Rich Zuchowski aka Webslave Ethical or not ???

[WebSlave]

I bet Rich would not feel the same way if any other site had a domain like fauna's. Even if that person in the end said it was just a joke. Last time I heard people that do not like one another do not play jokes on one another.

Take Rich's name out of it and put any other two sites and I bet you would find the erson that had the domain stealing traffic in the wrong.

Wanna bet, Gary? Matter of fact, back when all this was going on someone DID get the domain name of something like FaunasClassifieds.com or something like that, and offered it for auction on ReptiBid. I thought it was hilarious! Didn't bother me in the least. Sorry to shoot your theory out of the water.

 

[Gary O]

Did you find it ethical?

 

[crotalusadamanteus]

I want to see how you guys feel only one person answered my questions.

OK, NO. I don't see it as unethical. You say he thought it out. Big deal. Did he plan on putting KS under for good with this purchase of a single domain name? NO! I don't think it could be done anyway, and Rich is smart enough to know this.

Did he do it out of spite? It would appear that way, who knows. But spite, however inane it may be, is not the same as ethics or morals IMHO. Not at least in this case.

Rick

 

[Gary O]

Wait I remember that...... Did you not post about it here. They did not redirect it anywhere they offered it upfor sale which still to me is very unethical. You also tried to aucton off the KS name right?

 

[Gary O]

OK, NO. I don't see it as unethical. You say he thought it out. Big deal. Did he plan on putting KS under for good with this purchase of a single domain name? NO! I don't think it could be done anyway, and Rich is smart enough to know this.

Did he do it out of spite? It would appear that way, who knows. But spite, however inane it may be, is not the same as ethics or morals IMHO. Not at least in this case.

Rick

Then how is what Alan did unethical. Both did it to harm another. Bottom line.

Buying a domain in hpe of stealing, taking, or what ever you want to say off another site is wrong............... That was what he wanted to do. And sisie he brought up the auction of the fauna name. Which I also find unethical for whomever did that. I remember Rich tryng to auction off the KS name too.

I just see a lot of people going after one person but another did something to but is put up on a pedistal. but to each their own.

I have found out somethings about some.

Rich could say yeah I was worng in what I did. and be down with it like he has told so many people on the BOI. Just admitt you were wrong and build on it. I seen that told to so many people.

 

[esoteric-lizard]

Based upon the screenshots, I agree with the title of this post by Alan. This was an unethical move by Rich.

Buying that domain name and directing hits to Fauna was unethical.

It was done strictly to lure people to fauna based upon a missed keystoke when they were searching for kingsnake.

It was designed to purposely take hits and possibly business away from kingsnake.

That is not the American way. That is unethical.

who says this is unethical?

its dog eat dog ~ in a capitalistic society.

capitalism (business in America) is good for some, and not so good for others... is this ethical?

KS has taken peoples money for services and then banned them... no refund, just take the money and a kick out the door. KS allows KNOWN criminals to sell on their site... wtf???

...is this ethical?

 

[Chameleon Company]

Lol

Rich says:

I thought it was hilarious! Didn't bother me in the least.

Then Gary asks:

Did you find it ethical?

Gary, to praphrase Rich, which part about not giving a crap don't you get ?

 

[Gary O]

That did not answer my question. I find things funny and unethical. Maybe next time you can let Rich answer the question. He is smart and is an adult. We have talked in the past.

 

[DAND]

There is a reason Rich had to pay a settlement. You do not do that if you are not guilty of something. In this case Rich was guilty of setting up a website similiar in name to a competitor and directing hits (meant for another site) to his.

Steve,

Please quote your source for this claim.

 

[WebSlave]

The only reason some think it is wrong for what Alan posted is it is against Rich. That is it.

Is it illegal to do this, hard to say. But Jeff did have a case.

If we can not post that this was unethical how can all of you do the same to everyone else on here. Like saying Alans post was unethical? What is the difference? Really? Rich did it to hurt KS, Alan post this to hurt fauna. Samething to me. What makes one right and the other wrong?

I seen on the other threads people say that this person did it only out of revenge. I seen Rich himself say it. Then they say that it was not ethical and wrong of the person to do it. Everyone jumped on and said sure was man why would they do that just for revenge.

But Rich does it.....it is the way business goes. Blah blah blah.

I am saying it was wrong, and shows how Rich could do business. Not saying he would any longer but it was something he did.

This is what the BOI is. Questioning ethics. 50% of the BOI threads are ethics and not people breaking the law.

Jeff probably believed he could win the case. I believed I could have won it. My argument was that "kingsnake" is a generic and common term in this industry. I had already won an arbitration decision about this same situation. Would a court case have gone the same way? No way to tell, but I believed it would have. But when Jeff and I sat down together to talk it over we both felt that our conflict was not in the best interests of this entire COMMUNITY. It wasn't really about the domain name. It was about two hard headed guys who finally just decided to grow up and get on with their lives. Obviously some here have no such concerns and are trying hard to dredge up something that is just water under the bridge for your own personal reasons. But more power to you, I guess. Things must be boring in your neck of the woods.

Yeah, this is all posted elsewhere on this site, but short story form:

Truth of the matter is that I got KINGSNAKES.COM because I had just had ALL my domain names censored by kingsnake.com and I was thinking about what domain name I could have that they could NOT ban or censor. Just so happened that the guy who owned KINGSNAKES.COM owed me a lot of money that I thought for certain I was never going to be able to recover. So this seemed like an excellent way to turn that lost money into something to tickle my funny bone. And yes, I thought it was damned funny. Now being sued is not a lot of fun, even if you believe you are in the right and can win a case, but I learned a lot about the legal system that I feel was well worth the time, money, and aggravation. But still, my intention was to just have some fun with the domain name and tweak Jeff's nose a bit in the process. It was not done maliciously at all.

So no, it wasn't an idea that came to me out of spite, in the malicious sense, at all. Certainly if my domains had not all been banned, I would have had no reason to even think about that domain name. But when the thought came to me, I thought it was just funny as hell. I actually told my wife about it and I couldn't stop laughing the entire time. And all things said and done, I STILL think so. Sorry, but that is just the way my mind works sometimes. I'm just not the malicious type. You may become the butt of a practical joke, but that's about it.

So if someone thinks it unethical of me to do that, oh well. That is their problem, not mine. I doubt I will lose any sales nor any sleep of that one. But nice try though.....

 

[esoteric-lizard]

Then how is what Alan did unethical. Both did it to harm another. Bottom line.

Buying a domain in hpe of stealing, taking, or what ever you want to say off another site is wrong............... That was what he wanted to do. And sisie he brought up the auction of the fauna name. Which I also find unethical for whomever did that. I remember Rich tryng to auction off the KS name too.

I just see a lot of people going after one person but another did something to but is put up on a pedistal. but to each their own.

I have found out somethings about some.

Rich could say yeah I was worng in what I did. and be down with it like he has told so many people on the BOI. Just admitt you were wrong and build on it. I seen that told to so many people.

ever go to the grocery store and find generic products taking on a "similar" look and feel to the brand name product they are imitating?

or what about generic drugs or herbs, weight loss supplements... dude a lot of these generic companies boast the fact that they have the SAME ingredients at a FRACTION of the brand name. in essence they are diverting traffic to their "product."

is this ethical???? wtf????

this is all legal... you can package a product... label it... have the same ingredients... and put YOUR name it... market it... and sell it at half the price... this is ALL legal!!!
its things like this make for healthy market place... its called competition.

i dont see how rich could have been sued for buying a domain name and directing internet traffic to HIS site.... maybe he didnt spend enough money on a lawyer to beat KS's?

i think its retarded that KS would sue to have that domain name.

 

[Lucille]

There is a reason Rich had to pay a settlement. You do not do that if you are not guilty of something.

That is one of the most ignorant statements I have heard to date. There are millions of cases that are originated in the United States, The vast majority are either pled in criminal cases or settled in civil cases, for many different reasons including costs of litigation, time, relative outcome between settlement and litigation, and so on. There is absolutely no automatic substantive quotient to a pleading, it is often done on the advice of an attorney for tactical reasons.

 

[Gary O]

ever go to the grocery store and find generic products taking on a "similar" look and feel to the brand name product they are imitating?

or what about generic drugs or herbs, weight loss supplements... dude a lot of these generic companies boast the fact that they have the SAME ingredients at a FRACTION of the brand name. in essence they are diverting traffic to their "product."

is this ethical???? wtf????

this is all legal... you can package a product... label it... have the same ingredients... and put YOUR name it... market it... and sell it at half the price... this is ALL legal!!!
its things like this make for healthy market place... its called competition.

i dont see how rich could have been sued for buying a domain name and directing internet traffic to HIS site.... maybe he didnt spend enough money on a lawyer to beat KS's?

i think its retarded that KS would sue to have that domain name.

Ebay just won a law suit with the very same situaton and they are going after another person that has ebaystuff.com or something along those lines.

It happens daily.

 

[SPJ]

That is one of the most ignorant statements I have heard to date.

Well then you obviously do not go back and read what YOU post.

 

[WebSlave]

Breaking News!: Rich Z. once drove 68 miles per hour in a 65 mph zone! Juicy details forthcoming!!! (or not.)

Damn! You caught me...... I guess I should fess up to doing 120 in a 55mph zone as well, huh?

 

[Chameleon Company]

Gary,
Since you have made the analogy that Rich is so much like Alan in terms of his ethical choices, and Rich has taken the time to once again provide a long and detailed explanation, then please now give me your ethical take on the following three:

1) Alan's offering to sell Jeff B. his "inside info" (what a joke). Since Jeff "stood to gain $175K", Alan expected his info value at over $10K. He got not a penny, but what say ye to those ethics?

2) Alan aka Jen, giving himself favorable comments in forum?

3) Alan's choice of derision of Lucille. Not that he had disdain for her, but how he chose to verbalize it (not posted here out of disgust) ?

Give it a whack !

 

[Gary O]

Jeff probably believed he could win the case. I believed I could have won it. My argument was that "kingsnake" is a generic and common term in this industry. I had already won an arbitration decision about this same situation. Would a court case have gone the same way? No way to tell, but I believed it would have. But when Jeff and I sat down together to talk it over we both felt that our conflict was not in the best interests of this entire COMMUNITY. It wasn't really about the domain name. It was about two hard headed guys who finally just decided to grow up and get on with their lives. Obviously some here have no such concerns and are trying hard to dredge up something that is just water under the bridge for your own personal reasons. But more power to you, I guess. Things must be boring in your neck of the woods.

Yeah, this is all posted elsewhere on this site, but short story form:

Truth of the matter is that I got KINGSNAKES.COM because I had just had ALL my domain names censored by kingsnake.com and I was thinking about what domain name I could have that they could NOT ban or censor. Just so happened that the guy who owned KINGSNAKES.COM owed me a lot of money that I thought for certain I was never going to be able to recover. So this seemed like an excellent way to turn that lost money into something to tickle my funny bone. And yes, I thought it was damned funny. Now being sued is not a lot of fun, even if you believe you are in the right and can win a case, but I learned a lot about the legal system that I feel was well worth the time, money, and aggravation. But still, my intention was to just have some fun with the domain name and tweak Jeff's nose a bit in the process. It was not done maliciously at all.

So no, it wasn't an idea that came to me out of spite, in the malicious sense, at all. Certainly if my domains had not all been banned, I would have had no reason to even think about that domain name. But when the thought came to me, I thought it was just funny as hell. I actually told my wife about it and I couldn't stop laughing the entire time. And all things said and done, I STILL think so. Sorry, but that is just the way my mind works sometimes. I'm just not the malicious type. You may become the butt of a practical joke, but that's about it.

So if someone thinks it unethical of me to do that, oh well. That is their problem, not mine. I doubt I will lose any sales nor any sleep of that one. But nice try though.....

That last line is what so many have put on a thread here. You can not tell me different. I remember Bobby Pruitt doing it and Tim Bowels. Not comparing you to them at all though as they truly are rip off artists.

SOmetimes we all do things that are unethical but when we do them we do not think so. Becuase if we did think so we would not do them.

I bought a domain. proherps.com. While I was building the site I noticed a site when I was checking the search numbers. proherp.com. It is a software for herps. They do not sell anyherps. But I emailed him and said hey bro I bought this domain and it is almost the same as yours. You can have it I will figure something else out.

The guy did not mind me having it at all aslong as I was not giving aay herp software lol. But I offered before anything blew up. But the guy was cool with me keeping the domain. so it worked out.

This is just me I guess.

But Rich let me ask ou straight up. Did you know that Jeff would get upset? Becuase if so then yes you dd it to hurt him.

 

[WebSlave]

Also Alan has nothing to gain by posting this. Rich had tons to gain by purchasing that domain. and it was thought out IMO

Oh, I wouldn't say that at all Gary. We all can see what Alan hope to "gain" from this.....

 

[Gary O]

Gary,
Since you have made the analogy that Rich is so much like Alan in terms of his ethical choices, and Rich has taken the time to once again provide a long and detailed explanation, then please now give me your ethical take on the following three:

1) Alan's offering to sell Jeff B. his "inside info" (what a joke). Since Jeff "stood to gain $175K", Alan expected his info value at over $10K. He got not a penny, but what say ye to those ethics?

2) Alan aka Jen, giving himself favorable comments in forum?

3) Alan's choice of derision of Lucille. Not that he had disdain for her, but how he chose to verbalize it (not posted here out of disgust) ?

Give it a whack !

I am not sure about #2 as I do not know what you are talking about. So I will not comment on it.

#3 Lucille, go read what I feel about her in the other thread.

#1 I think everything to do with that domain thing was unethical.

I am not saying that Rich and Alan are the same but the actions of them in THIS situation can be compared.

 

[Gary O]

Oh, I wouldn't say that at all Gary. We all can see what Alan hope to "gain" from this.....

I honestly do not think he wants fauna dead.

I hope you know I do not. But Jim thinks sinse I only have 360 posts here I do.

I think your actions of making this open again is in the right direction though. I think you should charge for your classifieds though that would be another step in the right direction IMO.