RE: [ga] Ricochet.net domain name gets hacked

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 08:27 4/01/00 -0600, John B. Reynolds wrote:
>The domain was moved as the result of a settlement between the parties, not
>a court order.  See
><http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1504357.html?tag=st.cn.1>.
>
>As for the TRO, it's pretty clear that when you register a domain using a
>US-based registrar, it becomes subject to US court jurisdiction.  

No, not automatically. The court considered in the TRO that the fact that
the defendant's website was targeting US customers was a key in deciding to
apply the "long arm" statute.

Thanks for the pointer to the settlement news article, John. 
I do think though, that the prospect of expensive litigation in a foreign
jurisdiction is a pretty intimidating inducement for a "settlement".


If this become the rule in reverse hijacking cases, I may well mean that
non US registrants will think twice about doing business with a registrar
located in the US.
  



--Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  , bootstrap  of
the Cyberspace Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.idno.org  (or direct:) 
http://www.democracy.org.nz/idno/