Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

UK Registrar NOMINET Uses the Force and Gives star-wars.co.uk to Disney

posted by takyon on Friday July 10 2015, @08:10PM   Printer-friendly
from the dark-side-of-the-web dept.

SpaceMan writes:

Disney has won control of the star-wars.co.uk domain (and several others) from a costume retailer that was using it to sell "legitimate and licensed" Star Wars-themed costumes. Disney bought Lucasfilm and all of its intellectual property for $4.1 billion in 2012. The retailer's parent company, Abscissa, had used two of the domains for the last 10 years.

However, at the tail of the BBC story: "Abscissa itself has also benefited from the dispute-resolution process, by wresting control of jokers.co.uk from a fancy-dress rival in 2007".

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
UK Registrar NOMINET Uses the Force and Gives star-wars.co.uk to Disney | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 8 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1) by NullPtr on Friday July 10 2015, @08:13PM

    by NullPtr (3786) on Friday July 10 2015, @08:13PM (#207623) Journal

    You're either surprised or not. You can't not know; you can't speculate as to your potential emotion when an event which might provoke an emotion has already occurred. Why do people feel the need to talk nonsense when they're being asked questions on record? It's like when police are asked if they're aware of a motive for a crime and say "not at this particular point in time" instead of "no".

  • (Score: 3, Funny) by dyingtolive on Friday July 10 2015, @08:29PM

    by dyingtolive (952) on Friday July 10 2015, @08:29PM (#207632)

    Why use one word to say something plainly when you could further expound through the heavy overutilization of utterly unnecessary but not entirely incorrect filler for no reason beyond putting forth and perpetuating the generally pointless illusion that the more verbose language one speaks with, usually somehow the more official sounding in spoken tone such a thing begins to be?

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!

  • (Score: 1) by Absolutely.Geek on Tuesday July 14 2015, @09:27AM

    by Absolutely.Geek (5328) on Tuesday July 14 2015, @09:27AM (#208802)

    I generally agree with you; but your example is flawed. When asking an officer; and they reply with "not at this point in time" what they are saying is "no; but we expect to find out in the course of our investigations" which is much more verbose. Whereas in the emotion example you are correct; since the emotion would generally have happened already.

    .....unless there was slowly burning rage that eventuall bursts out in a flurry of expletives and violence.

    --
    Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.