[lonewacko_dot_com]

You missed a negative. I did not say "That doesn't mean that BH is in violation of their contract," I said "That *doesn't* mean that BH is *not* in violation of their contract."

In other words, BH might be in violation of their contract.

And, so what? William Morris Agency got them on a technicality. Who the hell appointed WMA as the WHOIS Polizei?

Why would WMA complain about someone's WHOIS? Because they're interested in keeping Internet records straight?

Or, did they complain because they thought that it would be a cheap and easy way to muscle this site off the web?

If BH has broken libel or harrassment laws, let WMA sue or get a court order. They will definitely be able to get accurate WHOIS information that way.

Did they do that? So, how is this different from a SLAPP suit then?

[lonewacko_dot_com]

P.S. For various reasons, I think BH sucks. However, if WMA's actions don't get condemned now, they and others will probably try tricks like this in the future. I don't look so askance at (c) claims concerning domain names, but WMA's complaint seems so baseless on its face.

[lonewacko_dot_com]

And, what I wrote above doesn't mean BH shouldn't be smarter. I don't think they're that smart, and that's one of the reasons why I don't like them. The next time around, they should use a proxy or a Mailboxes Etc. address with a voice mail number.

[HAL9000]

You missed a negative.

You are correct. That doesn't mean I'm not sorry about that.

Who the hell appointed WMA as the WHOIS Polizei?

Anyone can report that a registration contains false info. My dog could have filed a complaint, and the registrar would be required to act as dotster did in this care.

So, how is this different from a SLAPP suit then?

In the context that WMA filed the complain, it was sort of like a SLAPP. Except it wasn't a lawsuit, it was just a slam dunk complaint.