sneakers.com because he was first to register it really is n't necessarily that much more deserving than a guy who can pay $ 10k for it but did n't come along until a bit later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else think that first come, first serve isn't exactly the most fair system, either?
I mean it seems to me that the guy who got pants.com or sneakers.com because he was first to register it really isn't necessarily that much more deserving than a guy who can pay $10k for it but didn't come along until a bit later.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208595</id>
	<title>Re:Three pieces of advice</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1244126160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can recommend Sedo.com as a reliable and honest domain escrow service. If you're looking for recommendations. I also have a few domain names for sale, you can take one for your business: <a href="http://blakeyrat.com/index.php/domain-names-for-sale/" title="blakeyrat.com">http://blakeyrat.com/index.php/domain-names-for-sale/</a> [blakeyrat.com]</p><p>For example, "webpageofshit" might be appropriate.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can recommend Sedo.com as a reliable and honest domain escrow service .
If you 're looking for recommendations .
I also have a few domain names for sale , you can take one for your business : http : //blakeyrat.com/index.php/domain-names-for-sale/ [ blakeyrat.com ] For example , " webpageofshit " might be appropriate .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can recommend Sedo.com as a reliable and honest domain escrow service.
If you're looking for recommendations.
I also have a few domain names for sale, you can take one for your business: http://blakeyrat.com/index.php/domain-names-for-sale/ [blakeyrat.com]For example, "webpageofshit" might be appropriate.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207857</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208697</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1244126580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.</i></p><p>That's true of real estate, precious gems, and oil/natural gas as well. Why is domaining "wrong" and those other speculative businesses "right?"</p><p>If you're griping just because you didn't buy up domains when expensive ones were cheap-- well, I wasn't able to buy up land around Lake Washington when it was cheap either. Sometimes you just have to cope.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains , except to capitalize on the scarcity.That 's true of real estate , precious gems , and oil/natural gas as well .
Why is domaining " wrong " and those other speculative businesses " right ?
" If you 're griping just because you did n't buy up domains when expensive ones were cheap-- well , I was n't able to buy up land around Lake Washington when it was cheap either .
Sometimes you just have to cope .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.That's true of real estate, precious gems, and oil/natural gas as well.
Why is domaining "wrong" and those other speculative businesses "right?
"If you're griping just because you didn't buy up domains when expensive ones were cheap-- well, I wasn't able to buy up land around Lake Washington when it was cheap either.
Sometimes you just have to cope.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207757</id>
	<title>low ball</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>within the past year, my company went around purchasing the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.us,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.biz, etc TLDs for our domain.  none of them were taken except for the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net version.  we called the guy up and said we were interested and asked what his asking price was.  he said $2000, to which we said that was way too high.  he came back to us with, "well how much do you want to offer for it".  i think that our final buying price was between $300 and $500.
<br>
<br>
in that experience, i realized that some squatters are just one or two guys that sat around and registered a ton of domains for a couple of dollars a piece.  they are going to use the car salesman mentality by "hit em really high... then scrape them off the ceiling so you can get the price you want to sell for".  so they slap you with the $2000 as their asking price knowing that you won't pay it.  they know that you won't come back with a $50 offer since their first offer was so high.  if they had first said $500, then you probably wouldn't offer them as much.  if you really want to play their game and you are just getting started, it might be safe to just kill your webserver while you are on the phone with them so that they can't see what type of company you are or if you has the money bags.
<br>
<br>
anyway, just go into it like you are buying a car.  don't seem too interested or you will pay way more than you should.</htmltext>
<tokenext>within the past year , my company went around purchasing the .net , .us , .biz , etc TLDs for our domain .
none of them were taken except for the .net version .
we called the guy up and said we were interested and asked what his asking price was .
he said $ 2000 , to which we said that was way too high .
he came back to us with , " well how much do you want to offer for it " .
i think that our final buying price was between $ 300 and $ 500 .
in that experience , i realized that some squatters are just one or two guys that sat around and registered a ton of domains for a couple of dollars a piece .
they are going to use the car salesman mentality by " hit em really high... then scrape them off the ceiling so you can get the price you want to sell for " .
so they slap you with the $ 2000 as their asking price knowing that you wo n't pay it .
they know that you wo n't come back with a $ 50 offer since their first offer was so high .
if they had first said $ 500 , then you probably would n't offer them as much .
if you really want to play their game and you are just getting started , it might be safe to just kill your webserver while you are on the phone with them so that they ca n't see what type of company you are or if you has the money bags .
anyway , just go into it like you are buying a car .
do n't seem too interested or you will pay way more than you should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>within the past year, my company went around purchasing the .net, .us, .biz, etc TLDs for our domain.
none of them were taken except for the .net version.
we called the guy up and said we were interested and asked what his asking price was.
he said $2000, to which we said that was way too high.
he came back to us with, "well how much do you want to offer for it".
i think that our final buying price was between $300 and $500.
in that experience, i realized that some squatters are just one or two guys that sat around and registered a ton of domains for a couple of dollars a piece.
they are going to use the car salesman mentality by "hit em really high... then scrape them off the ceiling so you can get the price you want to sell for".
so they slap you with the $2000 as their asking price knowing that you won't pay it.
they know that you won't come back with a $50 offer since their first offer was so high.
if they had first said $500, then you probably wouldn't offer them as much.
if you really want to play their game and you are just getting started, it might be safe to just kill your webserver while you are on the phone with them so that they can't see what type of company you are or if you has the money bags.
anyway, just go into it like you are buying a car.
don't seem too interested or you will pay way more than you should.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208183</id>
	<title>A Bit of Advice</title>
	<author>emeri1md</author>
	<datestamp>1244123940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally, I'd start by looking at similar names.  Or different extensions.  By making an offer, you may drive them to buy other, similar domain names in order to force you to pay a higher price.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I 'd start by looking at similar names .
Or different extensions .
By making an offer , you may drive them to buy other , similar domain names in order to force you to pay a higher price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I'd start by looking at similar names.
Or different extensions.
By making an offer, you may drive them to buy other, similar domain names in order to force you to pay a higher price.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209449</id>
	<title>I can offer FREE domains</title>
	<author>OpenDomain</author>
	<datestamp>1244129580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has been a while since I posted on slashdot, but I could not resist because this is WHAT I DO (but WHITEHAT)</p><p>Here are some references: (Please be careful with MODS - these are NOT links to my sites]<br><a href="http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/140576" title="linux.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/140576</a> [linux.com]<br><a href="http://digg.com/tech\_news/The\_Drupal\_com\_domain\_has\_been\_donated\_to\_Dries\_Buytaert" title="digg.com" rel="nofollow">http://digg.com/tech\_news/The\_Drupal\_com\_domain\_has\_been\_donated\_to\_Dries\_Buytaert</a> [digg.com]<br><a href="http://xmpp.org/xsf/press/2005-12-30.shtml" title="xmpp.org" rel="nofollow">http://xmpp.org/xsf/press/2005-12-30.shtml</a> [xmpp.org]</p><p>Here is my simple advice:<br>You are screwed.</p><p>The squatters won long ago - THEY know the rules:<br>1) Register a domain<br>2) Be careful!<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; a) Do not put up infringing content<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; b) Put up a 'search' page to generate some profit<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; c) Do not offer to sell, just wait<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; d) Hide in another country with nicer rules for scammers if possible<br>3) Profit!</p><p>Here are my suggestions<br>1) Choose a different domain<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; a) Choose another Top Level Domain , may I suggest<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.TV ? (I may be biased as I bought the first premium dot TV domain)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; b) I can offer some for FREE for Open Source communities  (Notice: No link to me - just google for OpenDomain )<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; c) Try different variations of the brand<br>2) Suck it up and pay.<br>
&nbsp; a) Lease the domain<br>
&nbsp; b) Negotiate - a lawyer may help if you DO have IP</p><p>Good luck!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has been a while since I posted on slashdot , but I could not resist because this is WHAT I DO ( but WHITEHAT ) Here are some references : ( Please be careful with MODS - these are NOT links to my sites ] http : //www.linux.com/archive/feature/140576 [ linux.com ] http : //digg.com/tech \ _news/The \ _Drupal \ _com \ _domain \ _has \ _been \ _donated \ _to \ _Dries \ _Buytaert [ digg.com ] http : //xmpp.org/xsf/press/2005-12-30.shtml [ xmpp.org ] Here is my simple advice : You are screwed.The squatters won long ago - THEY know the rules : 1 ) Register a domain2 ) Be careful !
      a ) Do not put up infringing content       b ) Put up a 'search ' page to generate some profit       c ) Do not offer to sell , just wait       d ) Hide in another country with nicer rules for scammers if possible3 ) Profit ! Here are my suggestions1 ) Choose a different domain       a ) Choose another Top Level Domain , may I suggest .TV ?
( I may be biased as I bought the first premium dot TV domain )       b ) I can offer some for FREE for Open Source communities ( Notice : No link to me - just google for OpenDomain )       c ) Try different variations of the brand2 ) Suck it up and pay .
  a ) Lease the domain   b ) Negotiate - a lawyer may help if you DO have IPGood luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has been a while since I posted on slashdot, but I could not resist because this is WHAT I DO (but WHITEHAT)Here are some references: (Please be careful with MODS - these are NOT links to my sites]http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/140576 [linux.com]http://digg.com/tech\_news/The\_Drupal\_com\_domain\_has\_been\_donated\_to\_Dries\_Buytaert [digg.com]http://xmpp.org/xsf/press/2005-12-30.shtml [xmpp.org]Here is my simple advice:You are screwed.The squatters won long ago - THEY know the rules:1) Register a domain2) Be careful!
      a) Do not put up infringing content
      b) Put up a 'search' page to generate some profit
      c) Do not offer to sell, just wait
      d) Hide in another country with nicer rules for scammers if possible3) Profit!Here are my suggestions1) Choose a different domain
      a) Choose another Top Level Domain , may I suggest .TV ?
(I may be biased as I bought the first premium dot TV domain)
      b) I can offer some for FREE for Open Source communities  (Notice: No link to me - just google for OpenDomain )
      c) Try different variations of the brand2) Suck it up and pay.
  a) Lease the domain
  b) Negotiate - a lawyer may help if you DO have IPGood luck!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210835</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244135280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development? Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future.</p></div><p>Quite right, this analogy is exactly the same as Domaining. Except for the fact that the original seller of the land isn't a governing body providing the land as a service on a first come first served basis without competition for the land which would drive up the price, or the fact that most speculators cannot afford to purchase, protect and maintain 100's of real properties at the same time with no expenses, or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but except for those niggly little bits this analogy is right on...</p><p>
&nbsp; .  Instead, think of it not as the legal buying and selling of land but rather the often illegal act (in the US at least) of "scalping" Tickets - or selling tickets above face value or specified markup.  Ticketmaster in fact has proposed selling their tickets not by fixed price but rather through online auction -- sorry working poor guess you'll just have watch the match on T.V..... Perhaps ICANN should consider a new model perhaps ticket master could take over domain regostration...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development ?
Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future.Quite right , this analogy is exactly the same as Domaining .
Except for the fact that the original seller of the land is n't a governing body providing the land as a service on a first come first served basis without competition for the land which would drive up the price , or the fact that most speculators can not afford to purchase , protect and maintain 100 's of real properties at the same time with no expenses , or ... but except for those niggly little bits this analogy is right on.. .   .
Instead , think of it not as the legal buying and selling of land but rather the often illegal act ( in the US at least ) of " scalping " Tickets - or selling tickets above face value or specified markup .
Ticketmaster in fact has proposed selling their tickets not by fixed price but rather through online auction -- sorry working poor guess you 'll just have watch the match on T.V..... Perhaps ICANN should consider a new model perhaps ticket master could take over domain regostration.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development?
Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future.Quite right, this analogy is exactly the same as Domaining.
Except for the fact that the original seller of the land isn't a governing body providing the land as a service on a first come first served basis without competition for the land which would drive up the price, or the fact that most speculators cannot afford to purchase, protect and maintain 100's of real properties at the same time with no expenses, or ... but except for those niggly little bits this analogy is right on...
  .
Instead, think of it not as the legal buying and selling of land but rather the often illegal act (in the US at least) of "scalping" Tickets - or selling tickets above face value or specified markup.
Ticketmaster in fact has proposed selling their tickets not by fixed price but rather through online auction -- sorry working poor guess you'll just have watch the match on T.V..... Perhaps ICANN should consider a new model perhaps ticket master could take over domain regostration...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</id>
	<title>I disagree</title>
	<author>Overzeetop</author>
	<datestamp>1244123640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you buy domain names on speculation, you're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it. There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.</p><p>Now, since you appear to be a cybersquatter, I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan. That's fine. That's why houses are called "resales" and not "used."  A "Domainer" (aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you buy domain names on speculation , you 're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it .
There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains , except to capitalize on the scarcity.Now , since you appear to be a cybersquatter , I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan .
That 's fine .
That 's why houses are called " resales " and not " used .
" A " Domainer " ( aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld ) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you buy domain names on speculation, you're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it.
There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.Now, since you appear to be a cybersquatter, I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan.
That's fine.
That's why houses are called "resales" and not "used.
"  A "Domainer" (aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209879</id>
	<title>Don't Buy It From Him</title>
	<author>The MAZZTer</author>
	<datestamp>1244131320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since he's going to charge an exorbitant price to make up for all the OTHER domains he's squatting without a buyer.  You have two options (you can do both):</p><ol> <li>Find a different or similar domain name.  It's best to come up with as many ideas for a name as you can.  Try other TLDs.</li><li>Check the registry info to see when the domain expires.  If the squatter doesn't renew it right away (possible they might, possible they might not) grab it quick with a legit, cheaper domain registrar.  IIRC GoDaddy has an automatic purchase option that will wait until a domain expires and then purchases it for you immediately.  Of course they also have the automatic renewal which domain squatters likely use.</li></ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since he 's going to charge an exorbitant price to make up for all the OTHER domains he 's squatting without a buyer .
You have two options ( you can do both ) : Find a different or similar domain name .
It 's best to come up with as many ideas for a name as you can .
Try other TLDs.Check the registry info to see when the domain expires .
If the squatter does n't renew it right away ( possible they might , possible they might not ) grab it quick with a legit , cheaper domain registrar .
IIRC GoDaddy has an automatic purchase option that will wait until a domain expires and then purchases it for you immediately .
Of course they also have the automatic renewal which domain squatters likely use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since he's going to charge an exorbitant price to make up for all the OTHER domains he's squatting without a buyer.
You have two options (you can do both): Find a different or similar domain name.
It's best to come up with as many ideas for a name as you can.
Try other TLDs.Check the registry info to see when the domain expires.
If the squatter doesn't renew it right away (possible they might, possible they might not) grab it quick with a legit, cheaper domain registrar.
IIRC GoDaddy has an automatic purchase option that will wait until a domain expires and then purchases it for you immediately.
Of course they also have the automatic renewal which domain squatters likely use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28229169</id>
	<title>Lie like a dog.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Make up some excuse about being a non-profit or it's for your kids club website or something stupid like that.  Cybersquatters typically buy many domains and must move some domains to cover the other 10  domains they'll never sell.  Getting something is better than getting nothing.  Offer ridiculously low on the pretense that it's for your kids or something.  Then fight them at every move to increase the price.  Settle for something reasonable.  If the offer ever gets a reasonable place (less than $1000 is generally reasonable, $500 or less is more reasonable), buy it.  If they try to jack you around on it, tell them to get screwed and blatantly buy a different domain name (like a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org).  Don't be afraid to start using a different name, maybe you'll find the new one is better anyways.  Maybe they'll come around and sell it at a reasonable price.  Their cybersquatting is illegal and unethical, screw them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Make up some excuse about being a non-profit or it 's for your kids club website or something stupid like that .
Cybersquatters typically buy many domains and must move some domains to cover the other 10 domains they 'll never sell .
Getting something is better than getting nothing .
Offer ridiculously low on the pretense that it 's for your kids or something .
Then fight them at every move to increase the price .
Settle for something reasonable .
If the offer ever gets a reasonable place ( less than $ 1000 is generally reasonable , $ 500 or less is more reasonable ) , buy it .
If they try to jack you around on it , tell them to get screwed and blatantly buy a different domain name ( like a .org ) .
Do n't be afraid to start using a different name , maybe you 'll find the new one is better anyways .
Maybe they 'll come around and sell it at a reasonable price .
Their cybersquatting is illegal and unethical , screw them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make up some excuse about being a non-profit or it's for your kids club website or something stupid like that.
Cybersquatters typically buy many domains and must move some domains to cover the other 10  domains they'll never sell.
Getting something is better than getting nothing.
Offer ridiculously low on the pretense that it's for your kids or something.
Then fight them at every move to increase the price.
Settle for something reasonable.
If the offer ever gets a reasonable place (less than $1000 is generally reasonable, $500 or less is more reasonable), buy it.
If they try to jack you around on it, tell them to get screwed and blatantly buy a different domain name (like a .org).
Don't be afraid to start using a different name, maybe you'll find the new one is better anyways.
Maybe they'll come around and sell it at a reasonable price.
Their cybersquatting is illegal and unethical, screw them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212857</id>
	<title>Re:low ball</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with the OP and with the other AC who replied. Just send him an email offering $50 and see where it goes. I actually played a little bit with buying and selling domains and got out of it quickly because it seemed like a pretty crappy and stupid business to be in. It's akin to investing in lottery tickets, but with slightly better odds. BTW, spare me the indignation - I speculated on about half a dozen generic and nonsensical domains that weren't infringing on anyone's property or trademarks, and I tried to sell a few other domains that I had purchased out of personal interest as well.</p><p>I only sold a couple of domains and they went to the first offer that I got (one was $50 and the other was $200). Maybe it's just me being too nice and you would have less luck in getting your domain for low money, but I think a lot of these guys just have a ton of domains sitting there costing money or making a pittance in advertising revenue and it will be worth it to them to sell it to any person that is interested in it, even if they only make a little money after costs. Good luck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with the OP and with the other AC who replied .
Just send him an email offering $ 50 and see where it goes .
I actually played a little bit with buying and selling domains and got out of it quickly because it seemed like a pretty crappy and stupid business to be in .
It 's akin to investing in lottery tickets , but with slightly better odds .
BTW , spare me the indignation - I speculated on about half a dozen generic and nonsensical domains that were n't infringing on anyone 's property or trademarks , and I tried to sell a few other domains that I had purchased out of personal interest as well.I only sold a couple of domains and they went to the first offer that I got ( one was $ 50 and the other was $ 200 ) .
Maybe it 's just me being too nice and you would have less luck in getting your domain for low money , but I think a lot of these guys just have a ton of domains sitting there costing money or making a pittance in advertising revenue and it will be worth it to them to sell it to any person that is interested in it , even if they only make a little money after costs .
Good luck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with the OP and with the other AC who replied.
Just send him an email offering $50 and see where it goes.
I actually played a little bit with buying and selling domains and got out of it quickly because it seemed like a pretty crappy and stupid business to be in.
It's akin to investing in lottery tickets, but with slightly better odds.
BTW, spare me the indignation - I speculated on about half a dozen generic and nonsensical domains that weren't infringing on anyone's property or trademarks, and I tried to sell a few other domains that I had purchased out of personal interest as well.I only sold a couple of domains and they went to the first offer that I got (one was $50 and the other was $200).
Maybe it's just me being too nice and you would have less luck in getting your domain for low money, but I think a lot of these guys just have a ton of domains sitting there costing money or making a pittance in advertising revenue and it will be worth it to them to sell it to any person that is interested in it, even if they only make a little money after costs.
Good luck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210117</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>NitroWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1244132400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the heck do you mean you don't agree the definition of cybersquatting?  Cybersquatting is very clearly defined.  If you buy a domain you have no intention of using, other than to resell at a higher price, you are cybersquatting.  You are buying domains with the intention of reselling them at a higher price, ergo you are a cybersquatter.</p><p>Don't try to dodge the ball here, you are a cybersquatter plain and simple.  Whether or not that makes you scum is left up to the reader - for the record I think you are a dirt bag.  Others may not.  Even though I think you are a dirt bag, I understand your logic (and the logic of the rest of the cybersquatting world) and appreciate it, even if I don't agree with it.  Cybersquatters are bottom feeders, plain and simple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but the bottom feeders exist because the system allows them to exist.  The system needs to be fixed and the problem of dirt bags like you goes away.  I don't blame you for being a dirt bag, it's just who you are.  We, as keepers of the internet, need to make it so you can't survive.  Ultimately, it is our fault for designing a system that allows bottom feeders like you to exist, when we have the control and capability to make your environment hostile to your sort of life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the heck do you mean you do n't agree the definition of cybersquatting ?
Cybersquatting is very clearly defined .
If you buy a domain you have no intention of using , other than to resell at a higher price , you are cybersquatting .
You are buying domains with the intention of reselling them at a higher price , ergo you are a cybersquatter.Do n't try to dodge the ball here , you are a cybersquatter plain and simple .
Whether or not that makes you scum is left up to the reader - for the record I think you are a dirt bag .
Others may not .
Even though I think you are a dirt bag , I understand your logic ( and the logic of the rest of the cybersquatting world ) and appreciate it , even if I do n't agree with it .
Cybersquatters are bottom feeders , plain and simple ... but the bottom feeders exist because the system allows them to exist .
The system needs to be fixed and the problem of dirt bags like you goes away .
I do n't blame you for being a dirt bag , it 's just who you are .
We , as keepers of the internet , need to make it so you ca n't survive .
Ultimately , it is our fault for designing a system that allows bottom feeders like you to exist , when we have the control and capability to make your environment hostile to your sort of life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the heck do you mean you don't agree the definition of cybersquatting?
Cybersquatting is very clearly defined.
If you buy a domain you have no intention of using, other than to resell at a higher price, you are cybersquatting.
You are buying domains with the intention of reselling them at a higher price, ergo you are a cybersquatter.Don't try to dodge the ball here, you are a cybersquatter plain and simple.
Whether or not that makes you scum is left up to the reader - for the record I think you are a dirt bag.
Others may not.
Even though I think you are a dirt bag, I understand your logic (and the logic of the rest of the cybersquatting world) and appreciate it, even if I don't agree with it.
Cybersquatters are bottom feeders, plain and simple ... but the bottom feeders exist because the system allows them to exist.
The system needs to be fixed and the problem of dirt bags like you goes away.
I don't blame you for being a dirt bag, it's just who you are.
We, as keepers of the internet, need to make it so you can't survive.
Ultimately, it is our fault for designing a system that allows bottom feeders like you to exist, when we have the control and capability to make your environment hostile to your sort of life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209875</id>
	<title>I have done this.</title>
	<author>maillemaker</author>
	<datestamp>1244131320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I frequent an online BBS, the Armour Archive (www.armourarchive.org).  It is a hobbiest board for people who make medieval armour.</p><p>At one time, the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org (or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com, I can't remembernow) domain got snapped up by a squatter when it expired.  It was not a big deal, as the BBS owner switched domains to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com domain and the BBS went on.</p><p>As a way to give back to the community, however, I approached the squatter and offered to buy the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org domain back.  He was hesitant at first, thinking that it had something to do with "amor" (love).  When I explained that the domain he had squatted on was used by a bunch of hobbyists and they would never pay a lot of money to get it back, and I offered him like $200 for it, he agreed, and I got the domain and gave it to the BBS owner.</p><p>I think the trick here is to simply be up-front with what you are willing to pay.  If you're only willing to pay $500 for it, say so.  Either he'll sell or he won't.</p><p>I don't have a problem with domain squatters.  Anyone who utilizes their intellect to have the foresight to figure out what text strings might make profitable domain names has a skill and they are making money off of that skill.  People who get mad at domain squatters are really just mad that they didn't have that skill themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I frequent an online BBS , the Armour Archive ( www.armourarchive.org ) .
It is a hobbiest board for people who make medieval armour.At one time , the .org ( or .com , I ca n't remembernow ) domain got snapped up by a squatter when it expired .
It was not a big deal , as the BBS owner switched domains to the .com domain and the BBS went on.As a way to give back to the community , however , I approached the squatter and offered to buy the .org domain back .
He was hesitant at first , thinking that it had something to do with " amor " ( love ) .
When I explained that the domain he had squatted on was used by a bunch of hobbyists and they would never pay a lot of money to get it back , and I offered him like $ 200 for it , he agreed , and I got the domain and gave it to the BBS owner.I think the trick here is to simply be up-front with what you are willing to pay .
If you 're only willing to pay $ 500 for it , say so .
Either he 'll sell or he wo n't.I do n't have a problem with domain squatters .
Anyone who utilizes their intellect to have the foresight to figure out what text strings might make profitable domain names has a skill and they are making money off of that skill .
People who get mad at domain squatters are really just mad that they did n't have that skill themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I frequent an online BBS, the Armour Archive (www.armourarchive.org).
It is a hobbiest board for people who make medieval armour.At one time, the .org (or .com, I can't remembernow) domain got snapped up by a squatter when it expired.
It was not a big deal, as the BBS owner switched domains to the .com domain and the BBS went on.As a way to give back to the community, however, I approached the squatter and offered to buy the .org domain back.
He was hesitant at first, thinking that it had something to do with "amor" (love).
When I explained that the domain he had squatted on was used by a bunch of hobbyists and they would never pay a lot of money to get it back, and I offered him like $200 for it, he agreed, and I got the domain and gave it to the BBS owner.I think the trick here is to simply be up-front with what you are willing to pay.
If you're only willing to pay $500 for it, say so.
Either he'll sell or he won't.I don't have a problem with domain squatters.
Anyone who utilizes their intellect to have the foresight to figure out what text strings might make profitable domain names has a skill and they are making money off of that skill.
People who get mad at domain squatters are really just mad that they didn't have that skill themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207921</id>
	<title>Re:Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>sjwest</author>
	<datestamp>1244122500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you have to negotiate ?</p><p>do a whois lookup when does it end,<br>do not visit the site again and not bang up any stats collection on its popularity,<br>if the domain is not renewed get it normally</p><p>Be wary of godaddy.com as any whois lookup made on there site then that dom name is then registered to them so choose a registrar that is not going to screw you.</p><p>Patience might pay off</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have to negotiate ? do a whois lookup when does it end,do not visit the site again and not bang up any stats collection on its popularity,if the domain is not renewed get it normallyBe wary of godaddy.com as any whois lookup made on there site then that dom name is then registered to them so choose a registrar that is not going to screw you.Patience might pay off</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have to negotiate ?do a whois lookup when does it end,do not visit the site again and not bang up any stats collection on its popularity,if the domain is not renewed get it normallyBe wary of godaddy.com as any whois lookup made on there site then that dom name is then registered to them so choose a registrar that is not going to screw you.Patience might pay off</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208135</id>
	<title>What Is Its History?</title>
	<author>EnvyRAM</author>
	<datestamp>1244123760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the domain was previously owned and expired, it may have just been snatched back up in the hopes that the original owner made a mistake or to get some visitors expecting the old site.
<br> <br>
If this is the case, and it isn't a valuable domain already (where it is sure to sell), e-mailing simply alerts the owner that there is someone interested in the domain. They may only have registered it for a 1-year test to see if it gets any bites. If you don't think it will be snatched up otherwise, you can try to simply backorder the domain with a service like GoDaddy and wait for the year to end. I just recovered the domain for a friend's restaurant doing this on Tuesday. I had set him up with a temporary domain last year after losing it so he would still have a presence. It's just redirected now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the domain was previously owned and expired , it may have just been snatched back up in the hopes that the original owner made a mistake or to get some visitors expecting the old site .
If this is the case , and it is n't a valuable domain already ( where it is sure to sell ) , e-mailing simply alerts the owner that there is someone interested in the domain .
They may only have registered it for a 1-year test to see if it gets any bites .
If you do n't think it will be snatched up otherwise , you can try to simply backorder the domain with a service like GoDaddy and wait for the year to end .
I just recovered the domain for a friend 's restaurant doing this on Tuesday .
I had set him up with a temporary domain last year after losing it so he would still have a presence .
It 's just redirected now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the domain was previously owned and expired, it may have just been snatched back up in the hopes that the original owner made a mistake or to get some visitors expecting the old site.
If this is the case, and it isn't a valuable domain already (where it is sure to sell), e-mailing simply alerts the owner that there is someone interested in the domain.
They may only have registered it for a 1-year test to see if it gets any bites.
If you don't think it will be snatched up otherwise, you can try to simply backorder the domain with a service like GoDaddy and wait for the year to end.
I just recovered the domain for a friend's restaurant doing this on Tuesday.
I had set him up with a temporary domain last year after losing it so he would still have a presence.
It's just redirected now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208121</id>
	<title>Here's a twist on the question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244123700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you go about aquiring domains that are simply held by squatters that don't want to sell because they're convinced they're making enough ad revenue from the sites to make it worth it (even though on the domain you tried, there's no way in hell they really will be) like this company here:</p><p><a href="http://www.nameadministration.com/" title="nameadministration.com">http://www.nameadministration.com/</a> [nameadministration.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you go about aquiring domains that are simply held by squatters that do n't want to sell because they 're convinced they 're making enough ad revenue from the sites to make it worth it ( even though on the domain you tried , there 's no way in hell they really will be ) like this company here : http : //www.nameadministration.com/ [ nameadministration.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you go about aquiring domains that are simply held by squatters that don't want to sell because they're convinced they're making enough ad revenue from the sites to make it worth it (even though on the domain you tried, there's no way in hell they really will be) like this company here:http://www.nameadministration.com/ [nameadministration.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209649</id>
	<title>About cybersquatter, ICANN, SEDO &amp; WIPO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244130360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In our company with work since 2003 with a domain COM.AR (we're from Argentina) and NIC.AR doesn't charge about registration domain.

Two year later we wanted buy the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.COM domain, but it was registered by some company named Wolf Internet Service LDC . I contact that "company" and request us U$S 1200. The site still parking in SEDO and have some words, key, related with our website content.

I started to investing about this kind of frauds and discover a "neutral" organization named WIPO . I contacted with them about my problem at  (you can send your questions in any language), about the fraud, and they reply me with information about similar cases  and I interesting part:

"In a dispute involving one to five domain names, there is a fee of $ 1500 for the United States to a dispute that has to be resolved by a panel composed of a single member, and a rate of $ 4000 United States to a dispute that has to be resolved by a panel composed of three members."

So, they are charging me U$S 1500 to dispute the site when the cybersquatter request me $ 1200. The "bad guy" still winning.

We still with this problem, and is more difficult to us solute it because our country is no experienced about cybercrimes our copy right laws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In our company with work since 2003 with a domain COM.AR ( we 're from Argentina ) and NIC.AR does n't charge about registration domain .
Two year later we wanted buy the .COM domain , but it was registered by some company named Wolf Internet Service LDC .
I contact that " company " and request us U $ S 1200 .
The site still parking in SEDO and have some words , key , related with our website content .
I started to investing about this kind of frauds and discover a " neutral " organization named WIPO .
I contacted with them about my problem at ( you can send your questions in any language ) , about the fraud , and they reply me with information about similar cases and I interesting part : " In a dispute involving one to five domain names , there is a fee of $ 1500 for the United States to a dispute that has to be resolved by a panel composed of a single member , and a rate of $ 4000 United States to a dispute that has to be resolved by a panel composed of three members .
" So , they are charging me U $ S 1500 to dispute the site when the cybersquatter request me $ 1200 .
The " bad guy " still winning .
We still with this problem , and is more difficult to us solute it because our country is no experienced about cybercrimes our copy right laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In our company with work since 2003 with a domain COM.AR (we're from Argentina) and NIC.AR doesn't charge about registration domain.
Two year later we wanted buy the .COM domain, but it was registered by some company named Wolf Internet Service LDC .
I contact that "company" and request us U$S 1200.
The site still parking in SEDO and have some words, key, related with our website content.
I started to investing about this kind of frauds and discover a "neutral" organization named WIPO .
I contacted with them about my problem at  (you can send your questions in any language), about the fraud, and they reply me with information about similar cases  and I interesting part:

"In a dispute involving one to five domain names, there is a fee of $ 1500 for the United States to a dispute that has to be resolved by a panel composed of a single member, and a rate of $ 4000 United States to a dispute that has to be resolved by a panel composed of three members.
"

So, they are charging me U$S 1500 to dispute the site when the cybersquatter request me $ 1200.
The "bad guy" still winning.
We still with this problem, and is more difficult to us solute it because our country is no experienced about cybercrimes our copy right laws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211201</id>
	<title>Ironically...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244136780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ironically, cybersquatting is so commonplace that I've become wary of any domain name that sounds too good- pretty frequently it ends up being a stupid one page site full of ads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironically , cybersquatting is so commonplace that I 've become wary of any domain name that sounds too good- pretty frequently it ends up being a stupid one page site full of ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironically, cybersquatting is so commonplace that I've become wary of any domain name that sounds too good- pretty frequently it ends up being a stupid one page site full of ads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211571</id>
	<title>Re:Tips for getting the domain at a good price</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244138280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It worked for me once using a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.edu address.  I played the college student card, as I was one at the time, and got a pretty nice 3 letter<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org for $30.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It worked for me once using a .edu address .
I played the college student card , as I was one at the time , and got a pretty nice 3 letter .org for $ 30 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It worked for me once using a .edu address.
I played the college student card, as I was one at the time, and got a pretty nice 3 letter .org for $30.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210015</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209299</id>
	<title>Re:I was on the other end of this..</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244129100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[Citation Needed]</p><p>I here this story all the time, yet no one comes up with the documentation proving it happened.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Citation Needed ] I here this story all the time , yet no one comes up with the documentation proving it happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Citation Needed]I here this story all the time, yet no one comes up with the documentation proving it happened.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208329</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211371</id>
	<title>Re:Your customers won't care</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244137500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>URLs are no longer really important.</i> </p><p>Email is important and having to tell people sal@*l*a*m*e*n*e*s*s*f*i*l*t*e**l*a*m*e.com over the phone WITHOUT them making speeling errors is tough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>URLs are no longer really important .
Email is important and having to tell people sal @ * l * a * m * e * n * e * s * s * f * i * l * t * e * * l * a * m * e.com over the phone WITHOUT them making speeling errors is tough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>URLs are no longer really important.
Email is important and having to tell people sal@*l*a*m*e*n*e*s*s*f*i*l*t*e**l*a*m*e.com over the phone WITHOUT them making speeling errors is tough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955</id>
	<title>Your customers won't care</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1244122680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com. They will type your company name into google and click on the result. If they're recurring customers, they will bookmark your page.</p><p>URLs are no longer really important. I know people who have no idea what that funny bar on top of their browser is for that displays some funky random characters whenever they click on a link and a page loads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add .com .
They will type your company name into google and click on the result .
If they 're recurring customers , they will bookmark your page.URLs are no longer really important .
I know people who have no idea what that funny bar on top of their browser is for that displays some funky random characters whenever they click on a link and a page loads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add .com.
They will type your company name into google and click on the result.
If they're recurring customers, they will bookmark your page.URLs are no longer really important.
I know people who have no idea what that funny bar on top of their browser is for that displays some funky random characters whenever they click on a link and a page loads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209139</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244128560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> it's a mutual agreement between large domain parkings and google - not in index, yet with google ads.</p></div><p>I question that Google or another search giant would enter an agreement like you describe.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's a mutual agreement between large domain parkings and google - not in index , yet with google ads.I question that Google or another search giant would enter an agreement like you describe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> it's a mutual agreement between large domain parkings and google - not in index, yet with google ads.I question that Google or another search giant would enter an agreement like you describe.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691</id>
	<title>Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>gurps\_npc</author>
	<datestamp>1244120940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would suggest finding another Domain that they own and first asking them if you could buy that one.

That will give you a high end price.  Tell them no thank you.  Wait a day and say you also like the real one.  Then offer to buy it at 1/2 the price they gave for the first one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would suggest finding another Domain that they own and first asking them if you could buy that one .
That will give you a high end price .
Tell them no thank you .
Wait a day and say you also like the real one .
Then offer to buy it at 1/2 the price they gave for the first one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would suggest finding another Domain that they own and first asking them if you could buy that one.
That will give you a high end price.
Tell them no thank you.
Wait a day and say you also like the real one.
Then offer to buy it at 1/2 the price they gave for the first one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207637</id>
	<title>Unfortunate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244120580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I've accidentally typed in an address wrong, I've been brought to a page with <a href="http://www.buydomains.com/" title="buydomains.com" rel="nofollow">"premium" domains that a squatter is sitting on</a> [buydomains.com] listing the prices for them.  They were all pretty bland and stupid sites like a000.org or MedicMan.net but they listed the prices anywhere from $100 to $5,000.  Unfortunately what you have to realize if you're going to make this offer is that they're doing this for those few times a year they strike it rich so it's probably going to be closer to $5,000 or more.  If the site is like two last names or something readable, it's probably going to be pretty high cost.  Far less than a court case you probably wouldn't win though.  <br> <br>

The last thing you need to realize is that whatever money you give this guy is just going to fund him to buy up more domains and keep his hands on others longer.  If you wanted to do the most conscious thing for the community, you would just find another domain and not give this scum one red cent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I 've accidentally typed in an address wrong , I 've been brought to a page with " premium " domains that a squatter is sitting on [ buydomains.com ] listing the prices for them .
They were all pretty bland and stupid sites like a000.org or MedicMan.net but they listed the prices anywhere from $ 100 to $ 5,000 .
Unfortunately what you have to realize if you 're going to make this offer is that they 're doing this for those few times a year they strike it rich so it 's probably going to be closer to $ 5,000 or more .
If the site is like two last names or something readable , it 's probably going to be pretty high cost .
Far less than a court case you probably would n't win though .
The last thing you need to realize is that whatever money you give this guy is just going to fund him to buy up more domains and keep his hands on others longer .
If you wanted to do the most conscious thing for the community , you would just find another domain and not give this scum one red cent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I've accidentally typed in an address wrong, I've been brought to a page with "premium" domains that a squatter is sitting on [buydomains.com] listing the prices for them.
They were all pretty bland and stupid sites like a000.org or MedicMan.net but they listed the prices anywhere from $100 to $5,000.
Unfortunately what you have to realize if you're going to make this offer is that they're doing this for those few times a year they strike it rich so it's probably going to be closer to $5,000 or more.
If the site is like two last names or something readable, it's probably going to be pretty high cost.
Far less than a court case you probably wouldn't win though.
The last thing you need to realize is that whatever money you give this guy is just going to fund him to buy up more domains and keep his hands on others longer.
If you wanted to do the most conscious thing for the community, you would just find another domain and not give this scum one red cent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28216609</id>
	<title>Lowball them and then Forget It</title>
	<author>zuperduperman</author>
	<datestamp>1244118780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1.  Offer them a real lowball offer - like $200.  Enough to cover their cost of holding the domain, but no more.  There's a good chance that after you go away for a while they'll come back to you and accept it.   But not until they're completely convinced you've given up and gone elsewhere.</p><p>2.  Realize that evidence has shown that real english words in domain names are less effective and less memorable than made up ones.  For example, email.com has not been a particularly good domain, while plenty of other email providers with completely made up names have done just fine.  Don't be obsessed with getting real words in your domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Offer them a real lowball offer - like $ 200 .
Enough to cover their cost of holding the domain , but no more .
There 's a good chance that after you go away for a while they 'll come back to you and accept it .
But not until they 're completely convinced you 've given up and gone elsewhere.2 .
Realize that evidence has shown that real english words in domain names are less effective and less memorable than made up ones .
For example , email.com has not been a particularly good domain , while plenty of other email providers with completely made up names have done just fine .
Do n't be obsessed with getting real words in your domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Offer them a real lowball offer - like $200.
Enough to cover their cost of holding the domain, but no more.
There's a good chance that after you go away for a while they'll come back to you and accept it.
But not until they're completely convinced you've given up and gone elsewhere.2.
Realize that evidence has shown that real english words in domain names are less effective and less memorable than made up ones.
For example, email.com has not been a particularly good domain, while plenty of other email providers with completely made up names have done just fine.
Don't be obsessed with getting real words in your domain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1244124660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development? Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future. So long as this guy is honestly selling the domains without attempting to defraud buyers, he's doing the same thing, just with virtual land rather than actual real land. I may not like it (and I don't) but, so long as they are conducting things legitimately, I see no difference.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development ?
Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future .
So long as this guy is honestly selling the domains without attempting to defraud buyers , he 's doing the same thing , just with virtual land rather than actual real land .
I may not like it ( and I do n't ) but , so long as they are conducting things legitimately , I see no difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development?
Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future.
So long as this guy is honestly selling the domains without attempting to defraud buyers, he's doing the same thing, just with virtual land rather than actual real land.
I may not like it (and I don't) but, so long as they are conducting things legitimately, I see no difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623</id>
	<title>url?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244120340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the domain name we're talking about?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the domain name we 're talking about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the domain name we're talking about?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212805</id>
	<title>buy the name in the other TLD(s)</title>
	<author>marvinglenn</author>
	<datestamp>1244143680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had a similar situation.  In my situation I was able to purchase the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net version of the domain name.  The squatter with the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com version then contacted me trying to sell it to me.  I sent a nasty note back that I would not deal with a fucking squatter.  I think I also sent a note to their upstream for UCE.
</p><p>Soon after that the squatter dropped the name and I picked it up.  I'd paid for 'domain name back order' at my registrar, so it cost me a little more than normal, but not much more and the fucking squatter didn't get any of that extra cost.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a similar situation .
In my situation I was able to purchase the .net version of the domain name .
The squatter with the .com version then contacted me trying to sell it to me .
I sent a nasty note back that I would not deal with a fucking squatter .
I think I also sent a note to their upstream for UCE .
Soon after that the squatter dropped the name and I picked it up .
I 'd paid for 'domain name back order ' at my registrar , so it cost me a little more than normal , but not much more and the fucking squatter did n't get any of that extra cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a similar situation.
In my situation I was able to purchase the .net version of the domain name.
The squatter with the .com version then contacted me trying to sell it to me.
I sent a nasty note back that I would not deal with a fucking squatter.
I think I also sent a note to their upstream for UCE.
Soon after that the squatter dropped the name and I picked it up.
I'd paid for 'domain name back order' at my registrar, so it cost me a little more than normal, but not much more and the fucking squatter didn't get any of that extra cost.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213119</id>
	<title>Re:Your customers won't care</title>
	<author>Pecisk</author>
	<datestamp>1244145000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seconded. Most *advanced* users I know uses Google Search to reach page (if they haven't bookmarked it), because URLs are tiresome to remember (true), and even harder to type correctly on laptop (also true).</p><p>Don't get me wrong, URLs are definition of addresing in Internet, just for usual users it is difficult to get them - and I really understand them. Even now I more and more like Firefox search in URL bar feature - it really saves the day when I try to remember one interesting site which particular keywords in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seconded .
Most * advanced * users I know uses Google Search to reach page ( if they have n't bookmarked it ) , because URLs are tiresome to remember ( true ) , and even harder to type correctly on laptop ( also true ) .Do n't get me wrong , URLs are definition of addresing in Internet , just for usual users it is difficult to get them - and I really understand them .
Even now I more and more like Firefox search in URL bar feature - it really saves the day when I try to remember one interesting site which particular keywords in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seconded.
Most *advanced* users I know uses Google Search to reach page (if they haven't bookmarked it), because URLs are tiresome to remember (true), and even harder to type correctly on laptop (also true).Don't get me wrong, URLs are definition of addresing in Internet, just for usual users it is difficult to get them - and I really understand them.
Even now I more and more like Firefox search in URL bar feature - it really saves the day when I try to remember one interesting site which particular keywords in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207829</id>
	<title>its parked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The proper term is 'parked'  buydomains offers this type of service for 'domainers' (people who purchase bulk names).  And no its not a one off and hope to get rich.  Finding the perfect name is important, and you should settle with a 'branding' you will not be happy with.  Domainers park names to capitaliza on the traffic, but most revenu is made from actually selling their names</p><p>~shawn dyck<br>Buydomains- software engineer</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The proper term is 'parked ' buydomains offers this type of service for 'domainers ' ( people who purchase bulk names ) .
And no its not a one off and hope to get rich .
Finding the perfect name is important , and you should settle with a 'branding ' you will not be happy with .
Domainers park names to capitaliza on the traffic , but most revenu is made from actually selling their names ~ shawn dyckBuydomains- software engineer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The proper term is 'parked'  buydomains offers this type of service for 'domainers' (people who purchase bulk names).
And no its not a one off and hope to get rich.
Finding the perfect name is important, and you should settle with a 'branding' you will not be happy with.
Domainers park names to capitaliza on the traffic, but most revenu is made from actually selling their names~shawn dyckBuydomains- software engineer</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209837</id>
	<title>Re:Ideas</title>
	<author>QuantumPion</author>
	<datestamp>1244131080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even better, pretend to be an even more unscrupulous squatter and offer to buy a whole bunch of their domains, and offer a price less then what you were willing to pay as a premium on the one domain you wanted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even better , pretend to be an even more unscrupulous squatter and offer to buy a whole bunch of their domains , and offer a price less then what you were willing to pay as a premium on the one domain you wanted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even better, pretend to be an even more unscrupulous squatter and offer to buy a whole bunch of their domains, and offer a price less then what you were willing to pay as a premium on the one domain you wanted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209281</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244128980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Names are special and people and companies have a special right to their name. At least that is what it is like in the real world.<br>For the domain name system this obviously is a bit different, but in many European countries laws have been added that make things more similar (i.e. nobody may ask for money for a domain that is your name (company or personal) yet is neither their name nor can they justify why they should have a special right to that name).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Names are special and people and companies have a special right to their name .
At least that is what it is like in the real world.For the domain name system this obviously is a bit different , but in many European countries laws have been added that make things more similar ( i.e .
nobody may ask for money for a domain that is your name ( company or personal ) yet is neither their name nor can they justify why they should have a special right to that name ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Names are special and people and companies have a special right to their name.
At least that is what it is like in the real world.For the domain name system this obviously is a bit different, but in many European countries laws have been added that make things more similar (i.e.
nobody may ask for money for a domain that is your name (company or personal) yet is neither their name nor can they justify why they should have a special right to that name).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207929</id>
	<title>Georgi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244122560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not in the domain name business, but from time to time use to buy, sell and register some domains.</p><p>In my opinion and experience, there two kind of "sellers" out there. The one who know what to and how to sell and the quantity of money they want for specific domain name and the rest. These others just have no idea about the real value of a domain name and sell it for the price you say. Last domain I bought was 4 letters!!!! length and the price which the seller wanted was ~ $10000. In the end and after few emails telling him that "...I'm not in the domain name business and can't pay more than... bla bla bla", I got it for ~ $85 (paid in &#226;).</p><p>So its all about a game and lies to get the desired domain<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Hope that gives you some advice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not in the domain name business , but from time to time use to buy , sell and register some domains.In my opinion and experience , there two kind of " sellers " out there .
The one who know what to and how to sell and the quantity of money they want for specific domain name and the rest .
These others just have no idea about the real value of a domain name and sell it for the price you say .
Last domain I bought was 4 letters ! ! ! !
length and the price which the seller wanted was ~ $ 10000 .
In the end and after few emails telling him that " ...I 'm not in the domain name business and ca n't pay more than... bla bla bla " , I got it for ~ $ 85 ( paid in   ) .So its all about a game and lies to get the desired domain : ) Hope that gives you some advice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not in the domain name business, but from time to time use to buy, sell and register some domains.In my opinion and experience, there two kind of "sellers" out there.
The one who know what to and how to sell and the quantity of money they want for specific domain name and the rest.
These others just have no idea about the real value of a domain name and sell it for the price you say.
Last domain I bought was 4 letters!!!!
length and the price which the seller wanted was ~ $10000.
In the end and after few emails telling him that "...I'm not in the domain name business and can't pay more than... bla bla bla", I got it for ~ $85 (paid in â).So its all about a game and lies to get the desired domain :)Hope that gives you some advice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209507</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244129760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cybersquatting is very different from real estate investing.  If the cybersquatter were purchasing server space and renting it out, that would be analogous to real estate.</p><p>However, what the cybersquatt is doing is taking reserved slots on a government index from someone else who could be using it legitimately.</p><p>Governments keep an index of unique names for trade marks, and for corporate names.  They must be unique to prevent confusion.  All governments require that the registrant actually use the name, or the reserved place is lost.  You must be using the trademark, or actually form a corporation.</p><p>The same is true for domain names.  However, cybersquatters have found a loophole in a hosted page with coupons or sponsored links.  This is not really a legitimate business as we know it, but courts have supported it.</p><p>So cybersquatting is not like real estate, it more like a perversion of the government name index.  It is bad because it adds higher costs to starting a business, as evidenced by OP, which limits innovation and hurts society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cybersquatting is very different from real estate investing .
If the cybersquatter were purchasing server space and renting it out , that would be analogous to real estate.However , what the cybersquatt is doing is taking reserved slots on a government index from someone else who could be using it legitimately.Governments keep an index of unique names for trade marks , and for corporate names .
They must be unique to prevent confusion .
All governments require that the registrant actually use the name , or the reserved place is lost .
You must be using the trademark , or actually form a corporation.The same is true for domain names .
However , cybersquatters have found a loophole in a hosted page with coupons or sponsored links .
This is not really a legitimate business as we know it , but courts have supported it.So cybersquatting is not like real estate , it more like a perversion of the government name index .
It is bad because it adds higher costs to starting a business , as evidenced by OP , which limits innovation and hurts society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cybersquatting is very different from real estate investing.
If the cybersquatter were purchasing server space and renting it out, that would be analogous to real estate.However, what the cybersquatt is doing is taking reserved slots on a government index from someone else who could be using it legitimately.Governments keep an index of unique names for trade marks, and for corporate names.
They must be unique to prevent confusion.
All governments require that the registrant actually use the name, or the reserved place is lost.
You must be using the trademark, or actually form a corporation.The same is true for domain names.
However, cybersquatters have found a loophole in a hosted page with coupons or sponsored links.
This is not really a legitimate business as we know it, but courts have supported it.So cybersquatting is not like real estate, it more like a perversion of the government name index.
It is bad because it adds higher costs to starting a business, as evidenced by OP, which limits innovation and hurts society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212485</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>Old Spider</author>
	<datestamp>1244142420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finally, someone who doesn't like realtors as much as I do!  And those damn car salesmen... oh, they make me so mad!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , someone who does n't like realtors as much as I do !
And those damn car salesmen... oh , they make me so mad !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, someone who doesn't like realtors as much as I do!
And those damn car salesmen... oh, they make me so mad!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</id>
	<title>How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244122200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating - it's no trademark, not a domain typo - there is no bad faith. The domain has been registered by a domainer - a domain trader that buys premium domains treating them as an investment.<br>When you type in the domain name you will see a domain parking page - a website filled with some adds in order to earn some money to finance the cost of domain renewal plus sometimes a few bucks extra. The domain is not indexed by google - it's a mutual agreement between large domain parkings and google - not in index, yet with google ads.</p><p>As the domain is not registered as a clear example of cybersquating (and so is not getting a lot of traffic) you can be pretty sure it's for sale - that's where we earn money.</p><p>The domain value is based on (in no particular order):<br>1. domain length - the shorter the more expensive.<br>2. tld -<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com is the most expensive<br>3. the acctual domain name - if it is just a bunch of unpronaucable letters it will be cheap, if it's a word it will cost ya, especially if it means something. some random examples ghdn.com &lt; geen.com &lt; geek.com</p><p>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message. We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.</p><p>Once you agree on the price do use one of the domain markets that offers escrow - sorry I can't really point you to a speciffic site, as I deal exlusively in eastern european tlds and we have some local markets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating - it 's no trademark , not a domain typo - there is no bad faith .
The domain has been registered by a domainer - a domain trader that buys premium domains treating them as an investment.When you type in the domain name you will see a domain parking page - a website filled with some adds in order to earn some money to finance the cost of domain renewal plus sometimes a few bucks extra .
The domain is not indexed by google - it 's a mutual agreement between large domain parkings and google - not in index , yet with google ads.As the domain is not registered as a clear example of cybersquating ( and so is not getting a lot of traffic ) you can be pretty sure it 's for sale - that 's where we earn money.The domain value is based on ( in no particular order ) : 1. domain length - the shorter the more expensive.2 .
tld - .com is the most expensive3 .
the acctual domain name - if it is just a bunch of unpronaucable letters it will be cheap , if it 's a word it will cost ya , especially if it means something .
some random examples ghdn.com If you want to buy the domain make an offer , but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message .
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.Once you agree on the price do use one of the domain markets that offers escrow - sorry I ca n't really point you to a speciffic site , as I deal exlusively in eastern european tlds and we have some local markets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating - it's no trademark, not a domain typo - there is no bad faith.
The domain has been registered by a domainer - a domain trader that buys premium domains treating them as an investment.When you type in the domain name you will see a domain parking page - a website filled with some adds in order to earn some money to finance the cost of domain renewal plus sometimes a few bucks extra.
The domain is not indexed by google - it's a mutual agreement between large domain parkings and google - not in index, yet with google ads.As the domain is not registered as a clear example of cybersquating (and so is not getting a lot of traffic) you can be pretty sure it's for sale - that's where we earn money.The domain value is based on (in no particular order):1. domain length - the shorter the more expensive.2.
tld - .com is the most expensive3.
the acctual domain name - if it is just a bunch of unpronaucable letters it will be cheap, if it's a word it will cost ya, especially if it means something.
some random examples ghdn.com If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.Once you agree on the price do use one of the domain markets that offers escrow - sorry I can't really point you to a speciffic site, as I deal exlusively in eastern european tlds and we have some local markets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811</id>
	<title>Maybe use a subdomain?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>news.google.com</b> is just as good for google as <b>news.com</b> would be because browsers autocomplete from left to right. I type news, the google site comes right up.<br> <br>
So if you want <b>greatsite.com</b> but thats taken then register <b>blah.com</b> and create a subdomain <b>greatsite.blah.com</b> <br> <br>
Down the track you may be able to snap up the domain you originally wanted, or you may have a better idea by then.</htmltext>
<tokenext>news.google.com is just as good for google as news.com would be because browsers autocomplete from left to right .
I type news , the google site comes right up .
So if you want greatsite.com but thats taken then register blah.com and create a subdomain greatsite.blah.com Down the track you may be able to snap up the domain you originally wanted , or you may have a better idea by then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>news.google.com is just as good for google as news.com would be because browsers autocomplete from left to right.
I type news, the google site comes right up.
So if you want greatsite.com but thats taken then register blah.com and create a subdomain greatsite.blah.com  
Down the track you may be able to snap up the domain you originally wanted, or you may have a better idea by then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210801</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Kabuthunk</author>
	<datestamp>1244135160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.</i></p><p>Could you please define "fair"?  That's been a massive point for this topic in general.  Given it costs about say... $10 a year to register a domain, would your definition of "fair" be say... $50, the equivilant of 5 years of registration, or $5000?</p><p>Being on the inside, what *SHOULD* an opening bid be?  this is the reason your business is so looked down upon... because it's shadowy, unknown, and everything about it is kept secret.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>make an offer , but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.Could you please define " fair " ?
That 's been a massive point for this topic in general .
Given it costs about say... $ 10 a year to register a domain , would your definition of " fair " be say... $ 50 , the equivilant of 5 years of registration , or $ 5000 ? Being on the inside , what * SHOULD * an opening bid be ?
this is the reason your business is so looked down upon... because it 's shadowy , unknown , and everything about it is kept secret .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.Could you please define "fair"?
That's been a massive point for this topic in general.
Given it costs about say... $10 a year to register a domain, would your definition of "fair" be say... $50, the equivilant of 5 years of registration, or $5000?Being on the inside, what *SHOULD* an opening bid be?
this is the reason your business is so looked down upon... because it's shadowy, unknown, and everything about it is kept secret.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217167</id>
	<title>good luck</title>
	<author>gfody</author>
	<datestamp>1244122740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know some domains are simply not available. Because the squatters who nabbed them do not want to be identified.<br> <br>
I used to have a website at gfody.com and I forgot to renew the domain on time and the very next day it was hosting some generic link-page with ads - it was even feigning relevance by including links to search results from keywords in the referrer. For instance my site was about graphics programming and delphi. When you went to gfody.com there would be links to delphi and other graphics related sites with ads displayed next to them.<br> <br>
I tried desperately to get my domain back but to no avail. If you're curious go ahead and try to figure out who owns gfody.com - it's a goose chase strung through various fake corporations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know some domains are simply not available .
Because the squatters who nabbed them do not want to be identified .
I used to have a website at gfody.com and I forgot to renew the domain on time and the very next day it was hosting some generic link-page with ads - it was even feigning relevance by including links to search results from keywords in the referrer .
For instance my site was about graphics programming and delphi .
When you went to gfody.com there would be links to delphi and other graphics related sites with ads displayed next to them .
I tried desperately to get my domain back but to no avail .
If you 're curious go ahead and try to figure out who owns gfody.com - it 's a goose chase strung through various fake corporations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know some domains are simply not available.
Because the squatters who nabbed them do not want to be identified.
I used to have a website at gfody.com and I forgot to renew the domain on time and the very next day it was hosting some generic link-page with ads - it was even feigning relevance by including links to search results from keywords in the referrer.
For instance my site was about graphics programming and delphi.
When you went to gfody.com there would be links to delphi and other graphics related sites with ads displayed next to them.
I tried desperately to get my domain back but to no avail.
If you're curious go ahead and try to figure out who owns gfody.com - it's a goose chase strung through various fake corporations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208289</id>
	<title>Don't Encourage Them</title>
	<author>hyades1</author>
	<datestamp>1244124600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Offering these scumbags money just teaches them that they're on the right track.  If you've got money to burn, why not throw a little at some of the many groups that are trying to outlaw this practice? </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Offering these scumbags money just teaches them that they 're on the right track .
If you 've got money to burn , why not throw a little at some of the many groups that are trying to outlaw this practice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Offering these scumbags money just teaches them that they're on the right track.
If you've got money to burn, why not throw a little at some of the many groups that are trying to outlaw this practice? </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28220305</id>
	<title>Re:no</title>
	<author>pbhj</author>
	<datestamp>1244204520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If your business plan depends on owning one specific domain then your business plan sucks.</p></div><p>Twitter would be as good if it was called YouveOnly140Characters; and Flickr could equally be ShareYourPhotosHere and wouldn't Microsoft have got just as much buzz out of YetAnotherSearchEngine<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... his product can be awesome but without the right name he'll struggle. Domain names are very important.</p><p>I wonder how much MS paid for bing.com?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If your business plan depends on owning one specific domain then your business plan sucks.Twitter would be as good if it was called YouveOnly140Characters ; and Flickr could equally be ShareYourPhotosHere and would n't Microsoft have got just as much buzz out of YetAnotherSearchEngine ... his product can be awesome but without the right name he 'll struggle .
Domain names are very important.I wonder how much MS paid for bing.com ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your business plan depends on owning one specific domain then your business plan sucks.Twitter would be as good if it was called YouveOnly140Characters; and Flickr could equally be ShareYourPhotosHere and wouldn't Microsoft have got just as much buzz out of YetAnotherSearchEngine ... his product can be awesome but without the right name he'll struggle.
Domain names are very important.I wonder how much MS paid for bing.com?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211713</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Kidbro</author>
	<datestamp>1244138880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why is domaining "wrong" and those other speculative businesses "right?"</i></p><p>Any business that is based on artificially creating scarcity where there is none - i.e. depriving the society of abundant, or at least existing resources - is "wrong" (imo). Only if the resource in question has some inherent dangerous property could it be considered "right" to do so, but then it should certainly not be up to private interests to do so for monetary gain.</p><p>The comparison with businesses dealing with natural resources, while somewhat apt, is partly missing the point. Those businesses (while evil in various degrees - the diamond industry probably winning the prize) at least provide <i>some</i> service. I.e., they dig the stuff out of the ground and distribute it to the people who "need" it. The real estate business maintain the estate while it is "unused", and so on.<br>Cybersquatters - or, ahem, sorry, domainers (why do I have a sense of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer" title="wikipedia.org">deja vu</a> [wikipedia.org] when I hear that term?) - provide no service at all. They just create artificial scarcity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is domaining " wrong " and those other speculative businesses " right ?
" Any business that is based on artificially creating scarcity where there is none - i.e .
depriving the society of abundant , or at least existing resources - is " wrong " ( imo ) .
Only if the resource in question has some inherent dangerous property could it be considered " right " to do so , but then it should certainly not be up to private interests to do so for monetary gain.The comparison with businesses dealing with natural resources , while somewhat apt , is partly missing the point .
Those businesses ( while evil in various degrees - the diamond industry probably winning the prize ) at least provide some service .
I.e. , they dig the stuff out of the ground and distribute it to the people who " need " it .
The real estate business maintain the estate while it is " unused " , and so on.Cybersquatters - or , ahem , sorry , domainers ( why do I have a sense of deja vu [ wikipedia.org ] when I hear that term ?
) - provide no service at all .
They just create artificial scarcity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is domaining "wrong" and those other speculative businesses "right?
"Any business that is based on artificially creating scarcity where there is none - i.e.
depriving the society of abundant, or at least existing resources - is "wrong" (imo).
Only if the resource in question has some inherent dangerous property could it be considered "right" to do so, but then it should certainly not be up to private interests to do so for monetary gain.The comparison with businesses dealing with natural resources, while somewhat apt, is partly missing the point.
Those businesses (while evil in various degrees - the diamond industry probably winning the prize) at least provide some service.
I.e., they dig the stuff out of the ground and distribute it to the people who "need" it.
The real estate business maintain the estate while it is "unused", and so on.Cybersquatters - or, ahem, sorry, domainers (why do I have a sense of deja vu [wikipedia.org] when I hear that term?
) - provide no service at all.
They just create artificial scarcity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208207</id>
	<title>Find something better</title>
	<author>MazzThePianoman</author>
	<datestamp>1244124060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are much better off finding something unique. I did, it uses two actual words, and it is not used by anybody except one guy as as a user name in a few places. Just Google things until it draws a blank.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are much better off finding something unique .
I did , it uses two actual words , and it is not used by anybody except one guy as as a user name in a few places .
Just Google things until it draws a blank .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are much better off finding something unique.
I did, it uses two actual words, and it is not used by anybody except one guy as as a user name in a few places.
Just Google things until it draws a blank.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217515</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>Conficio</author>
	<datestamp>1244125920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference is that other speculative goods are fixed and sold for a price by someone who has build them or owns them through inheritance. Sure you might not see any value in that old car but someone else has always admired it and wants to rebuild it to its new glory. Or you might offer that old clunker for sale until the desperate person comes along and offers you much money in his desperation. Also your physical goods do age and need maintenance, the value of stock varies with the fortunes and skills of the companies managers, a house costs taxes and repairs, etc.</p><p>In contrast you can always buy a new domain for a set cheap fee a yr. IT does not age or need any risky repairs. In fact you don't buy domains, you rent them with a right to renew yearly. You sure can make the domain valuable by using it for a great service and attract some great business or simply visitors at the virtual address.</p><p>So you are comparing apples and oranges.</p><p>P.S.: I don't mean to defend cyber squatters here at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference is that other speculative goods are fixed and sold for a price by someone who has build them or owns them through inheritance .
Sure you might not see any value in that old car but someone else has always admired it and wants to rebuild it to its new glory .
Or you might offer that old clunker for sale until the desperate person comes along and offers you much money in his desperation .
Also your physical goods do age and need maintenance , the value of stock varies with the fortunes and skills of the companies managers , a house costs taxes and repairs , etc.In contrast you can always buy a new domain for a set cheap fee a yr. IT does not age or need any risky repairs .
In fact you do n't buy domains , you rent them with a right to renew yearly .
You sure can make the domain valuable by using it for a great service and attract some great business or simply visitors at the virtual address.So you are comparing apples and oranges.P.S .
: I do n't mean to defend cyber squatters here at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference is that other speculative goods are fixed and sold for a price by someone who has build them or owns them through inheritance.
Sure you might not see any value in that old car but someone else has always admired it and wants to rebuild it to its new glory.
Or you might offer that old clunker for sale until the desperate person comes along and offers you much money in his desperation.
Also your physical goods do age and need maintenance, the value of stock varies with the fortunes and skills of the companies managers, a house costs taxes and repairs, etc.In contrast you can always buy a new domain for a set cheap fee a yr. IT does not age or need any risky repairs.
In fact you don't buy domains, you rent them with a right to renew yearly.
You sure can make the domain valuable by using it for a great service and attract some great business or simply visitors at the virtual address.So you are comparing apples and oranges.P.S.
: I don't mean to defend cyber squatters here at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210337</id>
	<title>Our story</title>
	<author>GodfatherofSoul</author>
	<datestamp>1244133420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably the same as others have mentioned.  We didn't contact the squatter from business accounts.  We listened to his offer (an insane $100,000) then ignored him.  He was so desperate that he precipitously dropped the price WAAY down.  My boss ended up getting it for I think $100.
</p><ul>
<li>Look for alternatives</li>
<li>Be terse</li>
<li>Don't act desperate</li>
<li>Either don't let them know who you are or create a facade of poverty</li>
<li>Be patient</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably the same as others have mentioned .
We did n't contact the squatter from business accounts .
We listened to his offer ( an insane $ 100,000 ) then ignored him .
He was so desperate that he precipitously dropped the price WAAY down .
My boss ended up getting it for I think $ 100 .
Look for alternatives Be terse Do n't act desperate Either do n't let them know who you are or create a facade of poverty Be patient</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably the same as others have mentioned.
We didn't contact the squatter from business accounts.
We listened to his offer (an insane $100,000) then ignored him.
He was so desperate that he precipitously dropped the price WAAY down.
My boss ended up getting it for I think $100.
Look for alternatives
Be terse
Don't act desperate
Either don't let them know who you are or create a facade of poverty
Be patient</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207913</id>
	<title>Cool Domain Name Search Tool -- domai.nr</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244122440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>domai.nr -- A site to help you find a cool domain using 2 letter country codes and subdomains.  WAY useful tool for finding alternatives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>domai.nr -- A site to help you find a cool domain using 2 letter country codes and subdomains .
WAY useful tool for finding alternatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>domai.nr -- A site to help you find a cool domain using 2 letter country codes and subdomains.
WAY useful tool for finding alternatives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212931</id>
	<title>Shoot 'Em, Nuke 'Em, Just Don't Buy From Them</title>
	<author>manlygeek</author>
	<datestamp>1244144100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe there is a special place in hell just for the domain name cybersquatter.  Were it not illegal and immoral to inflict slow torture, I'd be all for that as a response.  What I wouldn't do is EVER purchase the domain name from them.  Think of the unique brands that have come from alternates, like 'flickr' for instance.  I can not conceive of a brand so important as to reward these vermin.  As an owner of dozens of domains, I can understand reserving a brand that you may or may not develop in the future and if not, either letting them expire or put them up on auction to recoup past registration fees and a reasonably good idea that you just don't have the drive to commercially develop.  But to own thousands just so others will have to pay you a premium is to provide absolutely no value whatsoever while demanding exhorbatant fees for the privilege.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe there is a special place in hell just for the domain name cybersquatter .
Were it not illegal and immoral to inflict slow torture , I 'd be all for that as a response .
What I would n't do is EVER purchase the domain name from them .
Think of the unique brands that have come from alternates , like 'flickr ' for instance .
I can not conceive of a brand so important as to reward these vermin .
As an owner of dozens of domains , I can understand reserving a brand that you may or may not develop in the future and if not , either letting them expire or put them up on auction to recoup past registration fees and a reasonably good idea that you just do n't have the drive to commercially develop .
But to own thousands just so others will have to pay you a premium is to provide absolutely no value whatsoever while demanding exhorbatant fees for the privilege .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe there is a special place in hell just for the domain name cybersquatter.
Were it not illegal and immoral to inflict slow torture, I'd be all for that as a response.
What I wouldn't do is EVER purchase the domain name from them.
Think of the unique brands that have come from alternates, like 'flickr' for instance.
I can not conceive of a brand so important as to reward these vermin.
As an owner of dozens of domains, I can understand reserving a brand that you may or may not develop in the future and if not, either letting them expire or put them up on auction to recoup past registration fees and a reasonably good idea that you just don't have the drive to commercially develop.
But to own thousands just so others will have to pay you a premium is to provide absolutely no value whatsoever while demanding exhorbatant fees for the privilege.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210667</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>Kabuthunk</author>
	<datestamp>1244134680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except of course, if the squatted domain is doing nothing but serving ads, then he'll probably make thousands of dollars off of that before the site goes down.  And in a few days it'll be fixed and back up, and the OP will be in the exact same position, except the squatter is a few thousand dollars richer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except of course , if the squatted domain is doing nothing but serving ads , then he 'll probably make thousands of dollars off of that before the site goes down .
And in a few days it 'll be fixed and back up , and the OP will be in the exact same position , except the squatter is a few thousand dollars richer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except of course, if the squatted domain is doing nothing but serving ads, then he'll probably make thousands of dollars off of that before the site goes down.
And in a few days it'll be fixed and back up, and the OP will be in the exact same position, except the squatter is a few thousand dollars richer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209697</id>
	<title>Re:no</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244130480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is it "too late"?  Unless the squatter has registered the trademark (NOT the same as registering the domain), it's not too late.  Even beyond registration rules, they aren't "actively using" the name, so you can't even qualify that as their trademark.</p><p>A business plan shouldn't depend on a short, well-named domain, but it sure helps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it " too late " ?
Unless the squatter has registered the trademark ( NOT the same as registering the domain ) , it 's not too late .
Even beyond registration rules , they are n't " actively using " the name , so you ca n't even qualify that as their trademark.A business plan should n't depend on a short , well-named domain , but it sure helps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it "too late"?
Unless the squatter has registered the trademark (NOT the same as registering the domain), it's not too late.
Even beyond registration rules, they aren't "actively using" the name, so you can't even qualify that as their trademark.A business plan shouldn't depend on a short, well-named domain, but it sure helps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207619</id>
	<title>Forsty Prost</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244120340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GNAA I'm in with frosty piss</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GNAA I 'm in with frosty piss</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GNAA I'm in with frosty piss</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212097</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>DaveGod</author>
	<datestamp>1244140680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it is broadly the same idea in the speculator's point of view. But there are key differences: domains are not originally sold at a market price, domains are not inherently valuable and there is not a liquid market.</p><p>This means squatters can obtain vast tracts of domains a little cost of capital in order to grossly inflate the price to the very few who have an interest in the domain. With land and property, a significant amount of capital is required to acquire it and therefore there is a significant cost (cost of capital) just to do nothing with it until the prices are higher. Furthermore people are able to relatively easily choose a different patch of land, whereas brand-owners are stuck with relatively few choices that connect to their brand (and sometimes, may have good reason to acquire all of them). Market forces naturally provide a degree of regulation over land and property, but very little over domains. </p><p>It's arguably like saying the government provides a water supply which it provides at incredibly low cost to it's citizens, but then people obtain the rights to 1cm wide strips of land around the water plant and  charge an exorbitant rent to anyone who's home is connected via that one little strip.</p><p>(Apologies for any lack of paragraphing, if the preview is accurate then my p tags only seem to be doing the job of a br tag)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it is broadly the same idea in the speculator 's point of view .
But there are key differences : domains are not originally sold at a market price , domains are not inherently valuable and there is not a liquid market.This means squatters can obtain vast tracts of domains a little cost of capital in order to grossly inflate the price to the very few who have an interest in the domain .
With land and property , a significant amount of capital is required to acquire it and therefore there is a significant cost ( cost of capital ) just to do nothing with it until the prices are higher .
Furthermore people are able to relatively easily choose a different patch of land , whereas brand-owners are stuck with relatively few choices that connect to their brand ( and sometimes , may have good reason to acquire all of them ) .
Market forces naturally provide a degree of regulation over land and property , but very little over domains .
It 's arguably like saying the government provides a water supply which it provides at incredibly low cost to it 's citizens , but then people obtain the rights to 1cm wide strips of land around the water plant and charge an exorbitant rent to anyone who 's home is connected via that one little strip .
( Apologies for any lack of paragraphing , if the preview is accurate then my p tags only seem to be doing the job of a br tag )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it is broadly the same idea in the speculator's point of view.
But there are key differences: domains are not originally sold at a market price, domains are not inherently valuable and there is not a liquid market.This means squatters can obtain vast tracts of domains a little cost of capital in order to grossly inflate the price to the very few who have an interest in the domain.
With land and property, a significant amount of capital is required to acquire it and therefore there is a significant cost (cost of capital) just to do nothing with it until the prices are higher.
Furthermore people are able to relatively easily choose a different patch of land, whereas brand-owners are stuck with relatively few choices that connect to their brand (and sometimes, may have good reason to acquire all of them).
Market forces naturally provide a degree of regulation over land and property, but very little over domains.
It's arguably like saying the government provides a water supply which it provides at incredibly low cost to it's citizens, but then people obtain the rights to 1cm wide strips of land around the water plant and  charge an exorbitant rent to anyone who's home is connected via that one little strip.
(Apologies for any lack of paragraphing, if the preview is accurate then my p tags only seem to be doing the job of a br tag)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208785</id>
	<title>It's simple</title>
	<author>Archon-X</author>
	<datestamp>1244126940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You email them, you make them a reasonable offer, a little below what you're prepared to spend, and you go from there.</p><p>If they don't reply, or want a stupid amount - you've not lost anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You email them , you make them a reasonable offer , a little below what you 're prepared to spend , and you go from there.If they do n't reply , or want a stupid amount - you 've not lost anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You email them, you make them a reasonable offer, a little below what you're prepared to spend, and you go from there.If they don't reply, or want a stupid amount - you've not lost anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208361</id>
	<title>dear f***t***</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244124840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you are not providing any 'service' by owning this arrangement of alphabetical characters. you dont 'own' it, it didnt even exist until you 'bought' it.</p><p>your 'business model' is the equivalent of buying sunshine or air and then then charging people to use it. its fucking free, nobody had to create it or expend aany energy for it to exist.</p><p>you are a leech on society. kindly get a real job that contributes to civilization, like being a fry cook or a dish washer.</p><p>f***t***</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you are not providing any 'service ' by owning this arrangement of alphabetical characters .
you dont 'own ' it , it didnt even exist until you 'bought ' it.your 'business model ' is the equivalent of buying sunshine or air and then then charging people to use it .
its fucking free , nobody had to create it or expend aany energy for it to exist.you are a leech on society .
kindly get a real job that contributes to civilization , like being a fry cook or a dish washer.f * * * t * * *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you are not providing any 'service' by owning this arrangement of alphabetical characters.
you dont 'own' it, it didnt even exist until you 'bought' it.your 'business model' is the equivalent of buying sunshine or air and then then charging people to use it.
its fucking free, nobody had to create it or expend aany energy for it to exist.you are a leech on society.
kindly get a real job that contributes to civilization, like being a fry cook or a dish washer.f***t***</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28218163</id>
	<title>sour grapes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244133660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...clearly not a legitimate business interest</p></div></blockquote><p>wtf...how exactly is it not a legitimate business interest?  From what you have described they probably owned that name long before you even had the idea for the business that would benefit from the name.  So its not like they saw your storefront and ran out an registered the name so they could hold it hostage.</p><p>Also, your probably being unimaginative. Somebody should make a list of businesses who names say exactly what they do. I am guessing its a smallish list.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...clearly not a legitimate business interestwtf...how exactly is it not a legitimate business interest ?
From what you have described they probably owned that name long before you even had the idea for the business that would benefit from the name .
So its not like they saw your storefront and ran out an registered the name so they could hold it hostage.Also , your probably being unimaginative .
Somebody should make a list of businesses who names say exactly what they do .
I am guessing its a smallish list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...clearly not a legitimate business interestwtf...how exactly is it not a legitimate business interest?
From what you have described they probably owned that name long before you even had the idea for the business that would benefit from the name.
So its not like they saw your storefront and ran out an registered the name so they could hold it hostage.Also, your probably being unimaginative.
Somebody should make a list of businesses who names say exactly what they do.
I am guessing its a smallish list.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208955</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244127660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah - that's what I was thinking about the owner of the parking lot just off of Times Square -- if he's not going to build a high rise, he's a squatter.</p><p>We live in a capitalist society, and thankfully we have property rights that protect the owner of property, regardless of how he decides to use the property.  Also, being a capitalist society, if you have a better, more economical use for the property, you should be able to strike a deal with the current owner to pay him more than it is worth to him, but less than it is worth to you.</p><p>This is not squatting (according to the anti-cybersquatting law) - as there is not trademark involved.  It is an unfortunate case of somebody owning something that you want to take from them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah - that 's what I was thinking about the owner of the parking lot just off of Times Square -- if he 's not going to build a high rise , he 's a squatter.We live in a capitalist society , and thankfully we have property rights that protect the owner of property , regardless of how he decides to use the property .
Also , being a capitalist society , if you have a better , more economical use for the property , you should be able to strike a deal with the current owner to pay him more than it is worth to him , but less than it is worth to you.This is not squatting ( according to the anti-cybersquatting law ) - as there is not trademark involved .
It is an unfortunate case of somebody owning something that you want to take from them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah - that's what I was thinking about the owner of the parking lot just off of Times Square -- if he's not going to build a high rise, he's a squatter.We live in a capitalist society, and thankfully we have property rights that protect the owner of property, regardless of how he decides to use the property.
Also, being a capitalist society, if you have a better, more economical use for the property, you should be able to strike a deal with the current owner to pay him more than it is worth to him, but less than it is worth to you.This is not squatting (according to the anti-cybersquatting law) - as there is not trademark involved.
It is an unfortunate case of somebody owning something that you want to take from them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210661</id>
	<title>Re:I was on the other end of this..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244134620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I owned Thundarr.com with the intention of making a Thundarr The Barbarian fan site for about a year. I slacked, of course, like I do on all my projects and awhile later I got an email from a big-wig at Raven Software asking if he could buy the domain from me to make a Thundarr the Barbarian fan site. Ended up unloading it for $120 plus a pre-release copy of Soldier of Fortune Gold.</p><p>Now wait for someone on Slashdot to accuse me of squatting the domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I owned Thundarr.com with the intention of making a Thundarr The Barbarian fan site for about a year .
I slacked , of course , like I do on all my projects and awhile later I got an email from a big-wig at Raven Software asking if he could buy the domain from me to make a Thundarr the Barbarian fan site .
Ended up unloading it for $ 120 plus a pre-release copy of Soldier of Fortune Gold.Now wait for someone on Slashdot to accuse me of squatting the domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I owned Thundarr.com with the intention of making a Thundarr The Barbarian fan site for about a year.
I slacked, of course, like I do on all my projects and awhile later I got an email from a big-wig at Raven Software asking if he could buy the domain from me to make a Thundarr the Barbarian fan site.
Ended up unloading it for $120 plus a pre-release copy of Soldier of Fortune Gold.Now wait for someone on Slashdot to accuse me of squatting the domain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208329</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210277</id>
	<title>Is it just me or....</title>
	<author>motherpusbucket</author>
	<datestamp>1244133060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>does the term "Cybersquatter" sound scatalogical?</htmltext>
<tokenext>does the term " Cybersquatter " sound scatalogical ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does the term "Cybersquatter" sound scatalogical?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207707</id>
	<title>Domain name not important?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When was the last time you timed out a website address in full? Current browser technology dictates that it's easier to just google a company. And after first finding the site you are looking for, no more than a couple of typed letters uniquely identify the desired website. Even Google itself hardly needs its epynomal domain name, although users might be sceptical about surfing to www..com. So, pick any domain name, as long as it seems trustworthy. I'll leave pointing out the downsides of this approach to you...</htmltext>
<tokenext>When was the last time you timed out a website address in full ?
Current browser technology dictates that it 's easier to just google a company .
And after first finding the site you are looking for , no more than a couple of typed letters uniquely identify the desired website .
Even Google itself hardly needs its epynomal domain name , although users might be sceptical about surfing to www..com .
So , pick any domain name , as long as it seems trustworthy .
I 'll leave pointing out the downsides of this approach to you.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When was the last time you timed out a website address in full?
Current browser technology dictates that it's easier to just google a company.
And after first finding the site you are looking for, no more than a couple of typed letters uniquely identify the desired website.
Even Google itself hardly needs its epynomal domain name, although users might be sceptical about surfing to www..com.
So, pick any domain name, as long as it seems trustworthy.
I'll leave pointing out the downsides of this approach to you...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681</id>
	<title>no</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1244120940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>
You don't own the trademark and even if you registered for it, you're doing so too late.  Either pay for it or find another name. If it's a low volume domain (or one they scooped up when it expired) they may not renew it, in which case you can get it that way, if you want to wait.
<p>
If your business plan depends on owning one specific domain then your business plan sucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't own the trademark and even if you registered for it , you 're doing so too late .
Either pay for it or find another name .
If it 's a low volume domain ( or one they scooped up when it expired ) they may not renew it , in which case you can get it that way , if you want to wait .
If your business plan depends on owning one specific domain then your business plan sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You don't own the trademark and even if you registered for it, you're doing so too late.
Either pay for it or find another name.
If it's a low volume domain (or one they scooped up when it expired) they may not renew it, in which case you can get it that way, if you want to wait.
If your business plan depends on owning one specific domain then your business plan sucks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211319</id>
	<title>A piece of advice</title>
	<author>Punk CPA</author>
	<datestamp>1244137320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I actually got back a URL that I had dropped by mistake when changing hosts.  If you have the patience or are angry enough, register with a backorder service to pick up the URL next renewal time.  Do it well in advance of expiration, as the service providers don't move all that fast.  Also, don't obsessively check the URL.  Squatters track the visits and will be more likely to renew or pick up URLs that generate traffic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually got back a URL that I had dropped by mistake when changing hosts .
If you have the patience or are angry enough , register with a backorder service to pick up the URL next renewal time .
Do it well in advance of expiration , as the service providers do n't move all that fast .
Also , do n't obsessively check the URL .
Squatters track the visits and will be more likely to renew or pick up URLs that generate traffic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually got back a URL that I had dropped by mistake when changing hosts.
If you have the patience or are angry enough, register with a backorder service to pick up the URL next renewal time.
Do it well in advance of expiration, as the service providers don't move all that fast.
Also, don't obsessively check the URL.
Squatters track the visits and will be more likely to renew or pick up URLs that generate traffic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208965</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe use a subdomain?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244127720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do realize the auto complete only works after you've been to the site or bookmarked it? Which then goes back to a brand marketing strategy which says that's not a good idea for you TLD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realize the auto complete only works after you 've been to the site or bookmarked it ?
Which then goes back to a brand marketing strategy which says that 's not a good idea for you TLD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realize the auto complete only works after you've been to the site or bookmarked it?
Which then goes back to a brand marketing strategy which says that's not a good idea for you TLD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210065</id>
	<title>buy early and buy often</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244132220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am working on starting my own business and the first domain that I wanted was taken, so I bought the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net but then a year later the ROADWARRIORVPN.COM became available so I grabbed it.  So in my case it worked out to get the domain as soon as you knew you might possibly need it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am working on starting my own business and the first domain that I wanted was taken , so I bought the .net but then a year later the ROADWARRIORVPN.COM became available so I grabbed it .
So in my case it worked out to get the domain as soon as you knew you might possibly need it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am working on starting my own business and the first domain that I wanted was taken, so I bought the .net but then a year later the ROADWARRIORVPN.COM became available so I grabbed it.
So in my case it worked out to get the domain as soon as you knew you might possibly need it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209871</id>
	<title>I was in the same situation</title>
	<author>Demiansmark</author>
	<datestamp>1244131260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I started my company, Station Four, we had the same issue. Since the name wasn't established and there were many variations that would be acceptable (station4, stationfour, stationfourdesign) we went into bargaining with the owner of <a href="http://www.stationfour.com/" title="stationfour.com" rel="nofollow">stationfour.com</a> [stationfour.com] with a "we'd like the domain but we don't need it attitude", we had already picked up stationfourdesign as a back up.</p><p>If we really really wanted a domain that matched our company name and we couldn't get 'stationfour' then we probably would have come up with another name.</p><p>The guy asked for too much, we said good-bye, he came back and said he'd sell it for $80 and we picked it up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I started my company , Station Four , we had the same issue .
Since the name was n't established and there were many variations that would be acceptable ( station4 , stationfour , stationfourdesign ) we went into bargaining with the owner of stationfour.com [ stationfour.com ] with a " we 'd like the domain but we do n't need it attitude " , we had already picked up stationfourdesign as a back up.If we really really wanted a domain that matched our company name and we could n't get 'stationfour ' then we probably would have come up with another name.The guy asked for too much , we said good-bye , he came back and said he 'd sell it for $ 80 and we picked it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I started my company, Station Four, we had the same issue.
Since the name wasn't established and there were many variations that would be acceptable (station4, stationfour, stationfourdesign) we went into bargaining with the owner of stationfour.com [stationfour.com] with a "we'd like the domain but we don't need it attitude", we had already picked up stationfourdesign as a back up.If we really really wanted a domain that matched our company name and we couldn't get 'stationfour' then we probably would have come up with another name.The guy asked for too much, we said good-bye, he came back and said he'd sell it for $80 and we picked it up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209829</id>
	<title>Re:My suggestion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244131080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but the price is negotiable.  And by negotiable I mean $800,000.00</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but the price is negotiable .
And by negotiable I mean $ 800,000.00</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but the price is negotiable.
And by negotiable I mean $800,000.00</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>usasma</author>
	<datestamp>1244123760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been waiting on a particular domain for a couple of years now.  I got the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net, but the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com is occupied by a squatter.
What I've found is that any interest at all will result in the price going up - and offers (if you've identified yourself) to sell it to you.
Even a domain watch (such as those that GoDaddy offers) will result in them holding onto it in the hopes that they'll get some money for it.

You can either wait them out, or pay the premium that they're asking (and fund their future squatting).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been waiting on a particular domain for a couple of years now .
I got the .org and .net , but the .com is occupied by a squatter .
What I 've found is that any interest at all will result in the price going up - and offers ( if you 've identified yourself ) to sell it to you .
Even a domain watch ( such as those that GoDaddy offers ) will result in them holding onto it in the hopes that they 'll get some money for it .
You can either wait them out , or pay the premium that they 're asking ( and fund their future squatting ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been waiting on a particular domain for a couple of years now.
I got the .org and .net, but the .com is occupied by a squatter.
What I've found is that any interest at all will result in the price going up - and offers (if you've identified yourself) to sell it to you.
Even a domain watch (such as those that GoDaddy offers) will result in them holding onto it in the hopes that they'll get some money for it.
You can either wait them out, or pay the premium that they're asking (and fund their future squatting).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207717</id>
	<title>Think of a different name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Presumably your are talking about a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com name.</p><p>Are you going to register all the alternative endings?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.co.uk<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net etc. Because others will and if you don't then their site will be picked up when people search for your name.</p><p>Better to have a name slightly different from the one that is already registered and register the relevant alternatives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably your are talking about a .com name.Are you going to register all the alternative endings ?
.co.uk .org .net etc .
Because others will and if you do n't then their site will be picked up when people search for your name.Better to have a name slightly different from the one that is already registered and register the relevant alternatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably your are talking about a .com name.Are you going to register all the alternative endings?
.co.uk .org .net etc.
Because others will and if you don't then their site will be picked up when people search for your name.Better to have a name slightly different from the one that is already registered and register the relevant alternatives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207941</id>
	<title>Take another TLD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244122680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would suggest looking for another TLD. Sure,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org etc. are nice, but there is so much more. Why not try India (.in) or Russia (.ru) for a change? Your domain name will still be short and perhaps it will even attract more customers...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would suggest looking for another TLD .
Sure , .com , .net , .org etc .
are nice , but there is so much more .
Why not try India ( .in ) or Russia ( .ru ) for a change ?
Your domain name will still be short and perhaps it will even attract more customers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would suggest looking for another TLD.
Sure, .com, .net, .org etc.
are nice, but there is so much more.
Why not try India (.in) or Russia (.ru) for a change?
Your domain name will still be short and perhaps it will even attract more customers...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207887</id>
	<title>Don't look big</title>
	<author>superdana</author>
	<datestamp>1244122200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>We buy a lot of domains where I work--a big honkin' national enterprise--but we never use our work email addresses when we approach a squatter. That way we don't tip them off to how much money we have. So, my advice is to be aware of how you present yourself, and be careful not to give the squatter the impression that you're anything more than a casual buyer. Don't mention that you have a partner, for example, and don't reveal why you want the domain.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We buy a lot of domains where I work--a big honkin ' national enterprise--but we never use our work email addresses when we approach a squatter .
That way we do n't tip them off to how much money we have .
So , my advice is to be aware of how you present yourself , and be careful not to give the squatter the impression that you 're anything more than a casual buyer .
Do n't mention that you have a partner , for example , and do n't reveal why you want the domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We buy a lot of domains where I work--a big honkin' national enterprise--but we never use our work email addresses when we approach a squatter.
That way we don't tip them off to how much money we have.
So, my advice is to be aware of how you present yourself, and be careful not to give the squatter the impression that you're anything more than a casual buyer.
Don't mention that you have a partner, for example, and don't reveal why you want the domain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213345</id>
	<title>Google Wave Domain No Longer a Destination</title>
	<author>Richard0Thomas</author>
	<datestamp>1244145780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google wave or the evolution of "the system" may mean that Web Sites may no longer be static destinations that people go to but rather data sources. I still think domains will me very important as data source labels.

<a href="http://goowave.com/google\_wave\_domain.htm" title="goowave.com" rel="nofollow">http://goowave.com/google\_wave\_domain.htm</a> [goowave.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google wave or the evolution of " the system " may mean that Web Sites may no longer be static destinations that people go to but rather data sources .
I still think domains will me very important as data source labels .
http : //goowave.com/google \ _wave \ _domain.htm [ goowave.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google wave or the evolution of "the system" may mean that Web Sites may no longer be static destinations that people go to but rather data sources.
I still think domains will me very important as data source labels.
http://goowave.com/google\_wave\_domain.htm [goowave.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210807</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>torkus</author>
	<datestamp>1244135160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually since it's serving an add page that would have the oppsite effect methinks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually since it 's serving an add page that would have the oppsite effect methinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually since it's serving an add page that would have the oppsite effect methinks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208411</id>
	<title>Re:Ideas</title>
	<author>rel4x</author>
	<datestamp>1244125200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Eh. If a domainer isn't taking you seriously they'll give you a "screw off" bid. Like $5,000 for a kinda crappy domain that the domainer truly doesn't expect to get over a few hundred for. The idea is that if the person doesn't buy (as expected) you can hold out for someone who wouldn't likely be a waste of time. On the other hand, every so often someone bites and pays the huge price.

IMO You want to appear to know what you're doing. Act like another domainer. Ask the type-in traffic, etc. When it's being evaluated based on that(which is typically low) it's going to constrain the price a bit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh .
If a domainer is n't taking you seriously they 'll give you a " screw off " bid .
Like $ 5,000 for a kinda crappy domain that the domainer truly does n't expect to get over a few hundred for .
The idea is that if the person does n't buy ( as expected ) you can hold out for someone who would n't likely be a waste of time .
On the other hand , every so often someone bites and pays the huge price .
IMO You want to appear to know what you 're doing .
Act like another domainer .
Ask the type-in traffic , etc .
When it 's being evaluated based on that ( which is typically low ) it 's going to constrain the price a bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh.
If a domainer isn't taking you seriously they'll give you a "screw off" bid.
Like $5,000 for a kinda crappy domain that the domainer truly doesn't expect to get over a few hundred for.
The idea is that if the person doesn't buy (as expected) you can hold out for someone who wouldn't likely be a waste of time.
On the other hand, every so often someone bites and pays the huge price.
IMO You want to appear to know what you're doing.
Act like another domainer.
Ask the type-in traffic, etc.
When it's being evaluated based on that(which is typically low) it's going to constrain the price a bit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207803</id>
	<title>Make up another name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many of the successful internet companies make up their own name.  google, hulu, reddit, slashdot, etc.  Make up a word that doesn't exist and go with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many of the successful internet companies make up their own name .
google , hulu , reddit , slashdot , etc .
Make up a word that does n't exist and go with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many of the successful internet companies make up their own name.
google, hulu, reddit, slashdot, etc.
Make up a word that doesn't exist and go with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208655</id>
	<title>You may as well answer spam while you're at it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244126460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's about as helpful.  All you'll be doing is financing the person to buy 100 other domains and hook the next sucker.</p><p>Pick another name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about as helpful .
All you 'll be doing is financing the person to buy 100 other domains and hook the next sucker.Pick another name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about as helpful.
All you'll be doing is financing the person to buy 100 other domains and hook the next sucker.Pick another name.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208439</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244125380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or his ad revenue will just go up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or his ad revenue will just go up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or his ad revenue will just go up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208735</id>
	<title>make an offer</title>
	<author>Script Cat</author>
	<datestamp>1244126820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>make an offer and be willing to walk away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>make an offer and be willing to walk away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>make an offer and be willing to walk away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208665</id>
	<title>Re:Surname</title>
	<author>VGPowerlord</author>
	<datestamp>1244126460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to break it to you Mr. Google, but they aren't a cybersquatter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to break it to you Mr. Google , but they are n't a cybersquatter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to break it to you Mr. Google, but they aren't a cybersquatter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215263</id>
	<title>Re:Your customers won't care</title>
	<author>againjj</author>
	<datestamp>1244111340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com.</p></div><p>You would be surprised.  Many people assume that will work, if they only go to sites where that works.  Think eBay, Facebook, Yahoo, Target, Bank of America, Nike, and a million other national brands.  It took me a year or so to stop my wife from doing that, and I only was able to convince her after she had tried that with a few companies where the rule didn't work.  At first she simply treated those companies as individual exceptions.  Why do you think that companies try to get company-name dot com?  It's because a large fraction of people expect it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add .com.You would be surprised .
Many people assume that will work , if they only go to sites where that works .
Think eBay , Facebook , Yahoo , Target , Bank of America , Nike , and a million other national brands .
It took me a year or so to stop my wife from doing that , and I only was able to convince her after she had tried that with a few companies where the rule did n't work .
At first she simply treated those companies as individual exceptions .
Why do you think that companies try to get company-name dot com ?
It 's because a large fraction of people expect it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will not type in your company name in the URL bar and add .com.You would be surprised.
Many people assume that will work, if they only go to sites where that works.
Think eBay, Facebook, Yahoo, Target, Bank of America, Nike, and a million other national brands.
It took me a year or so to stop my wife from doing that, and I only was able to convince her after she had tried that with a few companies where the rule didn't work.
At first she simply treated those companies as individual exceptions.
Why do you think that companies try to get company-name dot com?
It's because a large fraction of people expect it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211063</id>
	<title>Ensure transaction security</title>
	<author>kismet666</author>
	<datestamp>1244136240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Using an escrow service, its the safest way to make a major purchase with an untrusted party. I used <a href="http://www.escrow.com/" title="escrow.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.escrow.com/</a> [escrow.com] last year when I sold a domain name I had used for 15 years. It was quick, easy, and thier fee was tolerable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Using an escrow service , its the safest way to make a major purchase with an untrusted party .
I used http : //www.escrow.com/ [ escrow.com ] last year when I sold a domain name I had used for 15 years .
It was quick , easy , and thier fee was tolerable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using an escrow service, its the safest way to make a major purchase with an untrusted party.
I used http://www.escrow.com/ [escrow.com] last year when I sold a domain name I had used for 15 years.
It was quick, easy, and thier fee was tolerable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208265</id>
	<title>Trademark it</title>
	<author>snsh</author>
	<datestamp>1244124480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Trademark the name (costs a few hundred dollars), even if it's just for a stylized word (not the typed word) in the secondary register.  Then send a polite letter to the domain registrant asking for the name.  Even a weak trademark might be enough to get them to shy away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trademark the name ( costs a few hundred dollars ) , even if it 's just for a stylized word ( not the typed word ) in the secondary register .
Then send a polite letter to the domain registrant asking for the name .
Even a weak trademark might be enough to get them to shy away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trademark the name (costs a few hundred dollars), even if it's just for a stylized word (not the typed word) in the secondary register.
Then send a polite letter to the domain registrant asking for the name.
Even a weak trademark might be enough to get them to shy away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208675</id>
	<title>Opposite problem here</title>
	<author>Dutchmang</author>
	<datestamp>1244126520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a domain I've owned and not used for almost 15 years, it's a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com that would be very attractive to anyone with a directory or yellow pages plan.  Every so often I get a query on it but it's always.... wait for it... a domain squatter.  I tell them it's $10k and never hear back.  If I had a query from someone who really was going to do something with it, I would negotiate rationally.
<br>
<br>
So for those who say "registrant!=squatter" that's not my experience.  (Well except for me, um, never mind.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a domain I 've owned and not used for almost 15 years , it 's a .com that would be very attractive to anyone with a directory or yellow pages plan .
Every so often I get a query on it but it 's always.... wait for it... a domain squatter .
I tell them it 's $ 10k and never hear back .
If I had a query from someone who really was going to do something with it , I would negotiate rationally .
So for those who say " registrant ! = squatter " that 's not my experience .
( Well except for me , um , never mind .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a domain I've owned and not used for almost 15 years, it's a .com that would be very attractive to anyone with a directory or yellow pages plan.
Every so often I get a query on it but it's always.... wait for it... a domain squatter.
I tell them it's $10k and never hear back.
If I had a query from someone who really was going to do something with it, I would negotiate rationally.
So for those who say "registrant!=squatter" that's not my experience.
(Well except for me, um, never mind.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209235</id>
	<title>You say potato, I say ...</title>
	<author>OpenGLFan</author>
	<datestamp>1244128860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating</i> (sp)<br>Ok...<br><i>The domain has been registered by a domainer - a domain trader that buys premium domains treating them as an investment.</i><br>That's the definition of a cybersquatter.  <b>Domainer</b> is what cybersquatters call themselves -- it's like how mobsters call themselves "legitimate businessmen".<br><i>it's no trademark, not a domain typo - there is no bad faith.</i><br>That's just a subset of cybersquatter.  I think we used to use the word "domain scalper" for these guys, but I'm not a real Internet anthropologist, just an old man.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating ( sp ) Ok...The domain has been registered by a domainer - a domain trader that buys premium domains treating them as an investment.That 's the definition of a cybersquatter .
Domainer is what cybersquatters call themselves -- it 's like how mobsters call themselves " legitimate businessmen " .it 's no trademark , not a domain typo - there is no bad faith.That 's just a subset of cybersquatter .
I think we used to use the word " domain scalper " for these guys , but I 'm not a real Internet anthropologist , just an old man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating (sp)Ok...The domain has been registered by a domainer - a domain trader that buys premium domains treating them as an investment.That's the definition of a cybersquatter.
Domainer is what cybersquatters call themselves -- it's like how mobsters call themselves "legitimate businessmen".it's no trademark, not a domain typo - there is no bad faith.That's just a subset of cybersquatter.
I think we used to use the word "domain scalper" for these guys, but I'm not a real Internet anthropologist, just an old man.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213207</id>
	<title>The bigger picture fellas..cmon</title>
	<author>piedpiper18</author>
	<datestamp>1244145300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sorry but this is truly a baseless rant about ethics. It's not about cybersquatting being the right thing or not. Intent determines that. And as that is something we cannot understand, a debate is pointless.

As for Nevo, If you can't bargain for a decent price, I'd suggest getting creative with the name.

I understand exactly how you feel. I'm setting up a business myself and my domain of choice has been parked by a wise-ass squatter.

Good luck mate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry but this is truly a baseless rant about ethics .
It 's not about cybersquatting being the right thing or not .
Intent determines that .
And as that is something we can not understand , a debate is pointless .
As for Nevo , If you ca n't bargain for a decent price , I 'd suggest getting creative with the name .
I understand exactly how you feel .
I 'm setting up a business myself and my domain of choice has been parked by a wise-ass squatter .
Good luck mate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry but this is truly a baseless rant about ethics.
It's not about cybersquatting being the right thing or not.
Intent determines that.
And as that is something we cannot understand, a debate is pointless.
As for Nevo, If you can't bargain for a decent price, I'd suggest getting creative with the name.
I understand exactly how you feel.
I'm setting up a business myself and my domain of choice has been parked by a wise-ass squatter.
Good luck mate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215287</id>
	<title>Use a Third Party</title>
	<author>trygstad</author>
	<datestamp>1244111460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go through a third party--it doesn't have to be a lawyer or someone you pay, it could just be a friend--so that you and your business cannot be identified by the current owner. If you already have counsel, it would be best if it were your attorney. And gee willikers, as the longtime owner of PondScumAndLawyers.com, I really HATE urging anyone to use a lawyer, but this is a case where it would be best.

And who knows, maybe they just bought it on a lark; I actually owned "nobodyexpectsthespanishinquisition.com" for about three years just because I thought it was a cool domain to have--I'm such a nerd.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go through a third party--it does n't have to be a lawyer or someone you pay , it could just be a friend--so that you and your business can not be identified by the current owner .
If you already have counsel , it would be best if it were your attorney .
And gee willikers , as the longtime owner of PondScumAndLawyers.com , I really HATE urging anyone to use a lawyer , but this is a case where it would be best .
And who knows , maybe they just bought it on a lark ; I actually owned " nobodyexpectsthespanishinquisition.com " for about three years just because I thought it was a cool domain to have--I 'm such a nerd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go through a third party--it doesn't have to be a lawyer or someone you pay, it could just be a friend--so that you and your business cannot be identified by the current owner.
If you already have counsel, it would be best if it were your attorney.
And gee willikers, as the longtime owner of PondScumAndLawyers.com, I really HATE urging anyone to use a lawyer, but this is a case where it would be best.
And who knows, maybe they just bought it on a lark; I actually owned "nobodyexpectsthespanishinquisition.com" for about three years just because I thought it was a cool domain to have--I'm such a nerd.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209987</id>
	<title>.bus</title>
	<author>JTsyo</author>
	<datestamp>1244131920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There should be a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.bus upper domain that you would have to be the owner of the business to register. Not sure what you would do for cases where there are multiple businesses with the same name. Just first come, first served I guess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There should be a .bus upper domain that you would have to be the owner of the business to register .
Not sure what you would do for cases where there are multiple businesses with the same name .
Just first come , first served I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There should be a .bus upper domain that you would have to be the owner of the business to register.
Not sure what you would do for cases where there are multiple businesses with the same name.
Just first come, first served I guess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212051</id>
	<title>Very simple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244140560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Find out where he lives, hire a few thugs, you've got yourself a domain....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Find out where he lives , hire a few thugs , you 've got yourself a domain... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Find out where he lives, hire a few thugs, you've got yourself a domain....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28221135</id>
	<title>How about you...</title>
	<author>highonv8splash</author>
	<datestamp>1244210940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just wait until this whole DNS fad ends.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait until this whole DNS fad ends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait until this whole DNS fad ends.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215595</id>
	<title>Re:My suggestion</title>
	<author>initialE</author>
	<datestamp>1244113020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>murderinthefir.st then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>murderinthefir.st then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>murderinthefir.st then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210345</id>
	<title>Just ask</title>
	<author>gh5046</author>
	<datestamp>1244133480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Send the squatter an email asking if they would sell it, and for how much.  It doesn't hurt to ask, you might get it for cheaper than you think.</p><p>I recently did this.  A friend of mine owned a domain for several years and stopped renewing it a few years ago, so a squatter picked it up.  A couple years later I got sentimental so I contacted the squatter and he sold it to me for $50.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Send the squatter an email asking if they would sell it , and for how much .
It does n't hurt to ask , you might get it for cheaper than you think.I recently did this .
A friend of mine owned a domain for several years and stopped renewing it a few years ago , so a squatter picked it up .
A couple years later I got sentimental so I contacted the squatter and he sold it to me for $ 50 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Send the squatter an email asking if they would sell it, and for how much.
It doesn't hurt to ask, you might get it for cheaper than you think.I recently did this.
A friend of mine owned a domain for several years and stopped renewing it a few years ago, so a squatter picked it up.
A couple years later I got sentimental so I contacted the squatter and he sold it to me for $50.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208477</id>
	<title>Careful...</title>
	<author>Bones3D\_mac</author>
	<datestamp>1244125560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Keep in mind that even if they do agree to your offer for the domain name, you might not actually be purchasing it from them.</p><p>In many instances, squatters like these will often "sublet" a domain name, rather than actually sell it to you outright. If you aren't thorough, you might not notice the issue until after it needs to be renewed a year or two down the road. The idea is that once a person has operated under a domain name long enough for it to have value to them, they'll be so desperate to keep the name that they'll pay just about any price to continue using it.</p><p>Once they know they've got you hooked, it'll be just one more reason to justify doing it to others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Keep in mind that even if they do agree to your offer for the domain name , you might not actually be purchasing it from them.In many instances , squatters like these will often " sublet " a domain name , rather than actually sell it to you outright .
If you are n't thorough , you might not notice the issue until after it needs to be renewed a year or two down the road .
The idea is that once a person has operated under a domain name long enough for it to have value to them , they 'll be so desperate to keep the name that they 'll pay just about any price to continue using it.Once they know they 've got you hooked , it 'll be just one more reason to justify doing it to others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Keep in mind that even if they do agree to your offer for the domain name, you might not actually be purchasing it from them.In many instances, squatters like these will often "sublet" a domain name, rather than actually sell it to you outright.
If you aren't thorough, you might not notice the issue until after it needs to be renewed a year or two down the road.
The idea is that once a person has operated under a domain name long enough for it to have value to them, they'll be so desperate to keep the name that they'll pay just about any price to continue using it.Once they know they've got you hooked, it'll be just one more reason to justify doing it to others.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208627</id>
	<title>Don't bother</title>
	<author>cslewis2007</author>
	<datestamp>1244126280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't do it - it rarely works out.

Come up with a new business name.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't do it - it rarely works out .
Come up with a new business name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't do it - it rarely works out.
Come up with a new business name.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28218473</id>
	<title>Capitalist Pig-Dogs</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1244136600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><strong>Let's suppose land is very cheap. There are a lot of valid businesses and families who would like to build offices and houses. Unfortunately, somebody with no interest in the land at all got there first, bought all the land, and is now selling it for a ten thousand times as much as he paid.Sure, it's legal. Perhaps it's even a valid business. But he's still a scumbag because he's doing nothing productive other than costing people money who actually want to do something productive.</strong></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's suppose land is very cheap .
There are a lot of valid businesses and families who would like to build offices and houses .
Unfortunately , somebody with no interest in the land at all got there first , bought all the land , and is now selling it for a ten thousand times as much as he paid.Sure , it 's legal .
Perhaps it 's even a valid business .
But he 's still a scumbag because he 's doing nothing productive other than costing people money who actually want to do something productive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's suppose land is very cheap.
There are a lot of valid businesses and families who would like to build offices and houses.
Unfortunately, somebody with no interest in the land at all got there first, bought all the land, and is now selling it for a ten thousand times as much as he paid.Sure, it's legal.
Perhaps it's even a valid business.
But he's still a scumbag because he's doing nothing productive other than costing people money who actually want to do something productive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209107</id>
	<title>How it happened</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244128440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A friend of mine had a fairly nice<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com domain name, "dev2dev.com".  He was using it for personal use and running a few toy programs for him and his friends.  Then he started getting more and more hits from all over.  It turned out that BEA had created a developer community site at dev2dev.bea.com, but many people forgot to add the "BEA" part.</p><p>I was in a training class with BEA a few years ago as they mentioned that more samples and the community was located at dev2dev.bea.com. I mentioned to the sales guy at the back of the hotel ballroom that I had a friend with dev2dev.com and he was seeing a bunch of hits and that my friend was a BEA developer too.</p><p>About a month later, I get an email from my friend saying that "someone" was offering him $500 for his domain.  I told him that I'd mentioned it to BEA Sales guy and that he should try to get a perpetual developer license for everything that BEA sells and 2 unlimited CPU production licenses for everything as a swap.  He wanted a turbo for this import car instead that was around $5,000.  Further, the party offering to buy the domain wasn't saying who they were.  I don't know the **exact** terms reached, but it was under $5000 since he didn't get that turbo and talked about it for a while.</p><p>Ok, so if you go to <a href="http://dev2dev.com/" title="dev2dev.com" rel="nofollow">http://dev2dev.com/</a> [dev2dev.com], you don't see BEA there. Obviously, it wasn't them. My friend has no regrets over this - he saw it as "free money" for his $7/yr registration cost.  Clearly, he wasn't a squatter and a win-win outcome happened.</p><p>I have a few (under 5) domains that I'd be happy to sell for $500 each. I tend to use subdomains now, so only my main, really ugly name, is needed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A friend of mine had a fairly nice .com domain name , " dev2dev.com " .
He was using it for personal use and running a few toy programs for him and his friends .
Then he started getting more and more hits from all over .
It turned out that BEA had created a developer community site at dev2dev.bea.com , but many people forgot to add the " BEA " part.I was in a training class with BEA a few years ago as they mentioned that more samples and the community was located at dev2dev.bea.com .
I mentioned to the sales guy at the back of the hotel ballroom that I had a friend with dev2dev.com and he was seeing a bunch of hits and that my friend was a BEA developer too.About a month later , I get an email from my friend saying that " someone " was offering him $ 500 for his domain .
I told him that I 'd mentioned it to BEA Sales guy and that he should try to get a perpetual developer license for everything that BEA sells and 2 unlimited CPU production licenses for everything as a swap .
He wanted a turbo for this import car instead that was around $ 5,000 .
Further , the party offering to buy the domain was n't saying who they were .
I do n't know the * * exact * * terms reached , but it was under $ 5000 since he did n't get that turbo and talked about it for a while.Ok , so if you go to http : //dev2dev.com/ [ dev2dev.com ] , you do n't see BEA there .
Obviously , it was n't them .
My friend has no regrets over this - he saw it as " free money " for his $ 7/yr registration cost .
Clearly , he was n't a squatter and a win-win outcome happened.I have a few ( under 5 ) domains that I 'd be happy to sell for $ 500 each .
I tend to use subdomains now , so only my main , really ugly name , is needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A friend of mine had a fairly nice .com domain name, "dev2dev.com".
He was using it for personal use and running a few toy programs for him and his friends.
Then he started getting more and more hits from all over.
It turned out that BEA had created a developer community site at dev2dev.bea.com, but many people forgot to add the "BEA" part.I was in a training class with BEA a few years ago as they mentioned that more samples and the community was located at dev2dev.bea.com.
I mentioned to the sales guy at the back of the hotel ballroom that I had a friend with dev2dev.com and he was seeing a bunch of hits and that my friend was a BEA developer too.About a month later, I get an email from my friend saying that "someone" was offering him $500 for his domain.
I told him that I'd mentioned it to BEA Sales guy and that he should try to get a perpetual developer license for everything that BEA sells and 2 unlimited CPU production licenses for everything as a swap.
He wanted a turbo for this import car instead that was around $5,000.
Further, the party offering to buy the domain wasn't saying who they were.
I don't know the **exact** terms reached, but it was under $5000 since he didn't get that turbo and talked about it for a while.Ok, so if you go to http://dev2dev.com/ [dev2dev.com], you don't see BEA there.
Obviously, it wasn't them.
My friend has no regrets over this - he saw it as "free money" for his $7/yr registration cost.
Clearly, he wasn't a squatter and a win-win outcome happened.I have a few (under 5) domains that I'd be happy to sell for $500 each.
I tend to use subdomains now, so only my main, really ugly name, is needed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>RobDude</author>
	<datestamp>1244133540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes it is.</p><p>It's the same idea behind buying an undervalued stock, doing nothing with the stock (except owning it) and selling it later.</p><p>It's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued, renting it out/doing nothing, until the price goes up, and selling it later.</p><p>It's the same idea behind buying lots of gold because you feel it will be worth more in the years to come.</p><p>Buy low, sell high.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes it is.It 's the same idea behind buying an undervalued stock , doing nothing with the stock ( except owning it ) and selling it later.It 's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued , renting it out/doing nothing , until the price goes up , and selling it later.It 's the same idea behind buying lots of gold because you feel it will be worth more in the years to come.Buy low , sell high .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes it is.It's the same idea behind buying an undervalued stock, doing nothing with the stock (except owning it) and selling it later.It's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued, renting it out/doing nothing, until the price goes up, and selling it later.It's the same idea behind buying lots of gold because you feel it will be worth more in the years to come.Buy low, sell high.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209037</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244128080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you buy domain names on speculation, you're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it. There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.</p><p>Now, since you appear to be a cybersquatter, I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan. That's fine. That's why houses are called "resales" and not "used."  A "Domainer" (aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing.</p></div><p>So, a person who buys a piece of land in the real world for that same reason is a squatter?? No, thats not the case (A squatter is someone who lives illegally in a home that is not their own [Simplified]), it is investing and doesn't truly become squatting until they are being bought wholesale in large numbers without a real care for what the names are. Domains, as much as people don't like to admit it, are basically virtual real estate, and as such, there are people who treat it that way. It's not illegal, its business. Its supply and demand, quit crying because there are people who understand that better than you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you buy domain names on speculation , you 're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it .
There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains , except to capitalize on the scarcity.Now , since you appear to be a cybersquatter , I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan .
That 's fine .
That 's why houses are called " resales " and not " used .
" A " Domainer " ( aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld ) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing.So , a person who buys a piece of land in the real world for that same reason is a squatter ? ?
No , thats not the case ( A squatter is someone who lives illegally in a home that is not their own [ Simplified ] ) , it is investing and does n't truly become squatting until they are being bought wholesale in large numbers without a real care for what the names are .
Domains , as much as people do n't like to admit it , are basically virtual real estate , and as such , there are people who treat it that way .
It 's not illegal , its business .
Its supply and demand , quit crying because there are people who understand that better than you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you buy domain names on speculation, you're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it.
There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.Now, since you appear to be a cybersquatter, I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan.
That's fine.
That's why houses are called "resales" and not "used.
"  A "Domainer" (aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing.So, a person who buys a piece of land in the real world for that same reason is a squatter??
No, thats not the case (A squatter is someone who lives illegally in a home that is not their own [Simplified]), it is investing and doesn't truly become squatting until they are being bought wholesale in large numbers without a real care for what the names are.
Domains, as much as people don't like to admit it, are basically virtual real estate, and as such, there are people who treat it that way.
It's not illegal, its business.
Its supply and demand, quit crying because there are people who understand that better than you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217857</id>
	<title>you are doing bad things</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244130180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and god will punish you in the end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and god will punish you in the end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and god will punish you in the end.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869</id>
	<title>Easy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244122080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Give us the address, we'll give his server so much traffic he'll be begging to give the domain away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Give us the address , we 'll give his server so much traffic he 'll be begging to give the domain away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give us the address, we'll give his server so much traffic he'll be begging to give the domain away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208295</id>
	<title>Re:Don't play by their rules.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244124600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My boss, being the URL hound he is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p> </div><p>Good sir or madam, what is the name of this business this person happens to be in charge of?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My boss , being the URL hound he is ... Good sir or madam , what is the name of this business this person happens to be in charge of ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My boss, being the URL hound he is ... Good sir or madam, what is the name of this business this person happens to be in charge of?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208611</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe use a subdomain?</title>
	<author>7 digits</author>
	<datestamp>1244126220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; So if you want greatsite.com but thats taken then register blah.com</p><p>You obviously haven't even tried to register a domain name. All 4 letters domain were already gone maybe 10 years ago (there was a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. article on that), and getting a barely pronounceable 5 letters domain is really really really difficult.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; So if you want greatsite.com but thats taken then register blah.comYou obviously have n't even tried to register a domain name .
All 4 letters domain were already gone maybe 10 years ago ( there was a / .
article on that ) , and getting a barely pronounceable 5 letters domain is really really really difficult .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; So if you want greatsite.com but thats taken then register blah.comYou obviously haven't even tried to register a domain name.
All 4 letters domain were already gone maybe 10 years ago (there was a /.
article on that), and getting a barely pronounceable 5 letters domain is really really really difficult.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213823</id>
	<title>In My Experience</title>
	<author>phmadore</author>
	<datestamp>1244147640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey man--I recently bought girlswithinsurance.com back from an insurance guy. He had no real use of the domain, I'm sure he'd bought it on an impulse via linky offered by his registrar. I offered him a fair price (more than $200) and he immediately accepted it, leading me to believe that he would have taken a much lower amount. Nonetheless I made good on the offer. I had him request the money from me via paypal that way if any litigation ever needed to be pursued, it would be evident to the court that he had asked for the money for a specific reason, and he couldn't argue that I was just randomly sending him money or anything. Anyway, the end result was that he was very good about it and there were no issues once the money had been transferred--at least none that were within his control. GoDaddy has ailing software but that is another issue. Anyway, hope this info helps--the basic thing is to keep records of all communications and transactions and possibly initiate phone conversation via skype and record it. All of this is slightly unnecessary things to do in order to keep yourself from getting screwed over.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey man--I recently bought girlswithinsurance.com back from an insurance guy .
He had no real use of the domain , I 'm sure he 'd bought it on an impulse via linky offered by his registrar .
I offered him a fair price ( more than $ 200 ) and he immediately accepted it , leading me to believe that he would have taken a much lower amount .
Nonetheless I made good on the offer .
I had him request the money from me via paypal that way if any litigation ever needed to be pursued , it would be evident to the court that he had asked for the money for a specific reason , and he could n't argue that I was just randomly sending him money or anything .
Anyway , the end result was that he was very good about it and there were no issues once the money had been transferred--at least none that were within his control .
GoDaddy has ailing software but that is another issue .
Anyway , hope this info helps--the basic thing is to keep records of all communications and transactions and possibly initiate phone conversation via skype and record it .
All of this is slightly unnecessary things to do in order to keep yourself from getting screwed over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey man--I recently bought girlswithinsurance.com back from an insurance guy.
He had no real use of the domain, I'm sure he'd bought it on an impulse via linky offered by his registrar.
I offered him a fair price (more than $200) and he immediately accepted it, leading me to believe that he would have taken a much lower amount.
Nonetheless I made good on the offer.
I had him request the money from me via paypal that way if any litigation ever needed to be pursued, it would be evident to the court that he had asked for the money for a specific reason, and he couldn't argue that I was just randomly sending him money or anything.
Anyway, the end result was that he was very good about it and there were no issues once the money had been transferred--at least none that were within his control.
GoDaddy has ailing software but that is another issue.
Anyway, hope this info helps--the basic thing is to keep records of all communications and transactions and possibly initiate phone conversation via skype and record it.
All of this is slightly unnecessary things to do in order to keep yourself from getting screwed over.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208329</id>
	<title>I was on the other end of this..</title>
	<author>SuperCharlie</author>
	<datestamp>1244124720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had a domain and had good intentions of using it but never got around to it for around a year. The company who contacted me had a completely different business than I *would* have used it for, but I was broke so I weighed out what I thought it was worth, trying to be fair (hay it was a pretty good domain name) and asked for $5000. I figured they would negotiate me down and prolly take 1/2 or less. TBH, would have been happy if they took it or not. They lawyered up and after a few nasty certified letters I let it go since I couldn't afford the legal coverage. Kinda sucked to be sued out of it...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a domain and had good intentions of using it but never got around to it for around a year .
The company who contacted me had a completely different business than I * would * have used it for , but I was broke so I weighed out what I thought it was worth , trying to be fair ( hay it was a pretty good domain name ) and asked for $ 5000 .
I figured they would negotiate me down and prolly take 1/2 or less .
TBH , would have been happy if they took it or not .
They lawyered up and after a few nasty certified letters I let it go since I could n't afford the legal coverage .
Kinda sucked to be sued out of it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a domain and had good intentions of using it but never got around to it for around a year.
The company who contacted me had a completely different business than I *would* have used it for, but I was broke so I weighed out what I thought it was worth, trying to be fair (hay it was a pretty good domain name) and asked for $5000.
I figured they would negotiate me down and prolly take 1/2 or less.
TBH, would have been happy if they took it or not.
They lawyered up and after a few nasty certified letters I let it go since I couldn't afford the legal coverage.
Kinda sucked to be sued out of it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209341</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>z80kid</author>
	<datestamp>1244129220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't offer anyone anything of value. You offer non-interference in an otherwise working system for a fee.<p>
The only benefit you offer anyone is your absence. </p><p>
That should be your eulogy. "All he had to offer us was his absence. We gather today to celebrate his only  significant achievement."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't offer anyone anything of value .
You offer non-interference in an otherwise working system for a fee .
The only benefit you offer anyone is your absence .
That should be your eulogy .
" All he had to offer us was his absence .
We gather today to celebrate his only significant achievement .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't offer anyone anything of value.
You offer non-interference in an otherwise working system for a fee.
The only benefit you offer anyone is your absence.
That should be your eulogy.
"All he had to offer us was his absence.
We gather today to celebrate his only  significant achievement.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208781</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>HetMes</author>
	<datestamp>1244126940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You, sir, are a low life, terribly fond of his own delusion of being in a legitimate, respectable business. But I'm sure the money you extort from honest people makes a lot of people shut up in your face. However, everyone despises you behind your back. Kudos for being honest about your 'business', though!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You , sir , are a low life , terribly fond of his own delusion of being in a legitimate , respectable business .
But I 'm sure the money you extort from honest people makes a lot of people shut up in your face .
However , everyone despises you behind your back .
Kudos for being honest about your 'business ' , though !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, sir, are a low life, terribly fond of his own delusion of being in a legitimate, respectable business.
But I'm sure the money you extort from honest people makes a lot of people shut up in your face.
However, everyone despises you behind your back.
Kudos for being honest about your 'business', though!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28219769</id>
	<title>I wish him a strange sort of happiness</title>
	<author>dugeen</author>
	<datestamp>1244197800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cybersquatter had this incredible quality which was, um, I don't know how you can define it but I would, er, say it was, um, I'd say it was stupidity.

Take Peter Cook's advice and choose a different name. Don't encourage Squatter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cybersquatter had this incredible quality which was , um , I do n't know how you can define it but I would , er , say it was , um , I 'd say it was stupidity .
Take Peter Cook 's advice and choose a different name .
Do n't encourage Squatter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cybersquatter had this incredible quality which was, um, I don't know how you can define it but I would, er, say it was, um, I'd say it was stupidity.
Take Peter Cook's advice and choose a different name.
Don't encourage Squatter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208247</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>SQLGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1244124240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message. We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.</p></div><p>I think this is the key sticking point.  What is "too low"?  We all know that your costs are $10 per year (probably less due to bulk, but let's just go with that number) plus some administrative $$$'s.  We know that the domains do generate some income from ads.  This isn't a case of having registered McDonalds.com because that was your name and you can sell it to the company for 1 bazillion dollars.  It's a speculation.  I'm ok with some level of "profit" or reward for that but there is no brand associated with the domain already (*you* aren't marketing it), so what constitutes reasonable?  I think that $500 is on the high end of what an undeveloped domain name is worth, but when I see $5,000, that just floors me.  The key being that the domain is undeveloped.  Marketing is the key to whether a domain is successful or not and speculative registration does nothing for that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer , but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message .
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.I think this is the key sticking point .
What is " too low " ?
We all know that your costs are $ 10 per year ( probably less due to bulk , but let 's just go with that number ) plus some administrative $ $ $ 's .
We know that the domains do generate some income from ads .
This is n't a case of having registered McDonalds.com because that was your name and you can sell it to the company for 1 bazillion dollars .
It 's a speculation .
I 'm ok with some level of " profit " or reward for that but there is no brand associated with the domain already ( * you * are n't marketing it ) , so what constitutes reasonable ?
I think that $ 500 is on the high end of what an undeveloped domain name is worth , but when I see $ 5,000 , that just floors me .
The key being that the domain is undeveloped .
Marketing is the key to whether a domain is successful or not and speculative registration does nothing for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message.
We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.I think this is the key sticking point.
What is "too low"?
We all know that your costs are $10 per year (probably less due to bulk, but let's just go with that number) plus some administrative $$$'s.
We know that the domains do generate some income from ads.
This isn't a case of having registered McDonalds.com because that was your name and you can sell it to the company for 1 bazillion dollars.
It's a speculation.
I'm ok with some level of "profit" or reward for that but there is no brand associated with the domain already (*you* aren't marketing it), so what constitutes reasonable?
I think that $500 is on the high end of what an undeveloped domain name is worth, but when I see $5,000, that just floors me.
The key being that the domain is undeveloped.
Marketing is the key to whether a domain is successful or not and speculative registration does nothing for that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208339</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>dyingtolive</author>
	<datestamp>1244124720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem here is a matter of what is "fair".  You say that there are loads of offers which are "too low by two-three orders of magnitude."  What is a good offer for something like spoon.com?  $10000?  You paid about 15 bucks for it.  I think the problem is the level of expectation that you should get paid two-three orders of magnitude more than what the domain is worth.  The problem is that there is no value-add to what you do.  It is quite literally just running up to something screaming "I was here first, pay me for this for that reason alone!"  Most people resent paying more for a service that doesn't really get them anything.  One of the reasons why SEO is such a scam.  I might feed the domain trolls and give $100 for something like spoon.com if it was payday and I felt like being frivolous.  At the same time you say that you have on it "a website filled with some adds in order to earn some money to finance the cost of domain renewal plus sometimes a few bucks extra."  So you are already drawing even if not making a profit, so (in my mind) you can just enjoy your profitable little site, and I will look for a different name.<br> <br>
Oh, and as an afterthought though, props for having the balls to post this with your real UID.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem here is a matter of what is " fair " .
You say that there are loads of offers which are " too low by two-three orders of magnitude .
" What is a good offer for something like spoon.com ?
$ 10000 ? You paid about 15 bucks for it .
I think the problem is the level of expectation that you should get paid two-three orders of magnitude more than what the domain is worth .
The problem is that there is no value-add to what you do .
It is quite literally just running up to something screaming " I was here first , pay me for this for that reason alone !
" Most people resent paying more for a service that does n't really get them anything .
One of the reasons why SEO is such a scam .
I might feed the domain trolls and give $ 100 for something like spoon.com if it was payday and I felt like being frivolous .
At the same time you say that you have on it " a website filled with some adds in order to earn some money to finance the cost of domain renewal plus sometimes a few bucks extra .
" So you are already drawing even if not making a profit , so ( in my mind ) you can just enjoy your profitable little site , and I will look for a different name .
Oh , and as an afterthought though , props for having the balls to post this with your real UID .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem here is a matter of what is "fair".
You say that there are loads of offers which are "too low by two-three orders of magnitude.
"  What is a good offer for something like spoon.com?
$10000?  You paid about 15 bucks for it.
I think the problem is the level of expectation that you should get paid two-three orders of magnitude more than what the domain is worth.
The problem is that there is no value-add to what you do.
It is quite literally just running up to something screaming "I was here first, pay me for this for that reason alone!
"  Most people resent paying more for a service that doesn't really get them anything.
One of the reasons why SEO is such a scam.
I might feed the domain trolls and give $100 for something like spoon.com if it was payday and I felt like being frivolous.
At the same time you say that you have on it "a website filled with some adds in order to earn some money to finance the cost of domain renewal plus sometimes a few bucks extra.
"  So you are already drawing even if not making a profit, so (in my mind) you can just enjoy your profitable little site, and I will look for a different name.
Oh, and as an afterthought though, props for having the balls to post this with your real UID.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208233</id>
	<title>Re:How badly do you need that address?</title>
	<author>blackbear</author>
	<datestamp>1244124180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recently looked into a (cybersquatted) domain for a client. The squatter wanted $3000.00. We said, "Take a hike." Over the next few weeks I received unsolicited offers, each one for less money. Eventually the price went below 1K, then to make-an-offer.</p><p>I was determined that my client not give these scumbags any money, so I advised against making any offers, and finally told the scumbag, "No, seriously, take hike!"</p><p>My client went with an alternative that turned out to be a better choice because he was able to trademark it. The one he originally wanted was pretty generic and was already being used in commerce in several states by several companies.</p><p>The ability to trademark is one of the reasons that so many companies have begun using made-up words in their names. Doing so also takes cybersquatters out of the picture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recently looked into a ( cybersquatted ) domain for a client .
The squatter wanted $ 3000.00 .
We said , " Take a hike .
" Over the next few weeks I received unsolicited offers , each one for less money .
Eventually the price went below 1K , then to make-an-offer.I was determined that my client not give these scumbags any money , so I advised against making any offers , and finally told the scumbag , " No , seriously , take hike !
" My client went with an alternative that turned out to be a better choice because he was able to trademark it .
The one he originally wanted was pretty generic and was already being used in commerce in several states by several companies.The ability to trademark is one of the reasons that so many companies have begun using made-up words in their names .
Doing so also takes cybersquatters out of the picture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recently looked into a (cybersquatted) domain for a client.
The squatter wanted $3000.00.
We said, "Take a hike.
" Over the next few weeks I received unsolicited offers, each one for less money.
Eventually the price went below 1K, then to make-an-offer.I was determined that my client not give these scumbags any money, so I advised against making any offers, and finally told the scumbag, "No, seriously, take hike!
"My client went with an alternative that turned out to be a better choice because he was able to trademark it.
The one he originally wanted was pretty generic and was already being used in commerce in several states by several companies.The ability to trademark is one of the reasons that so many companies have begun using made-up words in their names.
Doing so also takes cybersquatters out of the picture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211069</id>
	<title>Re:How badly do you need that address?</title>
	<author>Julien Brub</author>
	<datestamp>1244136240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good, although I wouldn't *mention* alternatives, just mention there are plenty alternatives.

Also, let's say you want to buy ilvtofu.com. Buy ilvtofu.net and/or ilvtofu.us *before* making a proposition. You don't want to end-up without any Plan B.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good , although I would n't * mention * alternatives , just mention there are plenty alternatives .
Also , let 's say you want to buy ilvtofu.com .
Buy ilvtofu.net and/or ilvtofu.us * before * making a proposition .
You do n't want to end-up without any Plan B .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good, although I wouldn't *mention* alternatives, just mention there are plenty alternatives.
Also, let's say you want to buy ilvtofu.com.
Buy ilvtofu.net and/or ilvtofu.us *before* making a proposition.
You don't want to end-up without any Plan B.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211489</id>
	<title>Re:no</title>
	<author>city</author>
	<datestamp>1244137980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that the business plan sucks... it's just that the cybersquatter has already thought of that business plan and happens to be employing it successfully.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that the business plan sucks... it 's just that the cybersquatter has already thought of that business plan and happens to be employing it successfully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that the business plan sucks... it's just that the cybersquatter has already thought of that business plan and happens to be employing it successfully.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28219271</id>
	<title>Unneeded domain names</title>
	<author>innocent\_white\_lamb</author>
	<datestamp>1244233380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last summer I did a small project for a local business.  The owner wanted to sell his business and retire, so I registered a couple of domain names that described his business and added "for sale" to them, along the line of shoestoreforsale.com or paperrouteforsale.com and so on.  I took a few pictures of his business and put a simple web page up on those two domain names and a couple of months later he sold his business and I changed the content of the website to simply say "sold".</p><p>When those two domain names come up for renewal this summer I'm not going to be renewing them.  I no longer need them and the chance of another business of that exact type coming to me to sell his business are between slim and none, and Slim left town last week.  So paying the renewal fee for those domain names would be a waste of money.</p><p>I would like to think that those domain names will simply expire and go back into the pool so they would become available for the next guy who has that type of business for sale to purchase and use, but I suspect that they will be snapped up by domain squatter-scammers instead.  Which is a darn shame and no the way that the system should work, in my humble opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last summer I did a small project for a local business .
The owner wanted to sell his business and retire , so I registered a couple of domain names that described his business and added " for sale " to them , along the line of shoestoreforsale.com or paperrouteforsale.com and so on .
I took a few pictures of his business and put a simple web page up on those two domain names and a couple of months later he sold his business and I changed the content of the website to simply say " sold " .When those two domain names come up for renewal this summer I 'm not going to be renewing them .
I no longer need them and the chance of another business of that exact type coming to me to sell his business are between slim and none , and Slim left town last week .
So paying the renewal fee for those domain names would be a waste of money.I would like to think that those domain names will simply expire and go back into the pool so they would become available for the next guy who has that type of business for sale to purchase and use , but I suspect that they will be snapped up by domain squatter-scammers instead .
Which is a darn shame and no the way that the system should work , in my humble opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last summer I did a small project for a local business.
The owner wanted to sell his business and retire, so I registered a couple of domain names that described his business and added "for sale" to them, along the line of shoestoreforsale.com or paperrouteforsale.com and so on.
I took a few pictures of his business and put a simple web page up on those two domain names and a couple of months later he sold his business and I changed the content of the website to simply say "sold".When those two domain names come up for renewal this summer I'm not going to be renewing them.
I no longer need them and the chance of another business of that exact type coming to me to sell his business are between slim and none, and Slim left town last week.
So paying the renewal fee for those domain names would be a waste of money.I would like to think that those domain names will simply expire and go back into the pool so they would become available for the next guy who has that type of business for sale to purchase and use, but I suspect that they will be snapped up by domain squatter-scammers instead.
Which is a darn shame and no the way that the system should work, in my humble opinion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>riyley</author>
	<datestamp>1244129940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><div><p>sitting on a domain name unproductively with the intent to hope someone will come along and pay your ransom is not what most people consider legitimate business.  while some URL's sell for high premiums because of the website behind it, or simply the value of the name itself (consider systemax's acquisitions of circuitcity and compusa URL, trademark, logo, etc.), this is not the case of many URL squatters who simply buy up every domain in sight, hoping one will make a payoff when a corporation takes interest.<br> <br>
If the owner hopes to invest in domain names, they should be expected to work the value of the name.  but i disagree completely that a business hopeful with an actual use for a domain name should happily pay the extortion of a common domain thug.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sitting on a domain name unproductively with the intent to hope someone will come along and pay your ransom is not what most people consider legitimate business .
while some URL 's sell for high premiums because of the website behind it , or simply the value of the name itself ( consider systemax 's acquisitions of circuitcity and compusa URL , trademark , logo , etc .
) , this is not the case of many URL squatters who simply buy up every domain in sight , hoping one will make a payoff when a corporation takes interest .
If the owner hopes to invest in domain names , they should be expected to work the value of the name .
but i disagree completely that a business hopeful with an actual use for a domain name should happily pay the extortion of a common domain thug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sitting on a domain name unproductively with the intent to hope someone will come along and pay your ransom is not what most people consider legitimate business.
while some URL's sell for high premiums because of the website behind it, or simply the value of the name itself (consider systemax's acquisitions of circuitcity and compusa URL, trademark, logo, etc.
), this is not the case of many URL squatters who simply buy up every domain in sight, hoping one will make a payoff when a corporation takes interest.
If the owner hopes to invest in domain names, they should be expected to work the value of the name.
but i disagree completely that a business hopeful with an actual use for a domain name should happily pay the extortion of a common domain thug.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209389</id>
	<title>Re:Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1244129400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why ask about only two?  Why ask only the squatter that interests you?</p><p>It'll hurt their moral if they see more inquiries without sales.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ask about only two ?
Why ask only the squatter that interests you ? It 'll hurt their moral if they see more inquiries without sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why ask about only two?
Why ask only the squatter that interests you?It'll hurt their moral if they see more inquiries without sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212057</id>
	<title>No, extortion</title>
	<author>S-100</author>
	<datestamp>1244140560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you are hoarding diamonds or real estate, your hoard has an innate value to you.  When you hoard domains, your hoard has no innate value.  Your squatted domains have no value to you, only to other people that you have beaten to the punch.  It's those people that consider the domains valuable, and now they must pay your extortion in order to get what you have taken for no other reason than extortion.<br> <br>I had a domain that I had gotten in anticipation of starting an on-line service that would use it.  I never got around to working on that business, and someone approached me to obtain the domain.  We negotiated a fair price (way less than $1000) and the deal was done.  In this case, I sold an idle business asset.  A more appropriate analogy to cybersquatting would be a guy who takes all the free meals at a soup kitchen and then sells them to the hungry to the highest bidder.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When you are hoarding diamonds or real estate , your hoard has an innate value to you .
When you hoard domains , your hoard has no innate value .
Your squatted domains have no value to you , only to other people that you have beaten to the punch .
It 's those people that consider the domains valuable , and now they must pay your extortion in order to get what you have taken for no other reason than extortion .
I had a domain that I had gotten in anticipation of starting an on-line service that would use it .
I never got around to working on that business , and someone approached me to obtain the domain .
We negotiated a fair price ( way less than $ 1000 ) and the deal was done .
In this case , I sold an idle business asset .
A more appropriate analogy to cybersquatting would be a guy who takes all the free meals at a soup kitchen and then sells them to the hungry to the highest bidder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you are hoarding diamonds or real estate, your hoard has an innate value to you.
When you hoard domains, your hoard has no innate value.
Your squatted domains have no value to you, only to other people that you have beaten to the punch.
It's those people that consider the domains valuable, and now they must pay your extortion in order to get what you have taken for no other reason than extortion.
I had a domain that I had gotten in anticipation of starting an on-line service that would use it.
I never got around to working on that business, and someone approached me to obtain the domain.
We negotiated a fair price (way less than $1000) and the deal was done.
In this case, I sold an idle business asset.
A more appropriate analogy to cybersquatting would be a guy who takes all the free meals at a soup kitchen and then sells them to the hungry to the highest bidder.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210535</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1244134200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The big difference with land is that we live on a planet with a limited size. Most land has an owner by now - there is not much no-mans-land left in the world. That means to get the land you have to actually figure out who owns it and get the transfer done.
</p><p>Domain names can be created from scratch - there is a virtually unlimited number available, limited only by the allowed characters (26 letters plus some other characters), and total length (no idea how many characters are allowed but I am not aware of a limit). With 20 characters one would already have something like 10E45 names possible. That is big enough to call unlimited for practical use.
</p><p>So while I do understand the legitimate business of registering domains and hoping to sell them for a profit, to follow your land-investment analogy these businesses should limit themselves to existing domains, buying disused but already registered domains, and refrain from registering new domains.
</p><p>The latter, cybersquatting or domaining or whatever you call it does not add anything to the overall system. It is just a nuisance. There is no advantage whatsoever to the user of a domain, and it will definitely never be a market place like a stock exchange or commodities market where buyers and sellers gather and brokers facilitate deals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The big difference with land is that we live on a planet with a limited size .
Most land has an owner by now - there is not much no-mans-land left in the world .
That means to get the land you have to actually figure out who owns it and get the transfer done .
Domain names can be created from scratch - there is a virtually unlimited number available , limited only by the allowed characters ( 26 letters plus some other characters ) , and total length ( no idea how many characters are allowed but I am not aware of a limit ) .
With 20 characters one would already have something like 10E45 names possible .
That is big enough to call unlimited for practical use .
So while I do understand the legitimate business of registering domains and hoping to sell them for a profit , to follow your land-investment analogy these businesses should limit themselves to existing domains , buying disused but already registered domains , and refrain from registering new domains .
The latter , cybersquatting or domaining or whatever you call it does not add anything to the overall system .
It is just a nuisance .
There is no advantage whatsoever to the user of a domain , and it will definitely never be a market place like a stock exchange or commodities market where buyers and sellers gather and brokers facilitate deals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The big difference with land is that we live on a planet with a limited size.
Most land has an owner by now - there is not much no-mans-land left in the world.
That means to get the land you have to actually figure out who owns it and get the transfer done.
Domain names can be created from scratch - there is a virtually unlimited number available, limited only by the allowed characters (26 letters plus some other characters), and total length (no idea how many characters are allowed but I am not aware of a limit).
With 20 characters one would already have something like 10E45 names possible.
That is big enough to call unlimited for practical use.
So while I do understand the legitimate business of registering domains and hoping to sell them for a profit, to follow your land-investment analogy these businesses should limit themselves to existing domains, buying disused but already registered domains, and refrain from registering new domains.
The latter, cybersquatting or domaining or whatever you call it does not add anything to the overall system.
It is just a nuisance.
There is no advantage whatsoever to the user of a domain, and it will definitely never be a market place like a stock exchange or commodities market where buyers and sellers gather and brokers facilitate deals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207727</id>
	<title>Re:How badly do you need that address?</title>
	<author>paulatz</author>
	<datestamp>1244121180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>mention possible alternatives</i>
</p><p>This is sound advice! You should also remember to always mention you credit card details and your ebay password.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mention possible alternatives This is sound advice !
You should also remember to always mention you credit card details and your ebay password .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> mention possible alternatives
This is sound advice!
You should also remember to always mention you credit card details and your ebay password.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217191</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe use a subdomain?</title>
	<author>merreborn</author>
	<datestamp>1244122920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We had a subdomain-based strategy for a while, but we have a few sites that targets a less than internet-savvy audience.  We discovered that they don't understand subdomains at all.  When given the name greatsite.blah.com, They'd try to visit greatsite.com, or greatsiteblah.com, or just blah.com.</p><p>We're transitioning all our sites to straight-up<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.coms from here on out.</p><p>Depending on your audience, and goals, this may be less important, but if you're hoping to draw in less technical crowds, a straight up www.example.com-type domain is the only way to go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We had a subdomain-based strategy for a while , but we have a few sites that targets a less than internet-savvy audience .
We discovered that they do n't understand subdomains at all .
When given the name greatsite.blah.com , They 'd try to visit greatsite.com , or greatsiteblah.com , or just blah.com.We 're transitioning all our sites to straight-up .coms from here on out.Depending on your audience , and goals , this may be less important , but if you 're hoping to draw in less technical crowds , a straight up www.example.com-type domain is the only way to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We had a subdomain-based strategy for a while, but we have a few sites that targets a less than internet-savvy audience.
We discovered that they don't understand subdomains at all.
When given the name greatsite.blah.com, They'd try to visit greatsite.com, or greatsiteblah.com, or just blah.com.We're transitioning all our sites to straight-up .coms from here on out.Depending on your audience, and goals, this may be less important, but if you're hoping to draw in less technical crowds, a straight up www.example.com-type domain is the only way to go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209565</id>
	<title>What twist?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244130000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait a minute. Are you seriously calling someone who has a domain  name you want, but won't sell because they are making money, a squatter?</p><p>In that case Google is a squatter because I want that domain. The fact that they are making money from ad revenue is irrelevant~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait a minute .
Are you seriously calling someone who has a domain name you want , but wo n't sell because they are making money , a squatter ? In that case Google is a squatter because I want that domain .
The fact that they are making money from ad revenue is irrelevant ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait a minute.
Are you seriously calling someone who has a domain  name you want, but won't sell because they are making money, a squatter?In that case Google is a squatter because I want that domain.
The fact that they are making money from ad revenue is irrelevant~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208121</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207793</id>
	<title>Re:It's not going to happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've clearly never worked for a company with a porn site on one of the more common typos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've clearly never worked for a company with a porn site on one of the more common typos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've clearly never worked for a company with a porn site on one of the more common typos.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207695</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207897</id>
	<title>Just get a different domain</title>
	<author>Jarlsberg</author>
	<datestamp>1244122260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not worth the hassle or your money to pay for a squatted domain. It's always possible to find a decent substitute, maybe even a better one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not worth the hassle or your money to pay for a squatted domain .
It 's always possible to find a decent substitute , maybe even a better one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not worth the hassle or your money to pay for a squatted domain.
It's always possible to find a decent substitute, maybe even a better one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208915</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>HanClinto</author>
	<datestamp>1244127480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What benefits are you providing to the customer?</p><p>As far as I can tell, you seem to be similar to a real estate housing "flipper", who shops around for low-priced houses, and immediately sells it for more, without providing the buyer any services other than a higher price.</p><p>In a word, you are not generating anything of value.</p><p>Is this illegal?  No, by no means, and I don't think it should be.  It's just a parasitical business model that is bad for the community overall.  Real estate flipping is one of the (many) factors that contributed to artificially inflated the prices of houses during the last housing bubble.</p><p>Thankfully, it seems that this business model can only exist in the kind of market where the demand exceeds the supply, so opportunities for such parasitical non-productive business is limited.</p><p>I'm just glad that my current business lets me avoid having to deal with unwanted middle men like yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What benefits are you providing to the customer ? As far as I can tell , you seem to be similar to a real estate housing " flipper " , who shops around for low-priced houses , and immediately sells it for more , without providing the buyer any services other than a higher price.In a word , you are not generating anything of value.Is this illegal ?
No , by no means , and I do n't think it should be .
It 's just a parasitical business model that is bad for the community overall .
Real estate flipping is one of the ( many ) factors that contributed to artificially inflated the prices of houses during the last housing bubble.Thankfully , it seems that this business model can only exist in the kind of market where the demand exceeds the supply , so opportunities for such parasitical non-productive business is limited.I 'm just glad that my current business lets me avoid having to deal with unwanted middle men like yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What benefits are you providing to the customer?As far as I can tell, you seem to be similar to a real estate housing "flipper", who shops around for low-priced houses, and immediately sells it for more, without providing the buyer any services other than a higher price.In a word, you are not generating anything of value.Is this illegal?
No, by no means, and I don't think it should be.
It's just a parasitical business model that is bad for the community overall.
Real estate flipping is one of the (many) factors that contributed to artificially inflated the prices of houses during the last housing bubble.Thankfully, it seems that this business model can only exist in the kind of market where the demand exceeds the supply, so opportunities for such parasitical non-productive business is limited.I'm just glad that my current business lets me avoid having to deal with unwanted middle men like yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212623</id>
	<title>Barter</title>
	<author>Demonantis</author>
	<datestamp>1244143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The cybersquatter doesn't want the domain. He wants your money. Contact him and ask how much the site is going to cost. Don't be surprised if it is ridiculous then send an email back telling him your not interested at anything close to that price. I wouldn't be surprised if that price decreases rapidly to something quite more realistic. The guy is looking to make money and as long as its above cost he would be willing to sell. I don't get why people don't barter here as much as they do in Europe. Its a good skill to have.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The cybersquatter does n't want the domain .
He wants your money .
Contact him and ask how much the site is going to cost .
Do n't be surprised if it is ridiculous then send an email back telling him your not interested at anything close to that price .
I would n't be surprised if that price decreases rapidly to something quite more realistic .
The guy is looking to make money and as long as its above cost he would be willing to sell .
I do n't get why people do n't barter here as much as they do in Europe .
Its a good skill to have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cybersquatter doesn't want the domain.
He wants your money.
Contact him and ask how much the site is going to cost.
Don't be surprised if it is ridiculous then send an email back telling him your not interested at anything close to that price.
I wouldn't be surprised if that price decreases rapidly to something quite more realistic.
The guy is looking to make money and as long as its above cost he would be willing to sell.
I don't get why people don't barter here as much as they do in Europe.
Its a good skill to have.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209891</id>
	<title>Re:Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>iYk6</author>
	<datestamp>1244131380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's like buying a car: there's lots of wiggle room (even more than there is with a car!).</p></div><p>Exaggerate much? If I want the new Pullman Silver Palace Viper Porsche with a red racing stripe, there are many dealerships I can get it from. If I want clownpenisfart.com, there is only one place I can get it from.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like buying a car : there 's lots of wiggle room ( even more than there is with a car !
) .Exaggerate much ?
If I want the new Pullman Silver Palace Viper Porsche with a red racing stripe , there are many dealerships I can get it from .
If I want clownpenisfart.com , there is only one place I can get it from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like buying a car: there's lots of wiggle room (even more than there is with a car!
).Exaggerate much?
If I want the new Pullman Silver Palace Viper Porsche with a red racing stripe, there are many dealerships I can get it from.
If I want clownpenisfart.com, there is only one place I can get it from.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210015</id>
	<title>Tips for getting the domain at a good price</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244132040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Act like a kid.

Register a new email address at live.com or gmail, timlikestheyankees@ or something that makes you appear young.

Send an email to the company that owns the domain, make it very laid back, again act like a kid. Say you want the name for  a new band / a project / your sister's birthday and how much is it.

Make the email short and sweet, a lack of capitalisation and spelling will actually help here.

If its a domain theyve not had any interest in you should get an offer at a low price. If you sent an email all business like from a proper email account they'd try and ride you out for a higher amount. In their eyes some money is better than no money.

Worked for me in the past.

R</htmltext>
<tokenext>Act like a kid .
Register a new email address at live.com or gmail , timlikestheyankees @ or something that makes you appear young .
Send an email to the company that owns the domain , make it very laid back , again act like a kid .
Say you want the name for a new band / a project / your sister 's birthday and how much is it .
Make the email short and sweet , a lack of capitalisation and spelling will actually help here .
If its a domain theyve not had any interest in you should get an offer at a low price .
If you sent an email all business like from a proper email account they 'd try and ride you out for a higher amount .
In their eyes some money is better than no money .
Worked for me in the past .
R</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Act like a kid.
Register a new email address at live.com or gmail, timlikestheyankees@ or something that makes you appear young.
Send an email to the company that owns the domain, make it very laid back, again act like a kid.
Say you want the name for  a new band / a project / your sister's birthday and how much is it.
Make the email short and sweet, a lack of capitalisation and spelling will actually help here.
If its a domain theyve not had any interest in you should get an offer at a low price.
If you sent an email all business like from a proper email account they'd try and ride you out for a higher amount.
In their eyes some money is better than no money.
Worked for me in the past.
R</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>ikkonoishi</author>
	<datestamp>1244122200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Telling the actual URL in question would be a bad idea as it may cause the current holder to up their asking price since it was linked on slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Telling the actual URL in question would be a bad idea as it may cause the current holder to up their asking price since it was linked on slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Telling the actual URL in question would be a bad idea as it may cause the current holder to up their asking price since it was linked on slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207813</id>
	<title>Don't play by their rules.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244121720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>My boss received an e-mail from a cybersquatter that sought to sell us a URL that was very similar to a URL we currently owned.  My boss, being the URL hound he is asked me to purchase it.  I offered the squatter&#226;(TM)s auto-bid website $50, which it automatically turned down and told me I had to offer a minimum of $500.  I walked from the deal, only to receive an e-mail an hour later from the squatter, agreeing to my $50 bid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My boss received an e-mail from a cybersquatter that sought to sell us a URL that was very similar to a URL we currently owned .
My boss , being the URL hound he is asked me to purchase it .
I offered the squatter   ( TM ) s auto-bid website $ 50 , which it automatically turned down and told me I had to offer a minimum of $ 500 .
I walked from the deal , only to receive an e-mail an hour later from the squatter , agreeing to my $ 50 bid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My boss received an e-mail from a cybersquatter that sought to sell us a URL that was very similar to a URL we currently owned.
My boss, being the URL hound he is asked me to purchase it.
I offered the squatterâ(TM)s auto-bid website $50, which it automatically turned down and told me I had to offer a minimum of $500.
I walked from the deal, only to receive an e-mail an hour later from the squatter, agreeing to my $50 bid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28214189</id>
	<title>Boils down to...</title>
	<author>Ractive</author>
	<datestamp>1244149140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well everybody here is discussing about cybersquatters and suing but it all boils down to the point that if you want the domain you'll have to purchase it from the dude who got it first! </p><p>Unless they want $500.000 and you have copyright it's stupid to start litigation so just spend the $100 to $500 which is actually what you would pay for a physical sign for a physical businnes</p><p>They will try to charge you more, but believe me, you can negotiate, don't tell them what you will use it for, just tell them it's your grandma's maiden name and you want it for her birthday present. They'll know you're full of crap just as you know they are when they tell you similar things to charge you more.</p><p>
Just be sure to get a reputable escrow firm so you don't get scammed.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well everybody here is discussing about cybersquatters and suing but it all boils down to the point that if you want the domain you 'll have to purchase it from the dude who got it first !
Unless they want $ 500.000 and you have copyright it 's stupid to start litigation so just spend the $ 100 to $ 500 which is actually what you would pay for a physical sign for a physical businnesThey will try to charge you more , but believe me , you can negotiate , do n't tell them what you will use it for , just tell them it 's your grandma 's maiden name and you want it for her birthday present .
They 'll know you 're full of crap just as you know they are when they tell you similar things to charge you more .
Just be sure to get a reputable escrow firm so you do n't get scammed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well everybody here is discussing about cybersquatters and suing but it all boils down to the point that if you want the domain you'll have to purchase it from the dude who got it first!
Unless they want $500.000 and you have copyright it's stupid to start litigation so just spend the $100 to $500 which is actually what you would pay for a physical sign for a physical businnesThey will try to charge you more, but believe me, you can negotiate, don't tell them what you will use it for, just tell them it's your grandma's maiden name and you want it for her birthday present.
They'll know you're full of crap just as you know they are when they tell you similar things to charge you more.
Just be sure to get a reputable escrow firm so you don't get scammed.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209599</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>horatio</author>
	<datestamp>1244130180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating (sic)</p></div><p>Funny, you appear to be the only one here who thinks so.  And strictly legally, you may be correct.  Ethically is another matter.  You run around spending a few bucks per domain, snatching them up and holding the name hostage for the express purpose of extorting a massive margin (1000\%+) from prospective internet (term used loosely here) site creators.  To call what you do a "business model" is incredibly generous.  You violate the most basic principles of the internet as a shared community.  The internet is about building stuff.  Maybe you share what you build with the rest of the community, maybe you don't.  Maybe you operate a legitimate business on your domain and make a profit selling tea, or webspace, or whatever.  I have no problems with that.  I'm a big free-market capitalist pig.  That doesn't mean, however, I believe in a FFA anything-goes marketplace.  I can't walk into my competition's shop and piss on his product to drive his customers into my store.<br> <br>

If you were registering trademarks (instead of domain names) in the U.S. just to horde them and extort money, you would be hauled into court and get them stripped from you - because we have decided to set up a system that exists for inventors and people who actually do something useful.  The "law" regarding domain names is obviously much less strict, because we are a community and we expect that folks who buy up a name are doing so to use it for something besides being an asshat.<br> <br>

As a community, we have decided that we wanted the field to be wide open for anyone to invent, create, and share without being forced to spend enormous amounts of capital.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/services, OSS, and the RFCs are good examples of this.  Snapping up domain names for the express purpose of holding them for ransom is quite the opposite.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating ( sic ) Funny , you appear to be the only one here who thinks so .
And strictly legally , you may be correct .
Ethically is another matter .
You run around spending a few bucks per domain , snatching them up and holding the name hostage for the express purpose of extorting a massive margin ( 1000 \ % + ) from prospective internet ( term used loosely here ) site creators .
To call what you do a " business model " is incredibly generous .
You violate the most basic principles of the internet as a shared community .
The internet is about building stuff .
Maybe you share what you build with the rest of the community , maybe you do n't .
Maybe you operate a legitimate business on your domain and make a profit selling tea , or webspace , or whatever .
I have no problems with that .
I 'm a big free-market capitalist pig .
That does n't mean , however , I believe in a FFA anything-goes marketplace .
I ca n't walk into my competition 's shop and piss on his product to drive his customers into my store .
If you were registering trademarks ( instead of domain names ) in the U.S. just to horde them and extort money , you would be hauled into court and get them stripped from you - because we have decided to set up a system that exists for inventors and people who actually do something useful .
The " law " regarding domain names is obviously much less strict , because we are a community and we expect that folks who buy up a name are doing so to use it for something besides being an asshat .
As a community , we have decided that we wanted the field to be wide open for anyone to invent , create , and share without being forced to spend enormous amounts of capital .
/etc/services , OSS , and the RFCs are good examples of this .
Snapping up domain names for the express purpose of holding them for ransom is quite the opposite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating (sic)Funny, you appear to be the only one here who thinks so.
And strictly legally, you may be correct.
Ethically is another matter.
You run around spending a few bucks per domain, snatching them up and holding the name hostage for the express purpose of extorting a massive margin (1000\%+) from prospective internet (term used loosely here) site creators.
To call what you do a "business model" is incredibly generous.
You violate the most basic principles of the internet as a shared community.
The internet is about building stuff.
Maybe you share what you build with the rest of the community, maybe you don't.
Maybe you operate a legitimate business on your domain and make a profit selling tea, or webspace, or whatever.
I have no problems with that.
I'm a big free-market capitalist pig.
That doesn't mean, however, I believe in a FFA anything-goes marketplace.
I can't walk into my competition's shop and piss on his product to drive his customers into my store.
If you were registering trademarks (instead of domain names) in the U.S. just to horde them and extort money, you would be hauled into court and get them stripped from you - because we have decided to set up a system that exists for inventors and people who actually do something useful.
The "law" regarding domain names is obviously much less strict, because we are a community and we expect that folks who buy up a name are doing so to use it for something besides being an asshat.
As a community, we have decided that we wanted the field to be wide open for anyone to invent, create, and share without being forced to spend enormous amounts of capital.
/etc/services, OSS, and the RFCs are good examples of this.
Snapping up domain names for the express purpose of holding them for ransom is quite the opposite.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28218975</id>
	<title>Don't assume a domain is unused</title>
	<author>Anonymous Cowdog</author>
	<datestamp>1244142780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't assume a domain that appears unused is being squatted. It might be used for email, and it might have various unpublished subdomains that are being used.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't assume a domain that appears unused is being squatted .
It might be used for email , and it might have various unpublished subdomains that are being used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't assume a domain that appears unused is being squatted.
It might be used for email, and it might have various unpublished subdomains that are being used.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209</id>
	<title>Surname</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244124060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What do you do when your own surname is owned by a domain whore?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you do when your own surname is owned by a domain whore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you do when your own surname is owned by a domain whore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210393</id>
	<title>It could be as simple as asking -</title>
	<author>PoolOfThought</author>
	<datestamp>1244133600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have experience with the exact situation you are talking about. When I was going public with one of my websites I wanted the perfect name. I had a pretty good domain name already, but I felt that it was too specific. I wanted one that both spoke to what was being currently offered by the site, but still left room for the site to offer more than it already did. <br>
<br>
Eventually I settled on a name and it was owned by someone else. It was just serving ads. I WHOISed it, used the contact information and asked how much they wanted. What they asked for was not unreasonable. I felt like it could be an awesome name for the site's genre so I accepted and things went without a hitch. UNTIL... <br>
<br>
Later, something like 3 days later, I decided that the hyphenated version of the name would be nice to have as well. I went to register it and it was owned also. WHOIS again. Guess who? Same guy... guess when registered? Same day he transferred the other one to me. In the end I decided it was worth it to me to buy it from him as well (after I bought the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net of the hyphenated).<br>
<br>
I got exactly what I wanted. He made a small chunk of change (probably paid his home internet bill for the year). I was actually impressed with how smoothly it went down. I was even slightly impressed that he had the sense to go buy the other one when i bought the first one (though I intentionally did not buy the hyphenated one to start with because i wanted him to see he had options if he was in love with the name so he could still sell the first one to me).<br>
<br>
I guess I would say just try to contact them and find out what they want. It might be less than you expect OR you might not be able to get it at all with your available funds. I wish you luck. Having a good domain name that reflects what you do will help a lot in growing your site's popularity. Not having your #1 choice will probably not kill your chances, but it can make things a little bit harder. It might be worth the extra money to get exactly what you want.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have experience with the exact situation you are talking about .
When I was going public with one of my websites I wanted the perfect name .
I had a pretty good domain name already , but I felt that it was too specific .
I wanted one that both spoke to what was being currently offered by the site , but still left room for the site to offer more than it already did .
Eventually I settled on a name and it was owned by someone else .
It was just serving ads .
I WHOISed it , used the contact information and asked how much they wanted .
What they asked for was not unreasonable .
I felt like it could be an awesome name for the site 's genre so I accepted and things went without a hitch .
UNTIL.. . Later , something like 3 days later , I decided that the hyphenated version of the name would be nice to have as well .
I went to register it and it was owned also .
WHOIS again .
Guess who ?
Same guy... guess when registered ?
Same day he transferred the other one to me .
In the end I decided it was worth it to me to buy it from him as well ( after I bought the .net of the hyphenated ) .
I got exactly what I wanted .
He made a small chunk of change ( probably paid his home internet bill for the year ) .
I was actually impressed with how smoothly it went down .
I was even slightly impressed that he had the sense to go buy the other one when i bought the first one ( though I intentionally did not buy the hyphenated one to start with because i wanted him to see he had options if he was in love with the name so he could still sell the first one to me ) .
I guess I would say just try to contact them and find out what they want .
It might be less than you expect OR you might not be able to get it at all with your available funds .
I wish you luck .
Having a good domain name that reflects what you do will help a lot in growing your site 's popularity .
Not having your # 1 choice will probably not kill your chances , but it can make things a little bit harder .
It might be worth the extra money to get exactly what you want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have experience with the exact situation you are talking about.
When I was going public with one of my websites I wanted the perfect name.
I had a pretty good domain name already, but I felt that it was too specific.
I wanted one that both spoke to what was being currently offered by the site, but still left room for the site to offer more than it already did.
Eventually I settled on a name and it was owned by someone else.
It was just serving ads.
I WHOISed it, used the contact information and asked how much they wanted.
What they asked for was not unreasonable.
I felt like it could be an awesome name for the site's genre so I accepted and things went without a hitch.
UNTIL... 

Later, something like 3 days later, I decided that the hyphenated version of the name would be nice to have as well.
I went to register it and it was owned also.
WHOIS again.
Guess who?
Same guy... guess when registered?
Same day he transferred the other one to me.
In the end I decided it was worth it to me to buy it from him as well (after I bought the .net of the hyphenated).
I got exactly what I wanted.
He made a small chunk of change (probably paid his home internet bill for the year).
I was actually impressed with how smoothly it went down.
I was even slightly impressed that he had the sense to go buy the other one when i bought the first one (though I intentionally did not buy the hyphenated one to start with because i wanted him to see he had options if he was in love with the name so he could still sell the first one to me).
I guess I would say just try to contact them and find out what they want.
It might be less than you expect OR you might not be able to get it at all with your available funds.
I wish you luck.
Having a good domain name that reflects what you do will help a lot in growing your site's popularity.
Not having your #1 choice will probably not kill your chances, but it can make things a little bit harder.
It might be worth the extra money to get exactly what you want.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207915</id>
	<title>Use a temporary email address when communicating.</title>
	<author>berbmit</author>
	<datestamp>1244122440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Suggest you get a temporary email address when (if) you initiate communication.  Your normal email is just too useful a lead for them to google and see how much you're worth stinging for.  Better yet, ignore them and find another name.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Suggest you get a temporary email address when ( if ) you initiate communication .
Your normal email is just too useful a lead for them to google and see how much you 're worth stinging for .
Better yet , ignore them and find another name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suggest you get a temporary email address when (if) you initiate communication.
Your normal email is just too useful a lead for them to google and see how much you're worth stinging for.
Better yet, ignore them and find another name.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209661</id>
	<title>Re:My suggestion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244130360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>MurderInTheFirst.com was already registered.</p></div><p>Yes, but I'll sell it to you for 100 Million Dollars!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>MurderInTheFirst.com was already registered.Yes , but I 'll sell it to you for 100 Million Dollars !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MurderInTheFirst.com was already registered.Yes, but I'll sell it to you for 100 Million Dollars!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211647</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>ThrowAwaySociety</author>
	<datestamp>1244138580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating - it's no trademark, not a domain typo - there is no bad faith.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>That may be the legal definition of cybersquatting, but the popular definition is what you describe: buying domains in the hopes of flipping them for a higher price later.</p><p>For what it's worth, most of the unsolicited commercial bulk email I receive isn't legally Spam, either. That doesn't mean that the jerks who send it aren't spammers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating - it 's no trademark , not a domain typo - there is no bad faith .
...That may be the legal definition of cybersquatting , but the popular definition is what you describe : buying domains in the hopes of flipping them for a higher price later.For what it 's worth , most of the unsolicited commercial bulk email I receive is n't legally Spam , either .
That does n't mean that the jerks who send it are n't spammers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all what you are describing is not cybersquating - it's no trademark, not a domain typo - there is no bad faith.
...That may be the legal definition of cybersquatting, but the popular definition is what you describe: buying domains in the hopes of flipping them for a higher price later.For what it's worth, most of the unsolicited commercial bulk email I receive isn't legally Spam, either.
That doesn't mean that the jerks who send it aren't spammers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209619</id>
	<title>Don't Let Bob Register Your Domain Name</title>
	<author>aquatone282</author>
	<datestamp>1244130240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True story: an architect friend decided his business needed a presence on the Internet several years ago, but not knowing anything about the Internet except it was a way to advertise, and being cheap, he asked his neighbor Bob to set him-up.  The neighbor bought and registered his domain name, ("www.[last\_name]architecturalstudio.com") and set up a very simple page with contact info, etc.</p><p>My friend was happy, but two years later, the domain name came up for renewal and he and the neighbor were no longer on speaking terms.  The neighbor ignored the renewal notices and one day my friend gets a call from a client saying his website had disappeared and a search page was in its place.  Friend calls domain registrar (GoDaddy) who informs him his domain name expired thirty days previously and had been purchased by another party (even though GoDaddy says they'll hold the domain name for sixty days after expiration before putting it up for auction - one of many reasons to stay the heck away from GoDaddy).</p><p>Friend contacts the new owner - someone located in the UK - who tells my friend he can buy the domain name back for the low, low price of $40,000.00.  Friend says no thanks and registers a new domain name and begins process of putting up another website (with my help).  Day later, friend gets another call from a client asking if he knows his original domain name is now a pr0n site.  Friend apologizes and then receives an e-mail from the chap in the UK saying he can buy the domain name back for $500.00.</p><p>Moral of the story - never, ever, give anyone else control of your domain name.  Especially not Bob.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True story : an architect friend decided his business needed a presence on the Internet several years ago , but not knowing anything about the Internet except it was a way to advertise , and being cheap , he asked his neighbor Bob to set him-up .
The neighbor bought and registered his domain name , ( " www .
[ last \ _name ] architecturalstudio.com " ) and set up a very simple page with contact info , etc.My friend was happy , but two years later , the domain name came up for renewal and he and the neighbor were no longer on speaking terms .
The neighbor ignored the renewal notices and one day my friend gets a call from a client saying his website had disappeared and a search page was in its place .
Friend calls domain registrar ( GoDaddy ) who informs him his domain name expired thirty days previously and had been purchased by another party ( even though GoDaddy says they 'll hold the domain name for sixty days after expiration before putting it up for auction - one of many reasons to stay the heck away from GoDaddy ) .Friend contacts the new owner - someone located in the UK - who tells my friend he can buy the domain name back for the low , low price of $ 40,000.00 .
Friend says no thanks and registers a new domain name and begins process of putting up another website ( with my help ) .
Day later , friend gets another call from a client asking if he knows his original domain name is now a pr0n site .
Friend apologizes and then receives an e-mail from the chap in the UK saying he can buy the domain name back for $ 500.00.Moral of the story - never , ever , give anyone else control of your domain name .
Especially not Bob .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True story: an architect friend decided his business needed a presence on the Internet several years ago, but not knowing anything about the Internet except it was a way to advertise, and being cheap, he asked his neighbor Bob to set him-up.
The neighbor bought and registered his domain name, ("www.
[last\_name]architecturalstudio.com") and set up a very simple page with contact info, etc.My friend was happy, but two years later, the domain name came up for renewal and he and the neighbor were no longer on speaking terms.
The neighbor ignored the renewal notices and one day my friend gets a call from a client saying his website had disappeared and a search page was in its place.
Friend calls domain registrar (GoDaddy) who informs him his domain name expired thirty days previously and had been purchased by another party (even though GoDaddy says they'll hold the domain name for sixty days after expiration before putting it up for auction - one of many reasons to stay the heck away from GoDaddy).Friend contacts the new owner - someone located in the UK - who tells my friend he can buy the domain name back for the low, low price of $40,000.00.
Friend says no thanks and registers a new domain name and begins process of putting up another website (with my help).
Day later, friend gets another call from a client asking if he knows his original domain name is now a pr0n site.
Friend apologizes and then receives an e-mail from the chap in the UK saying he can buy the domain name back for $500.00.Moral of the story - never, ever, give anyone else control of your domain name.
Especially not Bob.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208261</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Etylowy</author>
	<datestamp>1244124420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I don't agree with your definition of cybersquatting (and therefore I don't consider myself a cybersquatter) I certainly see why you don't like what I do. Any business that makes you pay more for a services or goods that are served on first comes first served basis will make people angry. It's exactly the same with gold phone numers, except that there is no central control of the market (like the phone company).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I do n't agree with your definition of cybersquatting ( and therefore I do n't consider myself a cybersquatter ) I certainly see why you do n't like what I do .
Any business that makes you pay more for a services or goods that are served on first comes first served basis will make people angry .
It 's exactly the same with gold phone numers , except that there is no central control of the market ( like the phone company ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I don't agree with your definition of cybersquatting (and therefore I don't consider myself a cybersquatter) I certainly see why you don't like what I do.
Any business that makes you pay more for a services or goods that are served on first comes first served basis will make people angry.
It's exactly the same with gold phone numers, except that there is no central control of the market (like the phone company).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207847</id>
	<title>Obvious Solution</title>
	<author>charliebear</author>
	<datestamp>1244121960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just wait until it expires, then swoop in and register it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/then email the squatter and ask them if they want to buy it back</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait until it expires , then swoop in and register it .
/then email the squatter and ask them if they want to buy it back</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait until it expires, then swoop in and register it.
/then email the squatter and ask them if they want to buy it back</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207653</id>
	<title>recent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244120760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i recently had an experiance buying a domain name from a squatter. we promiced to pay them &#194;&pound;100 for the domain name, and then they sent us their fasthost account details, without us paying them. we thought we would take the opertunity to simply take the domain name anyway, and transfer it to our own account without payment.</p><p>hopefully you could try and get this idiot to do something similar, ie some details to see that the domain is in the account as "good faith" before you hand over any money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i recently had an experiance buying a domain name from a squatter .
we promiced to pay them     100 for the domain name , and then they sent us their fasthost account details , without us paying them .
we thought we would take the opertunity to simply take the domain name anyway , and transfer it to our own account without payment.hopefully you could try and get this idiot to do something similar , ie some details to see that the domain is in the account as " good faith " before you hand over any money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i recently had an experiance buying a domain name from a squatter.
we promiced to pay them Â£100 for the domain name, and then they sent us their fasthost account details, without us paying them.
we thought we would take the opertunity to simply take the domain name anyway, and transfer it to our own account without payment.hopefully you could try and get this idiot to do something similar, ie some details to see that the domain is in the account as "good faith" before you hand over any money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28229799</id>
	<title>patents@gcc-ip.com</title>
	<author>patents</author>
	<datestamp>1244217900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am a patent attorney (patents and trademarks). Recently a client had a similar problem, and I advised her to contact the trademark owner (who was not a cybersquatter, but this is otherwise similar). When she was told the price, I advised her to counter with what she would pay (making it clear that she could use another mark if the price was higher, but "somewhat preferred" that mark).
It worked, and she is now one happy camper.
The alternative is to complain to the Trademark Office and ask that the mark be revoked, then see if they will issue it to you - but I advise against going to court (but then I always advise against going to court - I'm biased, I guess).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a patent attorney ( patents and trademarks ) .
Recently a client had a similar problem , and I advised her to contact the trademark owner ( who was not a cybersquatter , but this is otherwise similar ) .
When she was told the price , I advised her to counter with what she would pay ( making it clear that she could use another mark if the price was higher , but " somewhat preferred " that mark ) .
It worked , and she is now one happy camper .
The alternative is to complain to the Trademark Office and ask that the mark be revoked , then see if they will issue it to you - but I advise against going to court ( but then I always advise against going to court - I 'm biased , I guess ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a patent attorney (patents and trademarks).
Recently a client had a similar problem, and I advised her to contact the trademark owner (who was not a cybersquatter, but this is otherwise similar).
When she was told the price, I advised her to counter with what she would pay (making it clear that she could use another mark if the price was higher, but "somewhat preferred" that mark).
It worked, and she is now one happy camper.
The alternative is to complain to the Trademark Office and ask that the mark be revoked, then see if they will issue it to you - but I advise against going to court (but then I always advise against going to court - I'm biased, I guess).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28221121</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>pbhj</author>
	<datestamp>1244210880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think that $500 is on the high end of what an undeveloped domain name is worth, but when I see $5,000, that just floors me.  The key being that the domain is undeveloped.  Marketing is the key to whether a domain is successful or not and speculative registration does nothing for that.</p></div><p>Registered domains have domain age which is good for SEO, if the domain name suggests a particular field (eg a tech domain) then it may have been optimised for that and might even have a few useful links possibly even a little PR.</p><p>The worth of anything in a capitalist regime is the value someone will pay. If there's scarcity (check!) then that value is boosted.</p><p>If the domain were developed, with some automated blog posts or somesuch, would it be worth more then. How about if the blog posts were put up manually. What about if it's being used but sporadically and with hight ratio of ads to content. At what point do you consider the owner is warranted to sell at a higher value? If $5000 is peanuts to the purchaser but will stop the seller from losing their family home, does that matter<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that $ 500 is on the high end of what an undeveloped domain name is worth , but when I see $ 5,000 , that just floors me .
The key being that the domain is undeveloped .
Marketing is the key to whether a domain is successful or not and speculative registration does nothing for that.Registered domains have domain age which is good for SEO , if the domain name suggests a particular field ( eg a tech domain ) then it may have been optimised for that and might even have a few useful links possibly even a little PR.The worth of anything in a capitalist regime is the value someone will pay .
If there 's scarcity ( check !
) then that value is boosted.If the domain were developed , with some automated blog posts or somesuch , would it be worth more then .
How about if the blog posts were put up manually .
What about if it 's being used but sporadically and with hight ratio of ads to content .
At what point do you consider the owner is warranted to sell at a higher value ?
If $ 5000 is peanuts to the purchaser but will stop the seller from losing their family home , does that matter .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that $500 is on the high end of what an undeveloped domain name is worth, but when I see $5,000, that just floors me.
The key being that the domain is undeveloped.
Marketing is the key to whether a domain is successful or not and speculative registration does nothing for that.Registered domains have domain age which is good for SEO, if the domain name suggests a particular field (eg a tech domain) then it may have been optimised for that and might even have a few useful links possibly even a little PR.The worth of anything in a capitalist regime is the value someone will pay.
If there's scarcity (check!
) then that value is boosted.If the domain were developed, with some automated blog posts or somesuch, would it be worth more then.
How about if the blog posts were put up manually.
What about if it's being used but sporadically and with hight ratio of ads to content.
At what point do you consider the owner is warranted to sell at a higher value?
If $5000 is peanuts to the purchaser but will stop the seller from losing their family home, does that matter ...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210643</id>
	<title>Registrars are part of the problem</title>
	<author>MoonRabbit</author>
	<datestamp>1244134560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Several years ago, I was looking at a particular<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org domain for a nonprofit site. WHOIS reported that the domain had been registered, the registration had expired, and the domain was "pending deletion". I found out the registrar was dotregistrar, so I jumped through their hoops and paid them $20 a year for the priviledge of  "backordering" the domain when they got around to deleting it. They said the "grace period" wasn't up yet (it's normally 15-90 days).

Fast forward three years - the domain is still a "pending delete", and I'm out $60. I tried contacting them one last time to find out what's going on. I'm still listed as #1 in the backorder list, but the domain hasn't been deleted. I say the hell with it and refuse to renew for a fourth year. The NEXT DAY, the domain has been registered to a new owner, who coincidentally, is a squatter whose sites are all registered with dotregistrar.

Either this is a really unlikely coincidence, or the whole "backorder" thing is a pretty blatant scam.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Several years ago , I was looking at a particular .org domain for a nonprofit site .
WHOIS reported that the domain had been registered , the registration had expired , and the domain was " pending deletion " .
I found out the registrar was dotregistrar , so I jumped through their hoops and paid them $ 20 a year for the priviledge of " backordering " the domain when they got around to deleting it .
They said the " grace period " was n't up yet ( it 's normally 15-90 days ) .
Fast forward three years - the domain is still a " pending delete " , and I 'm out $ 60 .
I tried contacting them one last time to find out what 's going on .
I 'm still listed as # 1 in the backorder list , but the domain has n't been deleted .
I say the hell with it and refuse to renew for a fourth year .
The NEXT DAY , the domain has been registered to a new owner , who coincidentally , is a squatter whose sites are all registered with dotregistrar .
Either this is a really unlikely coincidence , or the whole " backorder " thing is a pretty blatant scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several years ago, I was looking at a particular .org domain for a nonprofit site.
WHOIS reported that the domain had been registered, the registration had expired, and the domain was "pending deletion".
I found out the registrar was dotregistrar, so I jumped through their hoops and paid them $20 a year for the priviledge of  "backordering" the domain when they got around to deleting it.
They said the "grace period" wasn't up yet (it's normally 15-90 days).
Fast forward three years - the domain is still a "pending delete", and I'm out $60.
I tried contacting them one last time to find out what's going on.
I'm still listed as #1 in the backorder list, but the domain hasn't been deleted.
I say the hell with it and refuse to renew for a fourth year.
The NEXT DAY, the domain has been registered to a new owner, who coincidentally, is a squatter whose sites are all registered with dotregistrar.
Either this is a really unlikely coincidence, or the whole "backorder" thing is a pretty blatant scam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208171</id>
	<title>"clearly not a legitimate business interest"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244123880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really? How can you tell?</p><p>My company has a couple hundred domains that were purchased over time, for different projects, products, services &amp; proposals. Not all of them are active, but when you're in the early planning stages, it's worth paying $7 to godaddy to get the domain before anyone else.</p><p>Lots of legitimate companies buy domain names for future use. The default for many registrars is to show a search page &amp; some ads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
How can you tell ? My company has a couple hundred domains that were purchased over time , for different projects , products , services &amp; proposals .
Not all of them are active , but when you 're in the early planning stages , it 's worth paying $ 7 to godaddy to get the domain before anyone else.Lots of legitimate companies buy domain names for future use .
The default for many registrars is to show a search page &amp; some ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
How can you tell?My company has a couple hundred domains that were purchased over time, for different projects, products, services &amp; proposals.
Not all of them are active, but when you're in the early planning stages, it's worth paying $7 to godaddy to get the domain before anyone else.Lots of legitimate companies buy domain names for future use.
The default for many registrars is to show a search page &amp; some ads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211979</id>
	<title>if you rly want the spam</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244140200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this domain already got when it was in use for the 1st time, go ahead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this domain already got when it was in use for the 1st time , go ahead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this domain already got when it was in use for the 1st time, go ahead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212891</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244143980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fair is, whether you like it or not, what the seller and the buyer agree to.  The seller owns the property, in this case the domain, and is under no ethical or legal obligation (in my view of the world) to sell for some price that -you- like.  It's no different than (wait for it) me buying a particular car for $3 and demanding $1000 for it from you when you want to buy it.  You don't have to pay the ridiculous price, and the owner doesn't have to lower the price.  The low cost of acquisition is immaterial - the owner owns it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fair is , whether you like it or not , what the seller and the buyer agree to .
The seller owns the property , in this case the domain , and is under no ethical or legal obligation ( in my view of the world ) to sell for some price that -you- like .
It 's no different than ( wait for it ) me buying a particular car for $ 3 and demanding $ 1000 for it from you when you want to buy it .
You do n't have to pay the ridiculous price , and the owner does n't have to lower the price .
The low cost of acquisition is immaterial - the owner owns it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fair is, whether you like it or not, what the seller and the buyer agree to.
The seller owns the property, in this case the domain, and is under no ethical or legal obligation (in my view of the world) to sell for some price that -you- like.
It's no different than (wait for it) me buying a particular car for $3 and demanding $1000 for it from you when you want to buy it.
You don't have to pay the ridiculous price, and the owner doesn't have to lower the price.
The low cost of acquisition is immaterial - the owner owns it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208339</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217449</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>ryanov</author>
	<datestamp>1244125200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe I'm alone here, but this sort of shit has always pissed me off. The organization you're using this website for... it's an ISP, commercial company, and a non-profit organization? If not, why do you need all three domains (except to be incorrect on two of them)? It irritates me at work as it's a lot of pointless duplication to host three zones for every domain name, but it also means that the suffix doesn't tell you anything about the site.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I 'm alone here , but this sort of shit has always pissed me off .
The organization you 're using this website for... it 's an ISP , commercial company , and a non-profit organization ?
If not , why do you need all three domains ( except to be incorrect on two of them ) ?
It irritates me at work as it 's a lot of pointless duplication to host three zones for every domain name , but it also means that the suffix does n't tell you anything about the site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I'm alone here, but this sort of shit has always pissed me off.
The organization you're using this website for... it's an ISP, commercial company, and a non-profit organization?
If not, why do you need all three domains (except to be incorrect on two of them)?
It irritates me at work as it's a lot of pointless duplication to host three zones for every domain name, but it also means that the suffix doesn't tell you anything about the site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>kokojie</author>
	<datestamp>1244128920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why don't you just buy it? God forbid people invest in something in hope of it gaining value. These people invested tens of thousands of dollars in their business, god forbid they make any money to "fund their future squatting". You probably don't mind paying for everything else you want, why not pay for the domain name you want?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you just buy it ?
God forbid people invest in something in hope of it gaining value .
These people invested tens of thousands of dollars in their business , god forbid they make any money to " fund their future squatting " .
You probably do n't mind paying for everything else you want , why not pay for the domain name you want ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you just buy it?
God forbid people invest in something in hope of it gaining value.
These people invested tens of thousands of dollars in their business, god forbid they make any money to "fund their future squatting".
You probably don't mind paying for everything else you want, why not pay for the domain name you want?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208363</id>
	<title>Wait for it.</title>
	<author>diskis</author>
	<datestamp>1244124840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A few years ago I bought a domain for personal use, and accidentally got the wrong one. I was planning on [mynickname].net, but got [mynickname].org.</p><p>When the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org was about to expire I was going to nab the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net one, but at that point some chinese webstore was running on the adress. A year later it expired, and some squatter took it, and wanted several thousand dollars for it. Waited a year more, the squatter expired and I got my precious domain for only the registration fee.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A few years ago I bought a domain for personal use , and accidentally got the wrong one .
I was planning on [ mynickname ] .net , but got [ mynickname ] .org.When the .org was about to expire I was going to nab the .net one , but at that point some chinese webstore was running on the adress .
A year later it expired , and some squatter took it , and wanted several thousand dollars for it .
Waited a year more , the squatter expired and I got my precious domain for only the registration fee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few years ago I bought a domain for personal use, and accidentally got the wrong one.
I was planning on [mynickname].net, but got [mynickname].org.When the .org was about to expire I was going to nab the .net one, but at that point some chinese webstore was running on the adress.
A year later it expired, and some squatter took it, and wanted several thousand dollars for it.
Waited a year more, the squatter expired and I got my precious domain for only the registration fee.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208195</id>
	<title>Use your imagination and think of a better domain</title>
	<author>Big Hairy Ian</author>
	<datestamp>1244124000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's that simple.  If you find another and that's taken see what's on the site if it's under construction or just the usual search sh1t put up buy the domain registrar (which many do) try contacting the owner and find out what happened there are lots out there that people registered legitimately thinking they were going to do something with but they never got around to it or the business idea never got off the ground.  You could even find yourself talking to the Official Receiver/Liquidator if the business went bust.  At the end of the day not everyone who owns a domain name that's just sitting there is a squatter although most are.  If you do find yourself talking to a squatter end the communication and move onto another domain.</p><p>Good luck</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's that simple .
If you find another and that 's taken see what 's on the site if it 's under construction or just the usual search sh1t put up buy the domain registrar ( which many do ) try contacting the owner and find out what happened there are lots out there that people registered legitimately thinking they were going to do something with but they never got around to it or the business idea never got off the ground .
You could even find yourself talking to the Official Receiver/Liquidator if the business went bust .
At the end of the day not everyone who owns a domain name that 's just sitting there is a squatter although most are .
If you do find yourself talking to a squatter end the communication and move onto another domain.Good luck</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's that simple.
If you find another and that's taken see what's on the site if it's under construction or just the usual search sh1t put up buy the domain registrar (which many do) try contacting the owner and find out what happened there are lots out there that people registered legitimately thinking they were going to do something with but they never got around to it or the business idea never got off the ground.
You could even find yourself talking to the Official Receiver/Liquidator if the business went bust.
At the end of the day not everyone who owns a domain name that's just sitting there is a squatter although most are.
If you do find yourself talking to a squatter end the communication and move onto another domain.Good luck</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673</id>
	<title>How badly do you need that address?</title>
	<author>Ihlosi</author>
	<datestamp>1244120820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>(And whatever the answer to that question is - never, ever give it to the cybersquatter).<p>
Don't sound too interested when talking to them, mention possible alternatives. Lower your offer if the negotiations drag out - cybersquatters are in this for the money, and not selling the name means that they're not making any.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( And whatever the answer to that question is - never , ever give it to the cybersquatter ) .
Do n't sound too interested when talking to them , mention possible alternatives .
Lower your offer if the negotiations drag out - cybersquatters are in this for the money , and not selling the name means that they 're not making any .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(And whatever the answer to that question is - never, ever give it to the cybersquatter).
Don't sound too interested when talking to them, mention possible alternatives.
Lower your offer if the negotiations drag out - cybersquatters are in this for the money, and not selling the name means that they're not making any.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210757</id>
	<title>Haggle like a hag</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1244135040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last year, I was exploring the idea of a browser-based MMO game - unfortunately, the name was already parked. I asked for a quote and got back "1,900".</p><p>I said "hell no" (at this point we hadn't even planned as far as breaking even on the $15 registration fee, so a four-digit investment was out of the question). I got back "800". Then, a week later, "$500".</p><p>So just by refusing/not reacting to the first two offers, I brought his price down by three quarters. The moral: Domain squatters use a pricing scheme known as "what can we milk them for?" Unless you are looking at a domain you know is highly marketable ("free.com", "download.net"), you probably shouldn't be paying more than a thousand.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Last year , I was exploring the idea of a browser-based MMO game - unfortunately , the name was already parked .
I asked for a quote and got back " 1,900 " .I said " hell no " ( at this point we had n't even planned as far as breaking even on the $ 15 registration fee , so a four-digit investment was out of the question ) .
I got back " 800 " .
Then , a week later , " $ 500 " .So just by refusing/not reacting to the first two offers , I brought his price down by three quarters .
The moral : Domain squatters use a pricing scheme known as " what can we milk them for ?
" Unless you are looking at a domain you know is highly marketable ( " free.com " , " download.net " ) , you probably should n't be paying more than a thousand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last year, I was exploring the idea of a browser-based MMO game - unfortunately, the name was already parked.
I asked for a quote and got back "1,900".I said "hell no" (at this point we hadn't even planned as far as breaking even on the $15 registration fee, so a four-digit investment was out of the question).
I got back "800".
Then, a week later, "$500".So just by refusing/not reacting to the first two offers, I brought his price down by three quarters.
The moral: Domain squatters use a pricing scheme known as "what can we milk them for?
" Unless you are looking at a domain you know is highly marketable ("free.com", "download.net"), you probably shouldn't be paying more than a thousand.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208149</id>
	<title>Re:Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>unfasten</author>
	<datestamp>1244123820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Be wary of godaddy.com as any whois lookup made on there site then that dom name is then registered to them so choose a registrar that is not going to screw you.</p></div><p>I think you mean <a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/08/1920215" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Network Solutions</a> [slashdot.org], and I'm not sure they do it anymore. Like my sibling poster, I've also dealt with godaddy and haven't had any problems. In fact, it seems the president of GoDaddy is <a href="http://www.bobparsons.me/DomainKiting.html" title="bobparsons.me" rel="nofollow">outwardly against the idea</a> [bobparsons.me] and was calling for it to end.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Be wary of godaddy.com as any whois lookup made on there site then that dom name is then registered to them so choose a registrar that is not going to screw you.I think you mean Network Solutions [ slashdot.org ] , and I 'm not sure they do it anymore .
Like my sibling poster , I 've also dealt with godaddy and have n't had any problems .
In fact , it seems the president of GoDaddy is outwardly against the idea [ bobparsons.me ] and was calling for it to end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be wary of godaddy.com as any whois lookup made on there site then that dom name is then registered to them so choose a registrar that is not going to screw you.I think you mean Network Solutions [slashdot.org], and I'm not sure they do it anymore.
Like my sibling poster, I've also dealt with godaddy and haven't had any problems.
In fact, it seems the president of GoDaddy is outwardly against the idea [bobparsons.me] and was calling for it to end.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209357</id>
	<title>Just wait....</title>
	<author>robthebloke</author>
	<datestamp>1244129280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've got a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org site, and have had for quite a few years. About a year ago someone bought the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com version of the domain, waited an entire year, and then tried to sell me the domain for $950 or 'make me an offer'. I offered him 50pence, and since I was the only similarly named domain I figured he realised he couldn't make any money from it, and then didn't renew. I was able to pick up the domain for the standard price after that. <br> <br>
My advice would be to register a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net version of the domain, and simply wait. They'll contact you eventually, just don't give them a penny and it'll eventually work out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got a .org site , and have had for quite a few years .
About a year ago someone bought the .com version of the domain , waited an entire year , and then tried to sell me the domain for $ 950 or 'make me an offer' .
I offered him 50pence , and since I was the only similarly named domain I figured he realised he could n't make any money from it , and then did n't renew .
I was able to pick up the domain for the standard price after that .
My advice would be to register a .org or .net version of the domain , and simply wait .
They 'll contact you eventually , just do n't give them a penny and it 'll eventually work out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got a .org site, and have had for quite a few years.
About a year ago someone bought the .com version of the domain, waited an entire year, and then tried to sell me the domain for $950 or 'make me an offer'.
I offered him 50pence, and since I was the only similarly named domain I figured he realised he couldn't make any money from it, and then didn't renew.
I was able to pick up the domain for the standard price after that.
My advice would be to register a .org or .net version of the domain, and simply wait.
They'll contact you eventually, just don't give them a penny and it'll eventually work out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210043</id>
	<title>Domain Tasting?</title>
	<author>meerling</author>
	<datestamp>1244132100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since I don't know the circumstances of how you ended up at the cybersquatter, it is possible that they are just 'tasting' the domain to sucker you into paying them. If that's the case, just wait 6 days, and register your chosen domain with the registrar.<br> <br>

Short version of what domain tasting is: Squatter's script registers the domain you checked for availability using a "5 day free trial" grace period to sucker you into paying them.<br> <br>

Much better description: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_tasting" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_tasting</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since I do n't know the circumstances of how you ended up at the cybersquatter , it is possible that they are just 'tasting ' the domain to sucker you into paying them .
If that 's the case , just wait 6 days , and register your chosen domain with the registrar .
Short version of what domain tasting is : Squatter 's script registers the domain you checked for availability using a " 5 day free trial " grace period to sucker you into paying them .
Much better description : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain \ _tasting [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since I don't know the circumstances of how you ended up at the cybersquatter, it is possible that they are just 'tasting' the domain to sucker you into paying them.
If that's the case, just wait 6 days, and register your chosen domain with the registrar.
Short version of what domain tasting is: Squatter's script registers the domain you checked for availability using a "5 day free trial" grace period to sucker you into paying them.
Much better description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_tasting [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208533</id>
	<title>Re:Don't look big</title>
	<author>willisachimp</author>
	<datestamp>1244125800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Additionally, remember that headers can give away info on your IP address, even from webmail.
<br> <br>
For example:<br>
If I send a mail from hotmail to gmail, something like the following is embedded in the headers:
<br>
<i>(google.com: domain of myhotmailaccount@hotmail.com designates 12.34.56.78 as permitted sender)</i>
<br> <br>
If I traceroute 12.34.56.78, it resolves to a machine owned by my company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Additionally , remember that headers can give away info on your IP address , even from webmail .
For example : If I send a mail from hotmail to gmail , something like the following is embedded in the headers : ( google.com : domain of myhotmailaccount @ hotmail.com designates 12.34.56.78 as permitted sender ) If I traceroute 12.34.56.78 , it resolves to a machine owned by my company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Additionally, remember that headers can give away info on your IP address, even from webmail.
For example:
If I send a mail from hotmail to gmail, something like the following is embedded in the headers:

(google.com: domain of myhotmailaccount@hotmail.com designates 12.34.56.78 as permitted sender)
 
If I traceroute 12.34.56.78, it resolves to a machine owned by my company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210341</id>
	<title>Re:recent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244133480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like it... A virtual thief takes advantage of a virtual extortionist.<br>.<br>Now all we need to add is:<br>.<br>Virtual Pimps, and Hookers<br>Virtual Drugs and Booze<br>Virtual Muggings<br>Virtual 'Protection' Schemes</p><p>Then we'll be much closer to the Virtual Underworld.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like it... A virtual thief takes advantage of a virtual extortionist..Now all we need to add is : .Virtual Pimps , and HookersVirtual Drugs and BoozeVirtual MuggingsVirtual 'Protection ' SchemesThen we 'll be much closer to the Virtual Underworld .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like it... A virtual thief takes advantage of a virtual extortionist..Now all we need to add is:.Virtual Pimps, and HookersVirtual Drugs and BoozeVirtual MuggingsVirtual 'Protection' SchemesThen we'll be much closer to the Virtual Underworld.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208547</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244125920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Douchebags like you are why I sometimes think it would be good if initial domain registration cost $500.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Douchebags like you are why I sometimes think it would be good if initial domain registration cost $ 500 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Douchebags like you are why I sometimes think it would be good if initial domain registration cost $500.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208487</id>
	<title>Re:Easy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244125560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm...so you think giving a site free advertising and loads of traffic will make them want to sell?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm...so you think giving a site free advertising and loads of traffic will make them want to sell ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm...so you think giving a site free advertising and loads of traffic will make them want to sell?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28219403</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>lilo\_booter</author>
	<datestamp>1244235480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued, renting it out/doing nothing, until the price goes up, and selling it later.</p></div><p>In the country in which I live, doing nothing with owned property is liable to land you with a fine. Quite right too - property is a scarce commodity and having properties falling (further) into disrepair is a very bad situation.</p><p>Other than that, I kinda agree that domain name squatting falls into the other form of legalised gambling that you cited...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued , renting it out/doing nothing , until the price goes up , and selling it later.In the country in which I live , doing nothing with owned property is liable to land you with a fine .
Quite right too - property is a scarce commodity and having properties falling ( further ) into disrepair is a very bad situation.Other than that , I kinda agree that domain name squatting falls into the other form of legalised gambling that you cited.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued, renting it out/doing nothing, until the price goes up, and selling it later.In the country in which I live, doing nothing with owned property is liable to land you with a fine.
Quite right too - property is a scarce commodity and having properties falling (further) into disrepair is a very bad situation.Other than that, I kinda agree that domain name squatting falls into the other form of legalised gambling that you cited...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209033</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244128080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmmm...  I bought a couple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com domains back in the 90s.  I thought I might use them but never did.  Now I still have them.  Never got an email offering me $$.  Am I a squatter?  I may still use them but I'd sell them as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm... I bought a couple .com domains back in the 90s .
I thought I might use them but never did .
Now I still have them .
Never got an email offering me $ $ .
Am I a squatter ?
I may still use them but I 'd sell them as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm...  I bought a couple .com domains back in the 90s.
I thought I might use them but never did.
Now I still have them.
Never got an email offering me $$.
Am I a squatter?
I may still use them but I'd sell them as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211755</id>
	<title>Simple Economics</title>
	<author>sircastor</author>
	<datestamp>1244139120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you worked out the value for yourself? Is it a portmanteau? Just a funny word? A made up word? Or a common word/phrase that's going to seriously move people to your site intuitively? I know you've settled on a name, but if you're expecting to pay way more for a name than the $10-$15 it costs to register, I would seriously consider looking for a domain that is not registered. The domain name needs to pay for itself and should not be a major expense of your business. So if you see the name driving a serious amount of traffic directly, or being a significant factor in Organic search engine placement, go for it. Otherwise find another name you can get for cheap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you worked out the value for yourself ?
Is it a portmanteau ?
Just a funny word ?
A made up word ?
Or a common word/phrase that 's going to seriously move people to your site intuitively ?
I know you 've settled on a name , but if you 're expecting to pay way more for a name than the $ 10- $ 15 it costs to register , I would seriously consider looking for a domain that is not registered .
The domain name needs to pay for itself and should not be a major expense of your business .
So if you see the name driving a serious amount of traffic directly , or being a significant factor in Organic search engine placement , go for it .
Otherwise find another name you can get for cheap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you worked out the value for yourself?
Is it a portmanteau?
Just a funny word?
A made up word?
Or a common word/phrase that's going to seriously move people to your site intuitively?
I know you've settled on a name, but if you're expecting to pay way more for a name than the $10-$15 it costs to register, I would seriously consider looking for a domain that is not registered.
The domain name needs to pay for itself and should not be a major expense of your business.
So if you see the name driving a serious amount of traffic directly, or being a significant factor in Organic search engine placement, go for it.
Otherwise find another name you can get for cheap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208543</id>
	<title>No SEO, NO value</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1244125860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think this is waist of time and money. If the previous site did not have exactly your type of content, and was not optimized for your market, then why pay big bucks for it?</p><p>I might buy a domain because it is exactly what I would need (i.e. it is exactly a product name), but in that case I would have the trademark over it and would not be entertaining them anyway. Small, reasonable offer even then is all I would go for. Domains really do not have that much value, even if they are short and old.</p><p>If you buy a similar domain, but not exact domain, add the search engine optimization then it is worth more. I might buy out a competitor's domain that is closing their doors or something.</p><p>So, I guess my point is, how do the search engines view that domain?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this is waist of time and money .
If the previous site did not have exactly your type of content , and was not optimized for your market , then why pay big bucks for it ? I might buy a domain because it is exactly what I would need ( i.e .
it is exactly a product name ) , but in that case I would have the trademark over it and would not be entertaining them anyway .
Small , reasonable offer even then is all I would go for .
Domains really do not have that much value , even if they are short and old.If you buy a similar domain , but not exact domain , add the search engine optimization then it is worth more .
I might buy out a competitor 's domain that is closing their doors or something.So , I guess my point is , how do the search engines view that domain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this is waist of time and money.
If the previous site did not have exactly your type of content, and was not optimized for your market, then why pay big bucks for it?I might buy a domain because it is exactly what I would need (i.e.
it is exactly a product name), but in that case I would have the trademark over it and would not be entertaining them anyway.
Small, reasonable offer even then is all I would go for.
Domains really do not have that much value, even if they are short and old.If you buy a similar domain, but not exact domain, add the search engine optimization then it is worth more.
I might buy out a competitor's domain that is closing their doors or something.So, I guess my point is, how do the search engines view that domain?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208871</id>
	<title>Re:My suggestion</title>
	<author>Nesman64</author>
	<datestamp>1244127300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let the squatter know that at a certain price point, it is cheaper to simply have him killed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let the squatter know that at a certain price point , it is cheaper to simply have him killed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let the squatter know that at a certain price point, it is cheaper to simply have him killed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210867</id>
	<title>Re:url?</title>
	<author>Endo13</author>
	<datestamp>1244135400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I'm pretty sure there's at least one common practice of cybersquatters that we can all agree makes them total scumbags. And that is the practice of snapping up a domain name seconds after someone checked its availability.</p><p>I do have to agree though with a lot of the posters here that simply holding a domain that may eventually be worth something can be considered legitimate business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I 'm pretty sure there 's at least one common practice of cybersquatters that we can all agree makes them total scumbags .
And that is the practice of snapping up a domain name seconds after someone checked its availability.I do have to agree though with a lot of the posters here that simply holding a domain that may eventually be worth something can be considered legitimate business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I'm pretty sure there's at least one common practice of cybersquatters that we can all agree makes them total scumbags.
And that is the practice of snapping up a domain name seconds after someone checked its availability.I do have to agree though with a lot of the posters here that simply holding a domain that may eventually be worth something can be considered legitimate business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211283</id>
	<title>Re:recent</title>
	<author>slackbheep</author>
	<datestamp>1244137200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you had posted under your screenname this would have turned you into a folk hero.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you had posted under your screenname this would have turned you into a folk hero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you had posted under your screenname this would have turned you into a folk hero.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207653</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210933</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244135640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bullshit..</p><p>I've seen it happen enough times where I look for a URL, go to pay for it 1 hour later, and voila -- it's just been</p><p>Too many domain names are taken by cybersquatters that prey on search inquiries -- without having to pay a dime in order to extort money from legitimate businesses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bullshit..I 've seen it happen enough times where I look for a URL , go to pay for it 1 hour later , and voila -- it 's just beenToo many domain names are taken by cybersquatters that prey on search inquiries -- without having to pay a dime in order to extort money from legitimate businesses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bullshit..I've seen it happen enough times where I look for a URL, go to pay for it 1 hour later, and voila -- it's just beenToo many domain names are taken by cybersquatters that prey on search inquiries -- without having to pay a dime in order to extort money from legitimate businesses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209883</id>
	<title>Re:Surname</title>
	<author>splatter</author>
	<datestamp>1244131320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm with you.. this a'hole has not only the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com but also the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.biz of my surname with a three year old static page with his sons frigging picture on it On all THREE DOMAINS!!</p><p>
&nbsp; REALLY is that necessary? I'd love to make a genealogy sight with a sub domain for my self but no not with Mr domain whore in action.</p><p>I'm hoping he forgets to re-enroll so I can snatch one of these up, Yes I recognize the irony</p><p>DP</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm with you.. this a'hole has not only the .com but also the .net and .biz of my surname with a three year old static page with his sons frigging picture on it On all THREE DOMAINS ! !
  REALLY is that necessary ?
I 'd love to make a genealogy sight with a sub domain for my self but no not with Mr domain whore in action.I 'm hoping he forgets to re-enroll so I can snatch one of these up , Yes I recognize the ironyDP</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm with you.. this a'hole has not only the .com but also the .net and .biz of my surname with a three year old static page with his sons frigging picture on it On all THREE DOMAINS!!
  REALLY is that necessary?
I'd love to make a genealogy sight with a sub domain for my self but no not with Mr domain whore in action.I'm hoping he forgets to re-enroll so I can snatch one of these up, Yes I recognize the ironyDP</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209113</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244128440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This post is for the benefit of those who are less familiar with the issue at hand. While technically a reply, it is not directed to you as you are likely beyond redemption.<p>

You refer to 'your' domains as 'property', and ascribe the anger directed at you to jealousy. You err on both accounts. </p><p>

A domain is nothing more than an entry in a database meant to direct a seeker to something useful. The domain is not 'property' - the database as a whole is. And you do not own it.</p><p>

Your function is not to provide something useful, but to interfere with the intended use of the database. You are not selling property - you are offering to remove your interference for a fee. Your 'business model' is little different than piling rocks on a road and then offering to let drivers pass for a fee. </p><p>

As proof of this, ICANN offers a procedure for relief from bottom-feeders like you.  Unfortunately the procedure is lengthy and expensive enough that most find it easier to simply pay the troll to cross the bridge. </p><p>

In short, the only product that you have to offer anyone is your absence - the permanent state of which cannot come soon enough.</p><p>

In other words - fuck off and die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This post is for the benefit of those who are less familiar with the issue at hand .
While technically a reply , it is not directed to you as you are likely beyond redemption .
You refer to 'your ' domains as 'property ' , and ascribe the anger directed at you to jealousy .
You err on both accounts .
A domain is nothing more than an entry in a database meant to direct a seeker to something useful .
The domain is not 'property ' - the database as a whole is .
And you do not own it .
Your function is not to provide something useful , but to interfere with the intended use of the database .
You are not selling property - you are offering to remove your interference for a fee .
Your 'business model ' is little different than piling rocks on a road and then offering to let drivers pass for a fee .
As proof of this , ICANN offers a procedure for relief from bottom-feeders like you .
Unfortunately the procedure is lengthy and expensive enough that most find it easier to simply pay the troll to cross the bridge .
In short , the only product that you have to offer anyone is your absence - the permanent state of which can not come soon enough .
In other words - fuck off and die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This post is for the benefit of those who are less familiar with the issue at hand.
While technically a reply, it is not directed to you as you are likely beyond redemption.
You refer to 'your' domains as 'property', and ascribe the anger directed at you to jealousy.
You err on both accounts.
A domain is nothing more than an entry in a database meant to direct a seeker to something useful.
The domain is not 'property' - the database as a whole is.
And you do not own it.
Your function is not to provide something useful, but to interfere with the intended use of the database.
You are not selling property - you are offering to remove your interference for a fee.
Your 'business model' is little different than piling rocks on a road and then offering to let drivers pass for a fee.
As proof of this, ICANN offers a procedure for relief from bottom-feeders like you.
Unfortunately the procedure is lengthy and expensive enough that most find it easier to simply pay the troll to cross the bridge.
In short, the only product that you have to offer anyone is your absence - the permanent state of which cannot come soon enough.
In other words - fuck off and die.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209657</id>
	<title>Very simple, really</title>
	<author>vulpinemac</author>
	<datestamp>1244130360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait for them to forget to renew. I snagged one exactly that way and didn't have to wait very long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait for them to forget to renew .
I snagged one exactly that way and did n't have to wait very long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait for them to forget to renew.
I snagged one exactly that way and didn't have to wait very long.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208657</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244126460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you work out what a 'fair' offer is? I wouldn't really have any idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you work out what a 'fair ' offer is ?
I would n't really have any idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you work out what a 'fair' offer is?
I wouldn't really have any idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207907</id>
	<title>Ask about multiple domain prices</title>
	<author>lalena</author>
	<datestamp>1244122320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>First lookup the owner of that domain. Then, there are many sites out there that will tell you which domains that person owns. The way you handle this will be very different if he owns 10 vs 10 thousand domains.
<br>
Do a search with some of the "Buy this Premium Domain" sites to see if he has listed any of his sites to see how reasonable he is. Those prices are usually 1-2x's a real max bid starting point.
<br>
When you do ask for a price, ask him for the price of several of his domains at once. Act like you are not specifically interested in just of those domains and any would work for you. Maybe pretend to be another reseller interested in building your portfolio.
<br>
Some of the other advice above is also good. Don't be desparate, and the first email should be very short.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First lookup the owner of that domain .
Then , there are many sites out there that will tell you which domains that person owns .
The way you handle this will be very different if he owns 10 vs 10 thousand domains .
Do a search with some of the " Buy this Premium Domain " sites to see if he has listed any of his sites to see how reasonable he is .
Those prices are usually 1-2x 's a real max bid starting point .
When you do ask for a price , ask him for the price of several of his domains at once .
Act like you are not specifically interested in just of those domains and any would work for you .
Maybe pretend to be another reseller interested in building your portfolio .
Some of the other advice above is also good .
Do n't be desparate , and the first email should be very short .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First lookup the owner of that domain.
Then, there are many sites out there that will tell you which domains that person owns.
The way you handle this will be very different if he owns 10 vs 10 thousand domains.
Do a search with some of the "Buy this Premium Domain" sites to see if he has listed any of his sites to see how reasonable he is.
Those prices are usually 1-2x's a real max bid starting point.
When you do ask for a price, ask him for the price of several of his domains at once.
Act like you are not specifically interested in just of those domains and any would work for you.
Maybe pretend to be another reseller interested in building your portfolio.
Some of the other advice above is also good.
Don't be desparate, and the first email should be very short.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28214551</id>
	<title>Let it be known</title>
	<author>synaptic</author>
	<datestamp>1244107920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only "legitimate business interest" in owning a domain name is for the intarweb.</p><p>Pick a different domain name...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only " legitimate business interest " in owning a domain name is for the intarweb.Pick a different domain name.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only "legitimate business interest" in owning a domain name is for the intarweb.Pick a different domain name...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215873</id>
	<title>The best approach</title>
	<author>nilbog</author>
	<datestamp>1244114640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The best approach is not to let them know any kind of business interest is involved.  Have your 15 year old son broker the deal and claim the name is his nickname and he wants to start a blog for his friends.  You could probably get it for a few hundred bucks depending on what the domain name is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best approach is not to let them know any kind of business interest is involved .
Have your 15 year old son broker the deal and claim the name is his nickname and he wants to start a blog for his friends .
You could probably get it for a few hundred bucks depending on what the domain name is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best approach is not to let them know any kind of business interest is involved.
Have your 15 year old son broker the deal and claim the name is his nickname and he wants to start a blog for his friends.
You could probably get it for a few hundred bucks depending on what the domain name is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208153</id>
	<title>Re:Be Crafty - negotiate well.</title>
	<author>arkarumba</author>
	<datestamp>1244123820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good idea - but extend.  Try several domains you don't care about.  Offer a fifth of the price.<br>Not from the same phone of email account.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good idea - but extend .
Try several domains you do n't care about .
Offer a fifth of the price.Not from the same phone of email account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good idea - but extend.
Try several domains you don't care about.
Offer a fifth of the price.Not from the same phone of email account.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211785</id>
	<title>Property rights is a question of ideology.</title>
	<author>gobbo</author>
	<datestamp>1244139240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development?</p></div><p>Only a little difference: novelty and authority. But the real question is where one stands on the principles involved.</p><p>No matter where you are on the political 'spectrum', you're likely to have a different opinion on property rights, as it's one of the key things that places you on that spectrum.</p><p>If you are middle of the road, you think, quite possibly you've naturalized your version of property rights, which means that you tend to think of them as natural rights that extend right out to owning anything short of a human, and would be really uncomfortable with the idea of thinking about your attitude as ideology.</p><p>If you are completely opposed to the notion of ownership of 'common' resources like land and water, names and culture, and you think stewardship should be organised by some huge strong centralized government, you'd be a socialist dictatorship kind of person. If you think stewardship of common resources should be managed on an ad hoc consensual basis in as regionally-specific a way as possible and regulated at larger scale by multi-party treaties , you'd be in the socio-anarchist ~ tribalist ~ libertarian municipalist quarters.</p><p>Stripping land of its use value and strictly keeping it for its exchange value has been justified by broad-scale practice all around you, so it has a venerable history and seems natural. Domain names are new, the 'enclosure of the commons' via real estate has been happening for a very long time. There is an enormous and complex body of arguments against land speculation, some of them very quantifiable (so it's not purely an ideological discussion).</p><p>Also, domain names are not owned, they are essentially doled out with tenure grants and a fee. Structurally, they are treated like a common resource that is managed by central authority (more so than land, anyway). There is a different moral and ideological background.</p><p>Domainers usurp the original purpose of the domain. These folks seem to add nothing but lost productivity to the process of conducting business or having fun, unless you think the service they provide is the only fair way to do it.</p><p>Being legal does not make it legitimate, unless you believe fervently that the State is mother of all and that justice is blind in service of fairness (instead of in despair). There are many (not just marxists and anarchists) who also see land speculators as illegitimate parasites, sucking productivity out of the pockets of hard-working people who actually do worthwhile things with the land.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development ? Only a little difference : novelty and authority .
But the real question is where one stands on the principles involved.No matter where you are on the political 'spectrum ' , you 're likely to have a different opinion on property rights , as it 's one of the key things that places you on that spectrum.If you are middle of the road , you think , quite possibly you 've naturalized your version of property rights , which means that you tend to think of them as natural rights that extend right out to owning anything short of a human , and would be really uncomfortable with the idea of thinking about your attitude as ideology.If you are completely opposed to the notion of ownership of 'common ' resources like land and water , names and culture , and you think stewardship should be organised by some huge strong centralized government , you 'd be a socialist dictatorship kind of person .
If you think stewardship of common resources should be managed on an ad hoc consensual basis in as regionally-specific a way as possible and regulated at larger scale by multi-party treaties , you 'd be in the socio-anarchist ~ tribalist ~ libertarian municipalist quarters.Stripping land of its use value and strictly keeping it for its exchange value has been justified by broad-scale practice all around you , so it has a venerable history and seems natural .
Domain names are new , the 'enclosure of the commons ' via real estate has been happening for a very long time .
There is an enormous and complex body of arguments against land speculation , some of them very quantifiable ( so it 's not purely an ideological discussion ) .Also , domain names are not owned , they are essentially doled out with tenure grants and a fee .
Structurally , they are treated like a common resource that is managed by central authority ( more so than land , anyway ) .
There is a different moral and ideological background.Domainers usurp the original purpose of the domain .
These folks seem to add nothing but lost productivity to the process of conducting business or having fun , unless you think the service they provide is the only fair way to do it.Being legal does not make it legitimate , unless you believe fervently that the State is mother of all and that justice is blind in service of fairness ( instead of in despair ) .
There are many ( not just marxists and anarchists ) who also see land speculators as illegitimate parasites , sucking productivity out of the pockets of hard-working people who actually do worthwhile things with the land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development?Only a little difference: novelty and authority.
But the real question is where one stands on the principles involved.No matter where you are on the political 'spectrum', you're likely to have a different opinion on property rights, as it's one of the key things that places you on that spectrum.If you are middle of the road, you think, quite possibly you've naturalized your version of property rights, which means that you tend to think of them as natural rights that extend right out to owning anything short of a human, and would be really uncomfortable with the idea of thinking about your attitude as ideology.If you are completely opposed to the notion of ownership of 'common' resources like land and water, names and culture, and you think stewardship should be organised by some huge strong centralized government, you'd be a socialist dictatorship kind of person.
If you think stewardship of common resources should be managed on an ad hoc consensual basis in as regionally-specific a way as possible and regulated at larger scale by multi-party treaties , you'd be in the socio-anarchist ~ tribalist ~ libertarian municipalist quarters.Stripping land of its use value and strictly keeping it for its exchange value has been justified by broad-scale practice all around you, so it has a venerable history and seems natural.
Domain names are new, the 'enclosure of the commons' via real estate has been happening for a very long time.
There is an enormous and complex body of arguments against land speculation, some of them very quantifiable (so it's not purely an ideological discussion).Also, domain names are not owned, they are essentially doled out with tenure grants and a fee.
Structurally, they are treated like a common resource that is managed by central authority (more so than land, anyway).
There is a different moral and ideological background.Domainers usurp the original purpose of the domain.
These folks seem to add nothing but lost productivity to the process of conducting business or having fun, unless you think the service they provide is the only fair way to do it.Being legal does not make it legitimate, unless you believe fervently that the State is mother of all and that justice is blind in service of fairness (instead of in despair).
There are many (not just marxists and anarchists) who also see land speculators as illegitimate parasites, sucking productivity out of the pockets of hard-working people who actually do worthwhile things with the land.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211485</id>
	<title>Use a domain escrow service - (e.g. escrow.com)</title>
	<author>Timoteo47</author>
	<datestamp>1244137920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A few years ago I purchased a domain from someone in St. Petersburg Russia. I e-mailed the guy and asked him how much he wanted. He was asking for $3,000 which was fine with me.  Initially I was not comfortable sending $3,000 to an unknown person in St. Petersburg. So, we used escrow.com which specializes in selling and buying domain names. The buyer pays escrow.com and the seller transfers the domain to escrow.com. When escrow.com confirms the buyers paid and the transfer from the seller, they sending the money to the seller and transfer the domain to the buyer. Safe and simple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A few years ago I purchased a domain from someone in St. Petersburg Russia .
I e-mailed the guy and asked him how much he wanted .
He was asking for $ 3,000 which was fine with me .
Initially I was not comfortable sending $ 3,000 to an unknown person in St. Petersburg. So , we used escrow.com which specializes in selling and buying domain names .
The buyer pays escrow.com and the seller transfers the domain to escrow.com .
When escrow.com confirms the buyers paid and the transfer from the seller , they sending the money to the seller and transfer the domain to the buyer .
Safe and simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few years ago I purchased a domain from someone in St. Petersburg Russia.
I e-mailed the guy and asked him how much he wanted.
He was asking for $3,000 which was fine with me.
Initially I was not comfortable sending $3,000 to an unknown person in St. Petersburg. So, we used escrow.com which specializes in selling and buying domain names.
The buyer pays escrow.com and the seller transfers the domain to escrow.com.
When escrow.com confirms the buyers paid and the transfer from the seller, they sending the money to the seller and transfer the domain to the buyer.
Safe and simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209961</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244131740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?"</p><p>Nope, just you~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Is it just my observation , or are there way too many stupid people in the world ?
" Nope , just you ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
"Nope, just you~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210237</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe use a subdomain?</title>
	<author>Whatsisname</author>
	<datestamp>1244132880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you obviously missed the point</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you obviously missed the point</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you obviously missed the point</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211799</id>
	<title>Re:How it's done - info from "the other side"</title>
	<author>nadaou</author>
	<datestamp>1244139360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please consider for a moment the economic reasons that the world's economy is completely ruined right now, and millions of people have quite literally lost their job, homes, and self respect.</p><p>It is quite simply because of the rampant overinflation of valueless speculation. You take an item with no intrinsic value other than that someone is willing to pay something for it, hike up the price, onsell, rinse &amp; repeat. If you don't actually produce anything tangible, or provide a service to someone who does make something real which makes their process more efficient, then you are simply a leech on society and the economy. All you end up contributing is creating inflation for zero gain - the broken window fallacy. When the masses notice the leeches making some cash they naturally rush to join in on the action. Eventually the leeches outweigh the producers and the system becomes unstable and eventually it collapses with a big "pop", taking down both leeches and honest producers alike.</p><p>There is a spectrum, at one end is people working for the solution, at the other end people contributing to the world's problems. In the middle there is a median line at 50\%. Where would you like to be on that? Where do you think you are on that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please consider for a moment the economic reasons that the world 's economy is completely ruined right now , and millions of people have quite literally lost their job , homes , and self respect.It is quite simply because of the rampant overinflation of valueless speculation .
You take an item with no intrinsic value other than that someone is willing to pay something for it , hike up the price , onsell , rinse &amp; repeat .
If you do n't actually produce anything tangible , or provide a service to someone who does make something real which makes their process more efficient , then you are simply a leech on society and the economy .
All you end up contributing is creating inflation for zero gain - the broken window fallacy .
When the masses notice the leeches making some cash they naturally rush to join in on the action .
Eventually the leeches outweigh the producers and the system becomes unstable and eventually it collapses with a big " pop " , taking down both leeches and honest producers alike.There is a spectrum , at one end is people working for the solution , at the other end people contributing to the world 's problems .
In the middle there is a median line at 50 \ % .
Where would you like to be on that ?
Where do you think you are on that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please consider for a moment the economic reasons that the world's economy is completely ruined right now, and millions of people have quite literally lost their job, homes, and self respect.It is quite simply because of the rampant overinflation of valueless speculation.
You take an item with no intrinsic value other than that someone is willing to pay something for it, hike up the price, onsell, rinse &amp; repeat.
If you don't actually produce anything tangible, or provide a service to someone who does make something real which makes their process more efficient, then you are simply a leech on society and the economy.
All you end up contributing is creating inflation for zero gain - the broken window fallacy.
When the masses notice the leeches making some cash they naturally rush to join in on the action.
Eventually the leeches outweigh the producers and the system becomes unstable and eventually it collapses with a big "pop", taking down both leeches and honest producers alike.There is a spectrum, at one end is people working for the solution, at the other end people contributing to the world's problems.
In the middle there is a median line at 50\%.
Where would you like to be on that?
Where do you think you are on that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209971</id>
	<title>Been there</title>
	<author>tunersedge</author>
	<datestamp>1244131800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Two years ago I had a good idea for a business. Something we had wanted to try for a while, so I alloted some cash for it. The name was a good one, and we wanted to use it. The first thing we did was make up the domain portfolio. That is, the list of site names that are closely related which we wanted to own. There were 15 variations of slightly different spellings and hyphenations and domains. All of them except the main<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com we wanted were available and only $6. Made sense to buy those. All were redirected to that one main one. The main one cost us $800. I went to Sedo.com. They're a broker who makes heaps of money off of this sort of thing. They charged me $69 for the initial "estimate" of value. I'd call it a conflict of interest, since they made 10\% on the sale of it, paid by me. That estimate was then accepted as the selling price by the owner, and I paid it. The owner had a WHOIS that was listed as the domain manager (1&amp;1.com, I think), so I couldn't get to the owner directly. My feeling after the experience, besides feeling dirty and cheated, was that the process is set up as a pretty nasty racket, with many layers to make individual contact next to impossible, and really leaving little idea for the average person what the value of a domain is. That's the problem when the owners are just parking domains to make a profit. They aren't seeking to make the sale. The buyer is at an automatic disadvantage because there is an apparent and obvious need expressed simply by asking about it.

For those of you that are wondering, the domain I bought was tunersedge.com. We liked the name for an aftermarket performance auto parts retail site. Unfortunately, 2 years later, still no time to make it happen, but I still own the domains (all 15) and the company is still a legal entity. Maybe someday...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two years ago I had a good idea for a business .
Something we had wanted to try for a while , so I alloted some cash for it .
The name was a good one , and we wanted to use it .
The first thing we did was make up the domain portfolio .
That is , the list of site names that are closely related which we wanted to own .
There were 15 variations of slightly different spellings and hyphenations and domains .
All of them except the main .com we wanted were available and only $ 6 .
Made sense to buy those .
All were redirected to that one main one .
The main one cost us $ 800 .
I went to Sedo.com .
They 're a broker who makes heaps of money off of this sort of thing .
They charged me $ 69 for the initial " estimate " of value .
I 'd call it a conflict of interest , since they made 10 \ % on the sale of it , paid by me .
That estimate was then accepted as the selling price by the owner , and I paid it .
The owner had a WHOIS that was listed as the domain manager ( 1&amp;1.com , I think ) , so I could n't get to the owner directly .
My feeling after the experience , besides feeling dirty and cheated , was that the process is set up as a pretty nasty racket , with many layers to make individual contact next to impossible , and really leaving little idea for the average person what the value of a domain is .
That 's the problem when the owners are just parking domains to make a profit .
They are n't seeking to make the sale .
The buyer is at an automatic disadvantage because there is an apparent and obvious need expressed simply by asking about it .
For those of you that are wondering , the domain I bought was tunersedge.com .
We liked the name for an aftermarket performance auto parts retail site .
Unfortunately , 2 years later , still no time to make it happen , but I still own the domains ( all 15 ) and the company is still a legal entity .
Maybe someday.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two years ago I had a good idea for a business.
Something we had wanted to try for a while, so I alloted some cash for it.
The name was a good one, and we wanted to use it.
The first thing we did was make up the domain portfolio.
That is, the list of site names that are closely related which we wanted to own.
There were 15 variations of slightly different spellings and hyphenations and domains.
All of them except the main .com we wanted were available and only $6.
Made sense to buy those.
All were redirected to that one main one.
The main one cost us $800.
I went to Sedo.com.
They're a broker who makes heaps of money off of this sort of thing.
They charged me $69 for the initial "estimate" of value.
I'd call it a conflict of interest, since they made 10\% on the sale of it, paid by me.
That estimate was then accepted as the selling price by the owner, and I paid it.
The owner had a WHOIS that was listed as the domain manager (1&amp;1.com, I think), so I couldn't get to the owner directly.
My feeling after the experience, besides feeling dirty and cheated, was that the process is set up as a pretty nasty racket, with many layers to make individual contact next to impossible, and really leaving little idea for the average person what the value of a domain is.
That's the problem when the owners are just parking domains to make a profit.
They aren't seeking to make the sale.
The buyer is at an automatic disadvantage because there is an apparent and obvious need expressed simply by asking about it.
For those of you that are wondering, the domain I bought was tunersedge.com.
We liked the name for an aftermarket performance auto parts retail site.
Unfortunately, 2 years later, still no time to make it happen, but I still own the domains (all 15) and the company is still a legal entity.
Maybe someday...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213127</id>
	<title>Give up</title>
	<author>wiedzmin</author>
	<datestamp>1244145000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless you're willing to spend hundreds/thousands of dollars you're better off if you come up with a new name for your business. Use the <a href="http://www.dotomator.com/web20.html" title="dotomator.com" rel="nofollow">Web 2.0 domain name generator</a> [dotomator.com], you get great suggestions like Leendo and Twivee.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you 're willing to spend hundreds/thousands of dollars you 're better off if you come up with a new name for your business .
Use the Web 2.0 domain name generator [ dotomator.com ] , you get great suggestions like Leendo and Twivee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you're willing to spend hundreds/thousands of dollars you're better off if you come up with a new name for your business.
Use the Web 2.0 domain name generator [dotomator.com], you get great suggestions like Leendo and Twivee.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208187</id>
	<title>You're still a scammer.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244123940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the modern mob.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the modern mob .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the modern mob.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208991</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244127900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's not any different. that's the point, those people are also assholes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's not any different .
that 's the point , those people are also assholes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's not any different.
that's the point, those people are also assholes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209949</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244131680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can disagree all you want, but you are still wrong.<br>Before responding, you might want to actually read the definitions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can disagree all you want , but you are still wrong.Before responding , you might want to actually read the definitions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can disagree all you want, but you are still wrong.Before responding, you might want to actually read the definitions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209179</id>
	<title>Re:I disagree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244128680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development? Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future. So long as this guy is honestly selling the domains without attempting to defraud buyers, he's doing the same thing, just with virtual land rather than actual real land. I may not like it (and I don't) but, so long as they are conducting things legitimately, I see no difference.</p></div><p>There is no difference, but we have a term for people who buy up land on speculation: squatters.  Hence, the cyber-equivalent is called "cybersquatter".  I agree, the term has negative connotations, but that doesn't mean it's not a legitimate business.  The name just got its connotation from the portion of the industry that conducts itself like a used car salesman.  Still, slap all the euphemisms you want on the name "squatter" but you aren't going to change what it is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development ?
Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future .
So long as this guy is honestly selling the domains without attempting to defraud buyers , he 's doing the same thing , just with virtual land rather than actual real land .
I may not like it ( and I do n't ) but , so long as they are conducting things legitimately , I see no difference.There is no difference , but we have a term for people who buy up land on speculation : squatters .
Hence , the cyber-equivalent is called " cybersquatter " .
I agree , the term has negative connotations , but that does n't mean it 's not a legitimate business .
The name just got its connotation from the portion of the industry that conducts itself like a used car salesman .
Still , slap all the euphemisms you want on the name " squatter " but you are n't going to change what it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is what he does any different from someone who buys land as an investment rather than with an eye towards development?
Lots of people buy up lots of land with an eye towards their vale to someone else in the future.
So long as this guy is honestly selling the domains without attempting to defraud buyers, he's doing the same thing, just with virtual land rather than actual real land.
I may not like it (and I don't) but, so long as they are conducting things legitimately, I see no difference.There is no difference, but we have a term for people who buy up land on speculation: squatters.
Hence, the cyber-equivalent is called "cybersquatter".
I agree, the term has negative connotations, but that doesn't mean it's not a legitimate business.
The name just got its connotation from the portion of the industry that conducts itself like a used car salesman.
Still, slap all the euphemisms you want on the name "squatter" but you aren't going to change what it is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28221305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209299
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28216815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209389
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208965
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210117
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28221121
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211069
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210237
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211481
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211647
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208153
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207793
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209697
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210801
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209507
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209033
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28220305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210647
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211489
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215263
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209949
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28214985
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209565
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208361
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213119
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211371
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28219403
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208295
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_04_022220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212399
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213127
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208169
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209661
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209829
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207847
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209565
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208595
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207707
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28216815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28214985
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210667
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208411
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208533
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28213119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28221305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28215263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211775
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210643
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209883
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208289
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207883
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208131
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217449
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209255
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209541
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212485
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210867
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217167
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210369
------http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28219403
------http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212097
------http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217515
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209077
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208087
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207921
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209891
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208233
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207793
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207637
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211283
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28217857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208361
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208339
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208915
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208261
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210117
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209341
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208963
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210933
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209037
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209961
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209033
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208697
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211713
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28212057
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208323
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208991
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209281
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210835
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211785
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209179
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210535
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209507
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208955
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209949
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209599
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208247
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28221121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211647
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207907
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28220305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209697
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209039
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208639
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208329
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28209299
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28207813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28208295
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_04_022220.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28210015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_04_022220.28211571
</commentlist>
</conversation>
