Sign in / up

back to article Man sold EverythingEverywhere domain for 'nominal sum'

Everything Everywhere, Britain's newest and biggest phone company, snapped up its new domain name for “a nominal sum”, according to its previous owner. T-Mobile and Orange said today they have merged their UK businesses to create a new telecoms giant that will operate under the brand Everything Everywhere. The company will …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. irrelevant

    Ah, agents,.,..

    I periodically get unsolicited emails trying to buy one or another of my domains. The only one I have so far sold, which was for a domain I wasn't actually using, I checked the IP that the innocent looking webmail email came from, and discovered it was from one of the large registrars.. With that knowledge, I negotiated them up to about 20 times the initial otherwise-reasonable-sounding offer, about the same as four months salary! Not bad for a domain I originally got from freenetname.co.uk. (anybody remember them?) I might have held out for more (it ended up as a subsidiary website to one of the leading magazines in it's field!) but I was happy enough with it,

    0 0
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Thumb Down

      Ah, squatters

      Sorry, this practice needs to be stamped on hard. There is no skill, innovation or kudos in a domain land grab. Either the domain is under active use or it is not - and if not, it should revert to "unused" after (say) one month.

      This would crush the parasites...err...squatters and take out quite a few of those "misspelled" domains to. e.g. Canonical could collect "ubutnu.com", "ubtunu.com" et al for a very nominal fee.

      So if "everythingeverywhere.com" (or .co.uk, or....) was no being used, no one should have profited.

      3 1
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Grenade

        Whynot?

        So all land suitable for housing not currently having a house on it, or being built on it, should be given away? All cars not currently having an MOT, Taxed and on the road should be given back to the factory?

        They didn't have to use this name, he seemingly didn't register in "bad faith" (as squaters do). So what exactly is your problem?

        Is called the free market, get over it or piss off and live in North Korea

        5 3
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          FAIL

          FFS

          "So all land suitable for housing not currently having a house on it, or being built on it, should be given away?"

          No, but the relevant governmental body should prevent abuse of the land registry system from artificially inflating the price. Which is what happens with domain names right now.

          "All cars not currently having an MOT, Taxed and on the road should be given back to the factory?"

          No. But if you leave a car in one spot long enough, the council/police will take an interest and potentially remove it. Cars are very bad analogies for domain names anyway. You can always manufacture more cars and having more than one of any given type&colour is not an issue.

          "They didn't have to use this name, he seemingly didn't register in "bad faith" (as squaters do). So what exactly is your problem?"

          He's not using it. Smacks of squatting to me.

          "Is called the free market, get over it or piss off and live in North Korea"

          Ah, so you have no real argument then. I am not talking about dictating who can register what or own what. I am talking about some basic regulation to prevent abuse of the market. We do it everywhere else (for good reason!) and only IT seems to think it is some "special case".

          0 0
      2. John 62
        Reply Icon
        Megaphone

        yeah, information wants to be free!

        down with personal property! if you're not using it, give it up to the common good!

        0 0
      3. Ole Juul
        Reply Icon

        Who's a parasite?

        "Either the domain is under active use or it is not - and if not, it should revert to "unused" after (say) one month."

        There are indeed different definitions of active use. You should move to Denmark. There was a recent case there of a fellow who had owned a domain name (orango.dk) for almost a decade. He only had a simple web page which he used as a search portal, but what he was actively using was the name for his e-mail address. The Danish domain registrar did not consider this "active use" because he was not a company and so took the domain name away from him because a new company wanted the domain. A court case confirmed their right to do so. Public outcry didn't change anything either.

        0 0
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          See that...

          ...I don't agree with. I never mentioned web pages, I just said "actively using". He was, by any reasonable measure I can see, actively using it. Just not for web. Fair enough.

          0 0
  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    trade description?

    As its obviously not everything nor is it everywhere! Already i am feeling conned!

    0 0
  3. RichyS
    FAIL

    Everything Everywhere?

    They'll have 30 million minus one customer after this name change.

    Everything Everywhere. Except where we don't have coverage. Which is a lot of places. Damn.

    0 0
  4. Zer0
    FAIL

    t-orange

    Hi was hoping they would go for the name t-orange.co.uk which is the domain that i had registered

    0 0
    1. Jon Whiteoak
      Reply Icon
      Joke

      Will their Yorkshire based offices......

      be known as T'Orange?

      0 0
  5. fred #257

    At least they paid for it...

    ..as opposed to the usual corporate approach of "You have stolen our trademark. Hand it over or we'll sue you for a gazillion dollars!"

    1 0
  6. heyrick Silver badge

    Sedo?

    As in Sedo-flippin'-Parking?

    <sigh>

    0 0
  7. Calum Morrison
    Boffin

    Kerrang!

    The legendary - and now largely crap - heavy metal mag bought kerrang.com from a squatter a few years back. He was a metal fan who bought it when he realised they hadn't; when they launched on the interwebs, he agreed to sell it to them for the very metal sum of £666.

    If you have to ask...

    3 0
  8. pctechxp

    @AC re: squatters

    Domains are an asset so what is wrong with people making a little money from a large coporate.

    1 1
  9. irrelevant

    squatter?

    Sorry, not me mate. I registered my name with the intent of running a service on it. As it happens, I never quite got around to it due to other commitments. It was not a trademark or name of any company, just a particular combination of words that could be used to describe any number of things. I've no problems in letting names lapse when I see no further use for them, and have done so on multiple occasions. I've also lost names when incompetent registration agents lose my renewal payments, which is intensely infuriating. And I've never registered misspellings, apart from occasionally those of my own domains.

    0 0
  10. Anonymous Coward
    Grenade

    Melbourne IT hahahaha

    This is the same Melbourne IT that charges $400+/year for .com.au addresses when you can pick up a .com for $5/year?

    Oh, by the way, they DO have a monopoly on .com.au

    It's also why any small Australian company has the address .com instead of .com.au

    Anonymous, because the way this place is going, I'll have the Austapo on me in no time.

    "Oi! Stop! Geddova 'ere! Gimme yer paaaaypars!"

    0 0
  11. pan2008
    Stop

    waht?

    I don't understand having such a well know name, brands like t-mobile and orange they have chosen something silly like EverythingEverywhere. Who's gong to know that company name, maybe after they spent £10M to adverts or maybe more. Still sounds like a silly and too long name, which network to use use mate? EverythingEverywhere! IMOH is one of those dodgy corporate decisions adviced by some "idiotic" PR firm, see Brtish airways re-paint of planes direction!

    0 0
  12. nobodyspecial

    So what.

    It's the seller's responsibility to ensure he/she/they get the best price for any domain name "asset" they happen to be the Registrant of. If I'd been the seller I'd have done my due diligence and noticed that both the .net and .co.uk had recently been acquired by a Melbourne IT Corporate Domain Name Acquisition Department, I'd have immediately considered that notice that someone with money was behind it.

    I'd have also checked for any (R) (TM) applications although in this case there appear to be none.

    0 0
  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @Melbourne IT hahahaha

    They're advertising .com.au domains for sale at $35.00... pa?

    0 0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like