Post #51739

2025-12-11 06:13 UTC

That judge is a dumbass and any precedent that ‘justifies’ this ruling should be reviewed and struck down. This is called theft. And do eminent domain too while we’re at it.

Replies (3)

@nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 2025-12-11 06:27

Fun fact some states took this into thier own hands https://www.nh.gov/glance/state-constitution/bill-rights [Art.] 12-a. [Power to Take Property Limited.] No part of a person’s property shall be taken by eminent domain and transferred, directly or indirectly, to another person if the taking is for the purpose of private development or other private use of the property.

Open ##51763
@breakingcups@lemmy.world 2025-12-11 07:21

A domain name is explicitly not property.

Open ##51860
@dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 2025-12-11 16:35

Theft is when something you own is taken away. The squatter never owned the domain, only registered to use it. In this case, ICANN owns the domain and allows a registrar to handle who can use that domain. ICANN sets strict rules on how domains can be used, and the squatter broke those rules. Maybe the judge is a little smarter on actual laws than you are.

Open ##53202