July 24th, 2001, 08:54 PM
As far as I am concerned, Microsoft and screw itself over the domain name issue.
This is clearly a case of big bully on the block. Whereas Microsoft is using its legal and
monitary power to bully some 20 year old kid. Microsoft is just being a big baby. The kid needs to
tell Microsoft to fuq themselves and then register .com, .org web and net just to further spite them.
Its time Microsoft back off the little guy.
Well, easy for you to say. Getting into a legal fight can be VERY expensive. Well, I'm not saying
either of them is right on this one. I'm not a lawyer and don't really know. I do know this though. Microsoft, if you want the
damn domain so bad, give the kid his $100. Not many 20 year olds can afford to take on a large company over a
domain dispute. Justice for the rich?
About the whole domain.thing...it seems to me as if alot could
be solved by having a simple courtesy page for similar-domains.
For instance, in the micr0soft issue, as well as the porno issue
(so many porn sites have misleading names) as simple page for
sites that a user may be searching for would quickly
get them where they want to go, the big-money company
can't complain too loudly (since the customers *will* get
to their site after all) and the parody/small site gets to have
their weird domain.name...everyone should be happy.
Perhaps another default page name (like index.html, etc)
like typo.html at the root level of the site could do this.
ANyway...I just hope AOL doesn't come after you folks!!!
Great site! keep the info flowing!
Analyst II for Univ Of Pittsburgh
Regarding the registration of the micr0soft.com domain.
I am in total agreement with the party registering the
domain. In my honest opinion, Microsoft is just looking
for something to bitch about. Just to stomp on the little
guy. If Microsoft wanted that domain, they needed to
register it themselves. As far as obstructing legitimate
traffic, who would actually try to go to micr0soft.com???
Come on, get real microsoft!
I've got a TON of e-mail on this issue. I'll post just a few of them here.
In regards to the micr0soft domain. I don't see microsoft's problem.
I mean if they own the word "Microsoft" then if somebody were to register a
domain such as "microsoft.org" I can see it as being a violation of trademark laws.
But the "0" in the domain makes it a completely different word.
Just on a quick side note, I am wondering what is up with all the Microsoft lawsuits.
In the past week I have seen more of Bill Gates and his hordes of lackey lawyers
scrape together some pathetic excuses for lawsuits that only embarass them and
make them look more the tyrant monopoly.
Tech Support for Nauticom
This letter is regarding the legal actions against Jeremy Lynnes. My view of the predicament
is that microsoft has the rights to the domain name micr0soft.com. However the way in
which they enforce their rights are as always bullyish and in total lack of respect no matter
what the circumstances are. The "trademark" of Microsoft is not only windows 95, NT, 98 etc
but also disrespect and lack of common sense. They do however legally have every right to
enforce their rights as strict as they want, and no matter if you like the Windows environment
or IE etc you have to agree that the products are theirs. As far as Jeremy wants his 100$ for
registering the domain back he has no grounds for such demands but Microsoft doesn't have
grounds for statements like that they are "sick of people registering our domain names under
some sort of first amendment article that doesn't exist." What about all those people and
enterprises that MS runs over mindlessly?. This mainly because I don't think there is one
person in Redmond that even knows the first amendment let alone if there is an article
within it that is applicable in those cases. If MS could write in Win 98 should be on all
computers in the first they would. In summary, bad move Jeremy sorry.
And Microsoft, shape up... people won't take your "No nonsense take it or leave it attitude" you
are hurting your own compant as well as those people/companies that are publically standing up
for you. When you are in error, accept it, announce it, correct it .... That's all we ask.
Regarding the "Micr0soft.com" article...
And I quote...
"..we're here to make sure that a legit
customer base isn't facing a hassle trying to access our
That's complete bullshit. Who in their right mind would
type in www.micr0soft.com thinking that they would end up
at the MS site. I think M$ is getting a little touchy.
And then they won't even give him the $100 to cover domain
registration?! So now M$'s strategy is to use their humungo
legal power to steal from good old Joe Hacker?
This is one of the dumbest stories I've ever heard.
I'd like to make a comment on the article on Jeremy
registering the domain name "micr0soft.com". I don't
think he should be harassed by the name of the domain.
Technically "Microsoft" does not equal "micr0soft". Plus
he is willing to turn over the name to Microsoft for a
refund of the $100 he spent to register the name. I think the
whole situation is ridiculous. Microsoft has enough money
as it is and if they really wanted that domain to be
transfered under there name then they should pay the silly
$100. $100 is like $1 dollar to Microsoft but from the looks
of things they believe $100 is asking way too much.
MIS Assistant for PHS
I could fill a book with all the e-mails we've gotten on this issue. I think that's
a good enough sample of them
Just wanted to say 'Great page!!!!!!!!!'... As informative a site as any on
computer security -- or the serious lack thereof ;-)
The theme of this message is heard again and again, but I feel the need to
stress that people (among them, public servants like our... ahem...
CONGRESSMEN and SENATORS, not to mention idiots like DISA's Petey Farrell)
must realize that as mischievous as hackers may be, they are providing a
valuable service in their exploits. Putting a white-hot spotlight on holes
in someone's security allows everyone else to patch areas they never
considered to be 'problems'. The USAF (of which I'm a proud member) has
taken computer security VERY seriously in last 18-24 months. Among the
various lists of exploits (such as mercs) and archive of hacked pages, I've
seen only ONE reference to an AF site -- we must be doing something right
(or we've yet to piss somebody off...). Don't take that as open invitation
to try and hack AF sites -- it just appears that SOMEBODY in the US
government is getting the message. I know my organization's sysadmins are
vigilant in their measures to protect our resources. It's hard to stay
ahead in the security game, but sites like yours certainly give an extra
Again, keep up the good work, and many thanks!!!