4 ms·

They reversed it because it was an honest mistake and most people like to know that if they make the same mistake it can be undone.

GordonS 5y ago
I have to agree - although I'm surprised the registrant actually used common sense here, it was the fair thing to do.
- supergirl 5y ago
  maybe it was a bug in their system, so they were on the hook
masswerk 5y ago
It may be worth noting that in most countries a contract essentially is established by the consensus of wills by the parties involved. An error in objecto ("I didn't mean the thing I accidentally said or listed") is a legitimate excuse and nullifies a contract. (The consensus didn't exist and thus the contract had never been established in the first place). (This is also a reason why marketplaces, where things "just happen", are, let's say, complicated, as they do not adhere to this legal tradition.)
- throwaway_kufu 5y ago
  It can be a defense in the US but not likely the case here, the remedy wouldn’t be specific performance (ie give me the domain) but damages for a fair market value of what I paid for, specific performance is very rare in the US. There would also be claims against the marketplace (despite their terms of service indemnifying them) other laws apply that can’t be waived under both federal and state law such as fair trade practices acts and deceptive trade practices). The whole point being anyone could increase prices that were advertised and say oh my ad was in error rendering every contract reversible and subject to post hoc price increases.
  - AussieWog93 5y ago
    I mean, that's what judicial discretion is for. Good luck convincing a judge that the seller honestly intended to sell his domain for 1000x lower than market value.
    - throwaway_kufu 5y ago
      No that isn’t what judicial discretion is. In contract law judges are not permitted to unilaterally interject their understanding of a contracting party’s intent and revise the terms of a contract, try looking up the “4 corners of a contract”. I’ll give a specific example of a buddy of mine who in 2008 (during housing bubble) used to buy foreclosed homes at auction. There was a $2-3M home foreclosed Miami Beach home on auction, he put in a bid for about $200k, then the clerk of court website crashed, he didn’t think much of it, come to find out it crashed for everyone locking in his bid, the bank moved to set aside the sale on the basis of uncontrollable 3rd party error, my friend showed up single handedly with a few cases printed up in support of his position and the court denied the banks motion and my friend received title to the house. If the bank had any remedy it was for damages against the courts system that caused the damage not against the contractual winner of the auction.
      - nmfisher 5y ago
        That's not a contractual mistake though, is it? It was an auction, meaning anyone could bid, and he put a genuine bid for $200k. Just because the system crashed doesn't mean anyone actually made a representation they didn't intend to. A more realistic example would be the wrong house getting listed for auction due to clerical error (but one still owned by the bank). I'm fairly sure that would be set aside.
        throwaway_kufu 5y ago
        Edit: sorry you were talking about my example and not the domain. Auctions are contracts, in this case the seller (bank) agrees to accept the highest offer at the end of the expiration of the auction. So the terms are of the auction are time limited, historically the foreclosure auctions were done in person (sometimes on the courthouse steps), I’ve been at in person foreclosure auctions and the bank had a representative that ended up buying most of them (at least at the ones I attended)
- paxys 5y ago
  So many people think that the world runs algorithmically, like the code on their computer. Society is built upon interactions between real people. Everyone exercises a massive amount of judgement in whatever they do, for better or worse. And this is true for the legal system as well. Your "well technically I'm correct" arguments aren't going to work in front of a judge and jury the way they do on the internet.
  - girvo 5y ago
    This is one of the reasons I dislike the "literalist" judges and their "interpretations". It goes against what the law _is_, in my opinion. Note: I have a law degree, but am not a lawyer
throwaway_kufu 5y ago
Maybe...I tested your theory and asked them to reverse my recent sale of cryptocomicbook.com on the same basis and my request was declined. In either case there is both contract law and state federal law (unfair trade practices) that would support my claim in the courts if I were so inclined.
- cj 5y ago
  > I tested your theory and asked them to reverse my recent sale Was your recent sale grossly and clearly mispriced with evidence such as similar domains selling for many orders of magnitude more?
  - throwaway_kufu 5y ago
    Who is supposed to make that determination? It was below the marketplaces own valuation is that’s not enough and must use an ambiguous word like “grossly” essentially meaning in the sole discretion of the marketplace? In any case it’s neither in their terms or service nor supported by case law. Who ever listed it agreed to the terms of service/contract multiple times and verified the price multiple times, it’s not incumbent on a buyer to point out to a seller their price is below market value (and that come directly from the case law for contracts). If there was an error (either by the lister or maybe a bug in the marketplace software) believe it or not the claim would be against them and not me, and presumably they would both also be covered by insurance specifically for those kinds of damages. Im not saying I will take legal action, for example I offered them to just put my domains on their “premium listing page”. But I’m also not here to debate the legal merit of contract law.
    - codezero 5y ago
      You can't know that the person who listed it doesn't have a special MSA (service agreement) with their vendor that gives them premium support and or protections not offered to "normal" end-users, and you seem to believe there is some sort of clear black and white with how business may make decisions when there are incidents on their platforms. As a person who misses a lot of flights, I can tell you that they can always reroute you, usually for free, and sometimes get you home faster, but if you're an asshole and constantly talk about how you've been wronged, you get to wait for the next flight.
dehrmann 5y ago
It's not a blockchain domain registry.

GordonS 5y ago

I have to agree - although I'm surprised the registrant actually used common sense here, it was the fair thing to do.

supergirl 5y ago
maybe it was a bug in their system, so they were on the hook

masswerk 5y ago

It may be worth noting that in most countries a contract essentially is established by the consensus of wills by the parties involved. An error in objecto ("I didn't mean the thing I accidentally said or listed") is a legitimate excuse and nullifies a contract. (The consensus didn't exist and thus the contract had never been established in the first place). (This is also a reason why marketplaces, where things "just happen", are, let's say, complicated, as they do not adhere to this legal tradition.)

throwaway_kufu 5y ago
It can be a defense in the US but not likely the case here, the remedy wouldn’t be specific performance (ie give me the domain) but damages for a fair market value of what I paid for, specific performance is very rare in the US. There would also be claims against the marketplace (despite their terms of service indemnifying them) other laws apply that can’t be waived under both federal and state law such as fair trade practices acts and deceptive trade practices). The whole point being anyone could increase prices that were advertised and say oh my ad was in error rendering every contract reversible and subject to post hoc price increases.
- AussieWog93 5y ago
  I mean, that's what judicial discretion is for. Good luck convincing a judge that the seller honestly intended to sell his domain for 1000x lower than market value.
  - throwaway_kufu 5y ago
    No that isn’t what judicial discretion is. In contract law judges are not permitted to unilaterally interject their understanding of a contracting party’s intent and revise the terms of a contract, try looking up the “4 corners of a contract”. I’ll give a specific example of a buddy of mine who in 2008 (during housing bubble) used to buy foreclosed homes at auction. There was a $2-3M home foreclosed Miami Beach home on auction, he put in a bid for about $200k, then the clerk of court website crashed, he didn’t think much of it, come to find out it crashed for everyone locking in his bid, the bank moved to set aside the sale on the basis of uncontrollable 3rd party error, my friend showed up single handedly with a few cases printed up in support of his position and the court denied the banks motion and my friend received title to the house. If the bank had any remedy it was for damages against the courts system that caused the damage not against the contractual winner of the auction.
    - nmfisher 5y ago
      That's not a contractual mistake though, is it? It was an auction, meaning anyone could bid, and he put a genuine bid for $200k. Just because the system crashed doesn't mean anyone actually made a representation they didn't intend to. A more realistic example would be the wrong house getting listed for auction due to clerical error (but one still owned by the bank). I'm fairly sure that would be set aside.
      - throwaway_kufu 5y ago
        Edit: sorry you were talking about my example and not the domain. Auctions are contracts, in this case the seller (bank) agrees to accept the highest offer at the end of the expiration of the auction. So the terms are of the auction are time limited, historically the foreclosure auctions were done in person (sometimes on the courthouse steps), I’ve been at in person foreclosure auctions and the bank had a representative that ended up buying most of them (at least at the ones I attended)
paxys 5y ago
So many people think that the world runs algorithmically, like the code on their computer. Society is built upon interactions between real people. Everyone exercises a massive amount of judgement in whatever they do, for better or worse. And this is true for the legal system as well. Your "well technically I'm correct" arguments aren't going to work in front of a judge and jury the way they do on the internet.
- girvo 5y ago
  This is one of the reasons I dislike the "literalist" judges and their "interpretations". It goes against what the law _is_, in my opinion. Note: I have a law degree, but am not a lawyer

throwaway_kufu 5y ago

Maybe...I tested your theory and asked them to reverse my recent sale of cryptocomicbook.com on the same basis and my request was declined. In either case there is both contract law and state federal law (unfair trade practices) that would support my claim in the courts if I were so inclined.

cj 5y ago
> I tested your theory and asked them to reverse my recent sale Was your recent sale grossly and clearly mispriced with evidence such as similar domains selling for many orders of magnitude more?
- throwaway_kufu 5y ago
  Who is supposed to make that determination? It was below the marketplaces own valuation is that’s not enough and must use an ambiguous word like “grossly” essentially meaning in the sole discretion of the marketplace? In any case it’s neither in their terms or service nor supported by case law. Who ever listed it agreed to the terms of service/contract multiple times and verified the price multiple times, it’s not incumbent on a buyer to point out to a seller their price is below market value (and that come directly from the case law for contracts). If there was an error (either by the lister or maybe a bug in the marketplace software) believe it or not the claim would be against them and not me, and presumably they would both also be covered by insurance specifically for those kinds of damages. Im not saying I will take legal action, for example I offered them to just put my domains on their “premium listing page”. But I’m also not here to debate the legal merit of contract law.
  - codezero 5y ago
    You can't know that the person who listed it doesn't have a special MSA (service agreement) with their vendor that gives them premium support and or protections not offered to "normal" end-users, and you seem to believe there is some sort of clear black and white with how business may make decisions when there are incidents on their platforms. As a person who misses a lot of flights, I can tell you that they can always reroute you, usually for free, and sometimes get you home faster, but if you're an asshole and constantly talk about how you've been wronged, you get to wait for the next flight.

dehrmann 5y ago

It's not a blockchain domain registry.