Hello

Well I have been actively on here for almost 1 year and have many posts. Some though controversial and many informative or opinions my true thought of Burst.net TM INC or what ever has gotten really bad.

It has been proven based on Factual information that Burst.net is CyberSquatting Hostgui.net which if many dont know cybersquatting is illegal in the US.

I think it should be of action of this board to ban or suspend the burst name and account on here.

Honestly that is probably the lowest thing someone could do. Its one thing to have a problem with a server or something, but this is just a slap in the face to all of us in my opionion.

I recommend suspension for a few months.

Joe

Sorry Joe .. you know I back you up in almost any crazy ideas you have :D .. but not this one ;)

See, as much as I am ultraged about this, the fact remains that Jag doesn't have the TM "yet" .. so technically, they have not done anything wrong :rolleyes:

In any democratic .. err .. "Virtual World" ?? .. we need to look at all the variables, and even so we all know what hostgui stands for .. the fact remains that nobody owns it.

Now JAG .. get your ass in guear and get that TM before this gets even worst ;)

Carlos, I agree with you ... that's why I have been asking whether HostGUI has been trademarked at all ... It seems it has not :( Thus, with respect to this matter, I voted the third option in the poll ...

cheers,
:beer:

Well

Carlos Legally yes you are very right. A tM has not been done.

In regards to cybersqatting though, i think they may have broke that law.

And in regards to my crazy ideas, i have many more to come, and you do back me up most of the time, so Thanks

Why I think they should be banned or suspended, is lets face it thats a pretty dirty move by anyones part.



Joe

Kind of off subject, but you do not have to have a trademark registered to actually own the trademark. But thats for another long thread :)

I think everyone over-reacted on this issue.

Nothing is settled yet and there is already a big flame war against BURSTNET.

Let Jag and Burst solve it between themselves, I'm sure they will resolve their issue.

Originally posted by JeremyL
Kind of off subject, but you do not have to have a trademark registered to actually own the trademark. But thats for another long thread :)
True, but you have to remeber, this is the "internet" .. land of the free, a TM is allot harder to justify here widouth the proper reg. paperwork ...

Plus we talking about a product that is not out yet, so if it was to be taken to court it woudl be very hard to give a company TM rights on a non existing/registed product :(

(sorry guys, just playing it by the book here)

Well the forum has its own court of law.

Anyone has character knows that what Burst did was just not cool

The US courts may decide this issue, but WHT is its own law on here.

A member JAG is launching a new product that is pretty cool

Another Member Burst.net TMTMTM happened to register the .net name.

I think thats pretty wrong, my vote, is no more Burst for a while on this forum

Joe

Originally posted by CRego3D

True, but you have to remeber, this is the "internet" .. land of the free, a TM is allot harder to justify here widouth the proper reg. paperwork ...

Plus we talking about a product that is not out yet, so if it was to be taken to court it woudl be very hard to give a company TM rights on a non existing/registed product :(

(sorry guys, just playing it by the book here)

I would disagree. It doesn't matter if the product is being sold yet or not. HostGUI is a completely fictional name made up from scratch for a pice of software which is under development. I don't think any judge would believe that BurstNET (which has a vested interest in CPanel since Nick is employed by them and is a distibutor of cpanel) regestered the domain in good faith. I think it would be obvious that the domain was registered with less then apropriate intentions. And if in a longshot Jag didn't win in court over TM laws, they also have a strong case for cybersquating.

I was tempted to register the .org name :D I am surprised it's still not registered yet ... Now if someone registered the domain from overseas, the matter will become more complicated. I am not sure if there is any International Law regarding this :D

cheers,
:beer:

A brief overview of the TM law
http://www.gigalaw.com/articles/2001/kubiszyn-2001-01-p3.html

A mark can only be found to have trademark significance if the mark is "distinctive." There are four types of marks:

Arbitrary or fanciful marks -- those that are "made up" or are used with unrelated goods (such as XEROX, or AMAZON for a bookstore);


A mark need not be registered to be protected under state and federal trademark laws. Rights in a mark arise from use, not registration. However, federal registration of a mark gives the owner constructive nationwide use of the mark as of the date of filing. Therefore, the registration of a mark gives notice to any subsequent users that the registrant has superior rights in the mark.

Wow, that's pretty bad. Wonder what purpose they have for that name?

Well also if anyone wants a quicker hop to sleep, make sure to read the trademark link

I feel bad for attorneys now

Joe

Can you give us a link?

Thanks

Lets be honest about this, guys ...what if you would find that yahoo.net just became available. Would you register it or call Yahoo and tell them it expired? ;) The truth is that JaguarPC failed to register the .net of their project and BurstNET discivered a business opportunity. Now its up to them to resolve it.

Originally posted by Kiwi
Lets be honest about this, guys ...what if you would find that yahoo.net just became available. Would you register it or call Yahoo and tell them it expired? ;) The truth is that JaguarPC failed to register the .net of their project and BurstNET discivered a business opportunity. Now its up to them to resolve it.

If you were to register it, you just wasted your money. One of two things would happen as soon as Yahoo found out. Yahoo would contact and ask you to turn it over (for free) and you would. Or they would contact you and you say no and then waste all your money on a lawyer because they would have a 110% chance of winning the domain in court. (when I say they, I mean their $300/hr lawyers who will take everything you own in the end).

But yes it is up to the to work it out between themselves. The only reason I find it amusing is the fact thet it involves BurstNET TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM .....

Is that enought trademarks? I forget the exact number they used ;)

Originally posted by Kiwi
The truth is that JaguarPC failed to register the .net of their project and BurstNET discivered a business opportunity. Now its up to them to resolve it.

Marc,

Are you sure ? :) You remember that ... ;)

Mac

Do you remember nchost.com

you failed to register that, you werent too happy about it


Joe

Originally posted by JBIZ718
Do you remember nchost.com

you failed to register that, you werent too happy about it


Joe

Yes, but we resolved it off these forums. Thats the point i'm trying to make :)

Well, I don't believe that Burst broke any of the forum's rules, so it would be pretty lame to ban them from the forums. I think that the negative impact on Burst's reputation after this fiasco is over will be punishment enough.

Originally posted by mpope
Well, I don't believe that Burst broke any of the forum's rules, so it would be pretty lame to ban them from the forums. I think that the negative impact on Burst's reputation after this fiasco is over will be punishment enough.

Fair enough, but I think someone should mention a hosting company with a control panel released or in development buying a domain for a competing web host's control panel software's domain name, is indeed more than just a domain and it is the "illegal" act of trying to make money from another company's product. If someone got yahoo.net and it was about cowboy slang, Yahoo might not be able to take action, but if they ran a search engine, you get they definitely could. This is exactly the same action.

Further, in regards to this not being a WHT forum issue, so what? WHT should have a policy to ban any user or company that commits unethical or illegal acts (even if they must be deemed so or proven, nonetheless), just as WHT should ban any SPAMMING host or any host that is known to commit criminal or unethical acts. It's up to them, yes, and it doesn't affect them, true, but at the same time, to keep the forum a respectable one, it should protect the user's from unscrupulous company's. That is my opinion and although we can't make the forum do this, and although the judgment as to being illegal is up to a court of law (even though we're all able to see the laws by referencing government web sites and copyright and trademark books (at your local library people, if need be), we are certainly able to collectively make a sound and reasonable judgment to vote a bad element out from participation, just as we'd do it Peter/Davey from True hosting was here -- oh, wait, I forgot Burst bought TH.

After all, if this is a community, of decent user's, why then can't we expect reasonable action to be taken so users, new and old, can know that this is a good, trusted source for information and company's interactions? Otherwise, why are any of us here? Just to watch things happen and gossip? Others have been banned for issues pertaining to non-WHT related circumstances, due to their character, so let's be realistic, this is a reasonable issue to vote on and my vote is that they are tossed. Perhaps Burst and jag will resolve this, but this isn't some debate or argument they are having and Burst did this intentional and despicable act full well knowing. Is this the type of company's welcome to participate in this community? My opinion, is that they did this knowing, it's not like it's a mistake, I doubt they'll resolve this with Jag, and unless they do, look at the actions of this one user at least, and think about it. Again, my opinion, shared by others it seems.

Ok, now look at this thread from the BurstNET point of view, before we carry on commenting about this thread id like conclusive proof of the following statement, or the mods are simply going to get another request to have this post removed and guess what? we will have to comply because there is no real proof in this thread of what you accuse.

It has been proven based on Factual information that Burst.net is CyberSquatting Hostgui.net which if many dont know cybersquatting is illegal in the US.

Cheers

-XT

Originally posted by JBIZ718
Hello

Well I have been actively on here for almost 1 year and have many posts. Some though controversial and many informative or opinions my true thought of Burst.net TM INC or what ever has gotten really bad.

It has been proven based on Factual information that Burst.net is CyberSquatting Hostgui.net which if many dont know cybersquatting is illegal in the US.

I think it should be of action of this board to ban or suspend the burst name and account on here.

Honestly that is probably the lowest thing someone could do. Its one thing to have a problem with a server or something, but this is just a slap in the face to all of us in my opionion.

I recommend suspension for a few months.

Joe

You people have obviously not done your research:

BurstNET IS a registered trademark...
hostgui is NOT.

This is not a violation of trademark laws, when no trademark exists for "hostgui"

There isn't even one in the approval progress listed in the US GOV trademark database system.
If there was, we would not have registered the domain name...

And for those of you that may feel this is not wrong, but just in bad taste, you are entitled to your opinion...as we entitled to our own. And our opinion is that hostgui is nothing more than a knockoff/copy of CPanel...

Sean R.
BurstNET

Firstly, hi, I haven't posted here for a while, as I lost my password for my old handle. Secondly, Xstrike, read my above post. Personally, that's what it's about for me, more than anything else. Define CyberSquatting anyway; is that the act of sitting on a domain, hoarding it to try and sell it for the name or to the company that would otherwise have it, or is it to get traffic from a name that has nothing to do with your site to make money from someone else's name, or is it the issue of basically stealing a competing company's name to use to do one of the above things? I've heard all of them being the definition, and I don't think it's their intention to just draw traffic, other than for the purpose of trying to desperately grab the competitors would-be traffic, to sell them the same service. No matter how you look at it, most of these are illegal, and are most definitely unethical and wrong and I don't want to come back to this site and see this, I'd rather take another year off from here, or indefinitely. Also, no matter how you look at it, this must be Burst's way of admitting they believe HostGUI will be a huge product, to actually register a domain name in that products name, just to get people to their site. Burst must have a lot of faith in their competitors product. So much for NocSoft, eh, Burst? *LOL*What ever happened to Seans claims that he "doesn't sink down to other people's levels" and doesn't do this kind of thing? I think Seans threatened so many bogus law suits to people posting stuff on web boards over the last few years to try and intimidate them, that he is dense to the fact that not everyone's a joker and he might be getting in over his head, even if his arrogance dictates that frame of mind. Oh well, but if this is what this forun/site welcomes in it's users, I would prefer to just stay away again. Not to put any relevance into WHT or blame, but it just shouldn't be allowed, the rest of this rhetoric can be debated another time or whatever.

Originally posted by BurstNET
You people have obviously not done your research:

BurstNET IS a registered trademark...
hostgui is NOT.

This is not a violation of trademark laws, when no trademark exists for "hostgui"

There isn't even one in the approval progress listed in the US GOV trademark database system.
If there was, we would not have registered the domain name...

And for those of you that may feel this is not wrong, but just in bad taste, you are entitled to your opinion...as we entitled to our own. And our opinion is that hostgui is nothing more than a knockoff/copy of CPanel...

Sean R.
BurstNET

Predictable. Sean, you can make the same assumption about copyrights too, but if it exists and is created and there for you to see it's another company's product, you're information is off. Of course, for someone that ALWAYS claims to know the laws and business so well, your motive and actions sure dictate otherwise. Finally, for someone that claims it's just a knock-off (somewhat like Cpanel must be a knock-off of Alabanza and Plesk, huh? or is only Cpanel allowed to be a control panel software in your ever-so-knowledgeable mind?), that you sure went out of your way, ruined your last hopes of any decent reputation and made a lot of poor choices, all to get this domain, because you obviously believe it'll get you more traffic from the name alone. And you expect people to buy that BS? Well, welcome back, Sean! *LOL* Well, I need not say more about the obvious, you are doing so well at this, I don't need to continue.

All the laws apart, I am of the opinion that law should be interpreted in the spirit of the action and based on the motive of the actor. If it were incidental or totally innocent then even if it were illegal, it would be acceptable...

However, if Burst.Net registered hostgui.net knowing fully well that JaguarPC is developing HostGUI CP and given the fact that Burst has its own control panel then it is blatantly unethical and would be guilty beyond all reasonable doubt in my opinion...

I think modern corporate business should move away from "what can our lawyers get away with" [Microsoft included] and move towards "is this a fair competition".... It's not doing the convenient thing but doing the correct thing

WHT being a free and fair forum with emphasis on a high degree of ethics, I think I will vote for banning Burst

Cheers
Balaji

Oh.....

I was about to post something along the line of 'Hold your horses, there's a lot of accusations in the air and we aren't even sure that Burstnet as a whole actually registered this domain; it may the wrongdoing of one employee and that's all...'

But well, just when I was ready to hit the 'post' button I see Sean's message...
I don't understand: I've always thought that Burstnet was just an honest company with their own problems when it comes to customers service.
You know: too much work for these guys, but still people of good will. Hence, they've always had all my sympathy.

That's why, Sean, I'm quite shocked to read this sort of childish post, you know this odd little 'victory dance'...of course anyone can see that what you're doing is just wrong. When people complain about your service, there's always plenty of reasons why things may go wrong *but* you're trying your best...yada yada...but this?

Of course, you all have to consider than even if -and it's unlikely- Burst didn't sell one more server to anyone on WHT, it still would be a minor loss considering how many potential clients have and will never hear from WHT.

:confused:

<< Of course, you all have to consider than even if -and it's unlikely- Burst didn't sell one more server to anyone on WHT, it still would be a minor loss considering how many potential clients have and will never hear from WHT.>>

Exactly....WHT brings in less than 1% of our business. When you are just getting started, it is a good place to pick up your first cients, but once you get to a certain size, WHT becomes more of an annoyance than anything else.

I spend time on this board, when I have the time, as more of a break from work...just cause I enjoy reading about the companies that are going thru growth process that we successfully navigated thru.

To be honest, we would probably give JaguarPC the hostgui.net domain name if they asked nicely. We registered it because we knew it would cause alot of fuss on WHT...and that is always fun. We really don't care at this point what a handful of people on WHT say about it. JaguarPC rubbed us the wrong way in the past, in regards to comments made about BurstNET, CPanel & NOCSoft...and we found it amusing that they didn't have enough sense/competance to register the .net version of their domain. This has absolutely nothing to do with us being jealous of their product. The thing does not even exist yet, and who knows if it will ever exist. Regardless, there is plenty of room in the market for both products, and CPanel makes up for less than 5% of our revenue (and 50% of our support tickets)...and we couldn't care less if we lost 50% of our licensing clients. As far as being "scared" of the hostgui product...we really couldn't care less...it is a minor issue to us, and more amusing than it is anything else. On a business sense, not sure how many people are actually going to try hostgui though, atleast until it is a tried and true product. I know I would not risk hosting on a platform with no history behind it. A few months after release...sure...it may be one heck of a product. But the fact still stands that it is being developed as a replacement for CPanel...a copy/clone of CPanel...for people that do not want to or cannot afford to pay for the original genuine control product itself.


Sean R.
BurstNET

Originally posted by BurstNET
<< Of course, you all have to consider than even if -and it's unlikely- Burst didn't sell one more server to anyone on WHT, it still would be a minor loss considering how many potential clients have and will never hear from WHT.>>

Exactly....WHT brings in less than 1% of our business. When you are just getting started, it is a good place to pick up your first cients, but once you get to a certain size, WHT becomes more of an annoyance than anything else.

I spend time on this board, when I have the time, as more of a break from work...just cause I enjoy reading about the companies that are going thru growth process that we successfully navigated thru.

To be honest, we would probably give JaguarPC the hostgui.net domain name if they asked nicely. We registered it because we knew it would cause alot of fuss on WHT...and that is always fun. We really don't care at this point what a handful of people on WHT say about it. JaguarPC rubbed us the wrong way in the past, in regards to comments made about BurstNET, CPanel & NOCSoft...and we found it amusing that they didn't have enough sense/competance to register the .net version of their domain. This has absolutely nothing to do with us being jealous of their product. The thing does not even exist yet, and who knows if it will ever exist. Regardless, there is plenty of room in the market for both products, and CPanel makes up for less than 5% of our revenue (and 50% of our support tickets)...and we couldn't care less if we lost 50% of our licensing clients. As far as being "scared" of the hostgui product...we really couldn't care less...it is a minor issue to us, and more amusing than it is anything else. On a business sense, not sure how many people are actually going to try hostgui though, atleast until it is a tried and true product. I know I would not risk hosting on a platform with no history behind it. A few months after release...sure...it may be one heck of a product. But the fact still stands that it is being developed as a replacement for CPanel...a copy/clone of CPanel...for people that do not want to or cannot afford to pay for the original genuine control product itself.


Sean R.
BurstNET

So you find it amusing to cause a lot of fuss, and give grief to another host? How professional! Maybe instead of wasting your time trying to amuse yourselves in this manner, you could do a better job by building a good reputation.

And then you state quite clearly that you couldn't care less about your Cpanel customers....

As a happy Cpanel customer, I am deeply saddened by your attitude / actions regarding this...

"To be honest, we would probably give JaguarPC the hostgui.net domain name if they asked nicely. We registered it because we knew it would cause alot of fuss on WHT...and that is always fun."

What an EDIT! What a lie! This just backfired, and it should have! So just drop it, delete it, or better yet, just give it to Jag, or at least tell Jag to pay you what you did to register it and move on. Why should Jag be all polite asking you to please give them the domain and stop screwing them? The true words if admitiance, that you think it's fun to piss people off. You're not well liked, and I doubt this made any impact on that opinion one way or another, but you can bet it didn't help. As I said before, I'm done with WHT, as long as people like you are allowed to participate and outright (admit) just cause trouble and act like a jerk. You must be proud, and your arrogance is ludicrous, especially if you expect that you truly control this situation. You set off the chain of events, you can resolve it, and better for your own sake before your "we only get 1% of clients from WHT" BS is exposed to be fraud when you go under -- yes, I know the truth, and that's more like 70% of your clients come from here. Good show , Sean. Have at it, I'm out...

<< And then you state quite clearly that you couldn't care less about your Cpanel customers.... >>

That is not what I said nor meant.
We don't care about the revenue CPanel licensing brings BurstNET. Of course we care about the clients themselves....


Sean R.
BurstNET

Originally posted by BurstNET

I know I would not risk hosting on a platform with no history behind it.

Sean R.
BurstNET [/B]


I am sure people thought the same about Cpanel

..

On the copy front, i think i would ask how many variations of a hosting control panel can you have

It is ultimately has to perform a similar task. I dont know what you expect them to do to make it different.

..

From your statement, you said that you did it for fun to annoy other WHT forum people and only 1% of your customers come via this channel so you don't really care what people think, however I am sure a lot more visit here first to find out about your company before they approach you directly

Thanks

<< Should Burst be banned, suspended or left the same >>

I was not aware that "JBIZ718" is now a moderator at WHT! Congradulations "JBIZ718"...



Regardless...you don't have to worry about my posts much on here anymore, as I am not going to be posting on WHT for BurstNET much anyways anymore...we have a new Customer Service Manager that started this week, and he will be taking over the "BurstNET" WHT account.

Sean R.
BurstNET

<< annoy other WHT forum people >>

I did not say "annoy"...why would I want to annoy anyone?

I said/meant to cause discussion/talk around WHT about this.


Sean R.
BurstNET

Point taken.


You said < cause fuss>

And

We really don't care at this point what a handful of people on WHT say about it

..

So I would say a "dont care fuss" would try to invoke annoyance
therefore annoy would sum it up

Thanks

Originally posted by BurstNET
Exactly....WHT brings in less than 1% of our business. When you are just getting started, it is a good place to pick up your first cients, but once you get to a certain size, WHT becomes more of an annoyance than anything else.

Sorry you feel that way about WHT.


I spend time on this board, when I have the time, as more of a break from work...just cause I enjoy reading about the companies that are going thru growth process that we successfully navigated thru.

To be honest, we would probably give JaguarPC the hostgui.net domain name if they asked nicely.

We registered it because we knew it would cause alot of fuss on WHT...and that is always fun. We really don't care at this point what a handful of people on WHT say about it. JaguarPC rubbed us the wrong way in the past, in regards to comments made about BurstNET, CPanel & NOCSoft...and we found it amusing that they didn't have enough sense/competance to register the .net version of their domain. This has absolutely nothing to do with us being jealous of their product. The thing does not even exist yet, and who knows if it will ever exist.

Please point out one post, just one, where I ever made a derogatory remark about BurstNET.


Regardless, there is plenty of room in the market for both products, and CPanel makes up for less than 5% of our revenue (and 50% of our support tickets)...and we couldn't care less if we lost 50% of our licensing clients.
As far as being "scared" of the hostgui product...we really couldn't care less...it is a minor issue to us, and more amusing than it is anything else. On a business sense, not sure how many people are actually going to try hostgui though, atleast until it is a tried and true product. I know I would not risk hosting on a platform with no history behind it. A few months after release...sure...it may be one heck of a product. But the fact still stands that it is being developed as a replacement for CPanel...a copy/clone of CPanel...for people that do not want to or cannot afford to pay for the original genuine control product itself.


Sean R.
BurstNET

Its nowhere near a "clone" of cpanel, not one peice of code or underlying structure is the same, but Im not getting into that.

Its just sad to see this type of behavior.

Regards,
Greg

Originally posted by BurstNET
<< Of course, you all have to consider than even if -and it's unlikely- Burst didn't sell one more server to anyone on WHT, it still would be a minor loss considering how many potential clients have and will never hear from WHT.>>

Exactly....WHT brings in less than 1% of our business. When you are just getting started, it is a good place to pick up your first cients, but once you get to a certain size, WHT becomes more of an annoyance than anything else.

I spend time on this board, when I have the time, as more of a break from work...just cause I enjoy reading about the companies that are going thru growth process that we successfully navigated thru.

To be honest, we would probably give JaguarPC the hostgui.net domain name if they asked nicely. We registered it because we knew it would cause alot of fuss on WHT...and that is always fun. We really don't care at this point what a handful of people on WHT say about it. JaguarPC rubbed us the wrong way in the past, in regards to comments made about BurstNET, CPanel & NOCSoft...and we found it amusing that they didn't have enough sense/competance to register the .net version of their domain. This has absolutely nothing to do with us being jealous of their product. The thing does not even exist yet, and who knows if it will ever exist. Regardless, there is plenty of room in the market for both products, and CPanel makes up for less than 5% of our revenue (and 50% of our support tickets)...and we couldn't care less if we lost 50% of our licensing clients. As far as being "scared" of the hostgui product...we really couldn't care less...it is a minor issue to us, and more amusing than it is anything else. On a business sense, not sure how many people are actually going to try hostgui though, atleast until it is a tried and true product. I know I would not risk hosting on a platform with no history behind it. A few months after release...sure...it may be one heck of a product. But the fact still stands that it is being developed as a replacement for CPanel...a copy/clone of CPanel...for people that do not want to or cannot afford to pay for the original genuine control product itself.


Sean R.
BurstNET

While it's true that we decided we HAD to develop a control panel for the sake that of saving problems we were having, you shouldn't make the mistake of assuming (or claiming) it's a clone or to replace Cpanel. It was a replacement for us, sure. People wanted to be able to use it on their servers too, and we eventually decided to, since we understand how much problems people might have. This was not an act to try and steal away your clients or to insult anyone. However, why lie and say we developed a control panel for any other reason? It's not to insult it, but I'm not going to act like there were no problems or only minor issues involved -- or say "Why is ours better than what we were using? Well, it's not, we just wanted to take a lot of effort for no reason." If it was what we needed or expected, we'd not have had any desire to spend a lot of money and time just to act like you might? We want a good, solid and secure, stable software, and it couldn't offer that. I don't go around posting it either and I avoid posting to questions of people asking, just for that reason. Surely it's not doing any good to anyone to try and talk down about another product, just to try and sell yours. We didn't even want or intend to sell it. The posts I made, were about problems we had, and that was before I was ever involved in HostGUI!

I've posted about the issues and attitudes of the company and developer, when I was attacked for simply saying just that, but I'm not going to lie or hide the facts, when people ask -- but I do avoid it when possible. I have come to avoid responding, because people assume I'm just attacking you, the product or it's developer -- and I have definitely not been involved in ANY post about it since before I was involved in HostGUI -- so your assumptions are incorrect and I'd have had nothing to gain from such a thing. I believe, personally, that this supports why that theory isn't correct, by your actions here and now. Nonetheless, back to your comment, HostGUI is nothing like Cpanel. We did this to have a product that offers what we want and need and for it to function like it should. It's hardly a "clone", when it's got different features and is built completely different. Some people don't mind and some even like Cpanel, and that's fine -- why would we want people to not like something? HostGUI wasn't created to try and get them to drop Cpanel, it's for the sake of having a product people need that's CURRENTLY NOT AVAILABLE. My personal experience and opinion, is that although anything can be different than you expect (unless you're actually developing it and know), is that a product with no history, is likely more hopeful than a product with years of poor history.

I'm not sure how I can politely say that we are not and were not happy with that product, and for good reason and I'm not sure what you expect to avoid you acting so atrociously. I owe you nor my former comments about that product any apology and we lost a lot of clients and money due to it's problems, and because we develop something of a higher standard (which time will tell), you attack us and take everything personally? How can that possibly be avoided? You can take that however you want though. To try and act like it is a great or decent product, and try and sound like we're at all sane to be spending so much time and money to develop something properly, would be foolish, and untrue. I don't advertise that at all, but I don't act like it's not it either. If you take insult to that fact, fine. I am positive I have a justifiable and logical reason to not like how you operate or act, nor how this product is supported or how it fails to function (You are free (and probably will) claim that it's for another reason) However, this isn't a flame about it, this is simply a response to say; "What did you expect?" when people have problems with a product and receive this sort of attitude in response, to where it's so bad, they are forced to develop a product. Why develop a simple or average product just to replace a failed one? That indeed would be the clone -- unless you look at it as a non production quality prototype. Nevertheless, this is hardly a clone or a copy, and as another user pointed out, there was other's before Cpanel and Cpanel looked very similar to them, so stop trying to act like you are the source for everything. I'm sure GM doesn't like Honda, it's business, deal with it and save the petty games for some other medium and another time and with someone else. I don't by your excuse, or do you think vandalizing the neighbors house for having a higher paying job is justified too? I'm not going to allow you to drag me into some petty argument, so I'll end this, but your points are irrelevant and I only can hope that you see this for what it is and act reasonable and amicable about it. I post this on my own accord, you'll need to speak with Greg about this issue if you intend to. There's no reason to always be so controversial or mean about things, just be honest, (and bold, if you so need to be) and decent... you will go farther if you do. In case you missed the point, there's a difference between responding to points out of experience, logic and reason and maybe the other guy doesn't like the facts (the truth hurts sometimes), and to purposefully get involved in other people's business for your own "amusement" as you call it and cause problems. Really, grow up. That's all I will say about this.

Greg,

I never said "you" NOR did I say "derogatory".
Check older posts from Tim Greer, a JaguarPC employee, and you'll see what I am talking about.


Sean R.
BurstNET

Originally posted by BurstNET
Greg,

I never said "you" NOR did I say "derogatory".
Check posts rom Tim Greer, a JaguarPC employee, and you'll see what I am talking about.


Sean R.
BurstNET

If you expect to insult people, or to try and discredit them because they honestly post real issues about a products shortcomings, than you need thicker skin. If you assume that you can attack someone and not have them respond to your post, then I wonder what world you live in? You will see nothing in my posts that were of any unreasonable or unfair nature. I suggest you check your own posts, Sean Rosler, before you make judgment calls. I never stated one thing negative about you, unless it was in direct response to a wrongful act towards myself by you. As for Cpanel and it's faults, if you take that personally, you need to review your outlook. This is ridiculous to try and turn this into an issue about what I did or said. In fact, I have not been involved in any discussion about yourself for over a year (or near) and that would have been in response to the above condition. I'm not going to apologize to you for your actions and my response to them. The difference is, I did not post about you or cause you any problems, nor did I make any effort to. If you post and attack me, I am expected to respond, as I am now. It's that simple, you're not going to turn this issue around and try and blame other people for what you did. I can drag up plenty of old posts where you were acting horrible and my response explaining how you had no right to attack me, but that neither proves your claim above, nor does it have any relevance to this issue. Get over it and move on. It's time to stop playing the "Mr. Nice Guy" victim. Enough already, enough!

Tim's a passionate man, and one hell of great admin and programmer, his posts are always bold, truthful, and very informative. I'm sure this issue does not set easy with him since it doesn't with me.

I'm kind of wondering what Nick's thinking about the whole situation right now. I'm not aware of the whole financial setup he and Burst have (and how much personal income he recieves from CPanel itself), but were I in his place and just waking up to check this board not knowing about the .net registration, I'd probably be spitting my coco-pops across the room by now :)

My vote went to 'not caring'. And whether it's squatting, trademark violating, puppy kicking, or whatever, it was just a very very poor idea that wasn't thought out.

Greg Moore

Originally posted by akashik

My vote went to 'not caring'. And whether it's squatting, trademark violating, puppy kicking, or whatever, it was just a very very poor idea that wasn't thought out.

Greg Moore

LOL , I think puppy kicking is the rules here at WHT to get you instantly banned .

Sean
as you may think that is ethical business practice i dont
dont know if you may know me or not or remember
we talked last week about colocating 4 servers

well guess what bud.

not now i want nothing do with your company what if my company take off

you going to steal .nets and other domain because we do good or have product

you lost one customer and guaranteed more follow

The policy of the board has been consistently that any action such as banning is based on what takes place here in the forum, not off-forum activity. Therefore, Burst.net should not be banned as a result of this action. As much as I consider their action to be wrong, I don't think the rules here should be altered just for this situation. The integrity and independence of the board should be preserved. Burst.net has done enough damage to themselves without the need for any further help.

The remaining threads on this topic have been closed and focus should remain on this thread for your opinions.

Members of WHT can rest assured that we will in no way act upon the result of this poll and the result will purely show the opinion of members of the board.

Everyone is entitled to purchase the domain names of their choice if it is available, and not trademarked. maybe what BurstNET done was immoral.

BurstNET have offered to sell them the domain at a reasonable price, maybe it would be good for you two to contact each other directly and settle your differences.

I really don't see how this is any of our business at all. This matter should be between BurstNET™ and JaquarPC and really what Sean has done has nothing to do with the service they provide at all. And though BurstNET™ is a provider of CPanel, I don't see why CPanel has been brought up in this thread as it is not a BurstNET™ product but indeed a product of DarkOrb as far as I know.

Thats just my Opinion.. You are all entitled to your own of course, so please don't flame me.

Business is business. If JaguarPC wants their domain back... they need to get a TM!

Im all for burstnet for jumping on an opportunity and doing absolutely nothing wrong! Being the most morally politely is not possible in this dog-eat-dog industry.

For all those who think burstnet should do 'the right thing' ... i would say that bringing burstnet problems into WHT is not the right thing. If you have a problem, you sort it out with burstnet, you dont come complaining about it on WHT and give them a bad name. I have seen numerous posts dissing burstnet because someone had a slight problem.

Im all in support of BurstNET!

Magic,
<quote>
you dont come complaining about it on WHT and give them a bad name. I have seen numerous posts dissing burstnet because someone had a slight problem.
</quote>

Actually Burst.net gave themselves a bad name by making this move. No one has to give them a bad name.

You have a website: http://www.cyberaddicts.net/, lets assume http://www.cyberaddicts.com wasn't taken and I put up a site that served the same fuction as yours. Would you be happy? The fact remains that was they did was wrong. Even in a dog eat dog business you don't pull a stunt like that.

They didnt give themselves a bad name since they have not done anything wrong.

If JaguarPC was so desparate to get that name ... why didnt they register it? Why do they come and bitch about it on WHT?? They are the ones giving themselves a bad name.

There are numerous TLDs now.

They shouldn't have to get the .com, .net, .org, .cc, .info, .biz and the many more domains to protect their name. Geeze it would break the bank to do so.

What Burst did they clearly did to profit off of Jag's product. Again put yourself in Jag's position. There are some things you don't do even if it isn't illegal to do so. There is a fine line between smart business and rotten business. They crossed that line in my book.

Besides, it isn't a matter of them wanting to use that domain. It is a matter of Burst using their name. As far as my understanding, as with a copyright, a trademark is made upon distinct usage as with the case of HostGUI and the use of HostGUI.com. Therefor HostGUI is a legal trademark and Burst as in effect broken the law.

Michael

Why would you even consider banning someone that gives us such entertainment? :D

Originally posted by Incognito
The policy of the board has been consistently that any action such as banning is based on what takes place here in the forum, not off-forum activity. Therefore, Burst.net should not be banned as a result of this action. Burst.net has done enough damage to themselves without the need for any further help.
This has been, and will most likely continue to be, the policy of the forum. It is hard enough trying to moderate the forum, let alone the internet (which is something we don't want to get involved in).

As for this thread. All I can say is that I'm deeply disappointed in Burst and in Sean's actions and comments.

If jag took burst to a US Court of law even without the TM and stated there business plans and could proove sufficient evidence that Burst was cybersquatting hostgui.net, the courts would force Burst to give it up.

Cybersquatting is illegal in the US.

Also Sean - TM I have backed you guys up in many situations on here, but no more. You are a scum bag, and your company is representation of that and your scumbag views.

Joe

It looks like in the end this totally back-fired on Burst. They just gave JaguarPC and HostGUI a ton of free PR. I'd really like to commend Jag for staying focused and not getting into the heat of all of this. Professionalism is really shining on you guys right now, and BurstNET looks rather foolish.

Oh, and Magic, Jag didn't bring this to WHT, one of his supporters did.

Scott

Originally posted by BurstNET
You people have obviously not done your research:

BurstNET IS a registered trademark...
hostgui is NOT.

This is not a violation of trademark laws, when no trademark exists for "hostgui"

There isn't even one in the approval progress listed in the US GOV trademark database system.
If there was, we would not have registered the domain name...



I hope you didn't pay a lawyer to give you that advice because if you did, they must have gone to vocational law school.

That statement is completely false. You do not even need to attempt to register a trademark to make it legal. Please consult a lawyer or do some research before making statements based on laws you don't understand.

just a question.

Cybersquatting is illegal in the US, but (I am guessing on this) not in many other countries (say for example Bolivia - again a guess).

How does it work out then if someone from a country where cybersquatting is 'OK' buys a domain that in the US would constitute 'squatting'?

Just wondering

Eric

Originally posted by mynetjob
just a question.

Cybersquatting is illegal in the US, but (I am guessing on this) not in many other countries (say for example Bolivia - again a guess).

How does it work out then if someone from a country where cybersquatting is 'OK' buys a domain that in the US would constitute 'squatting'?

Just wondering

Eric

It really doesn't matter, because the US company can file suit in the US. When the out of country company doesn't show up, the US company would win, and ICANN will follow the US court rulings and turn over the domain.

But that is for trademark issues. ICANN will turn over a domain guilty of cybersquating from any country without a court judgement.

As usual this this thread just goes to show the type of individuals that frequent WHT. People just seem to want to attack other people no matter what chance they get...especially competitors. It really digusts me the way people jump on other members here any chance they get.

The fact exists that JaguarPC screwed up and made a major mistake not registering that domain name. We happened across it and did what anyone else would do, we registered it. It was not a intent to be malicious, infringe on any product/trademark rights, nor cybersquat and sell them the domain at a huge price. We simply found it amusing that they would made such a basic mistake, and called them on it. We have no intention of confusing our product(s) with the hostgui product, and using the domain name to capture some of their traffic. We DID OFFER to give them the domain name (not sell it) if they asked us nicely...they HAVE NOT so far.

But go ahead and say all the nasty things you want about BurstNET...the fact still remains we supply one of the top services in the hosting industry, are growing extremely fast, and will be around for a very long time. Calling us names and cursing us out is only making you look bad and unprofessional, not us. As far as we are concerned, we did nothing wrong, and the only thing we may be guilty of is a gutsy business move.


Sean R.
BurstNET

But he is correct about one thing...this does show "the type of individuals that frequent WHT", Sean included.

Had Sean simply said, we are contacting Jag and trying to work this out offline, for me at least, that would have been the end of the story.

However, the following statement is not professional.

"We registered it because we knew it would cause alot of fuss on WHT...and that is always fun. We really don't care at this point what a handful of people on WHT say about it. JaguarPC rubbed us the wrong way in the past, in regards to comments made about BurstNET, CPanel & NOCSoft...and we found it amusing that they didn't have enough sense/competance to register the .net version of their domain. "

We are all subject to criticism here, but as much as we want to do otherwise, if we want to keep a professional reputation, we must conduct ourselves accordingly.

Sean says he likes to cause a fuss here....well, he is certainly good at it. I, on the other hand, make every effort to get along with all the others using this forum.

<< Had Sean simply said, we are contacting Jag and trying to work this out offline, for me at least, that would have been the end of the story. >>

We are working this out with JaguarPC...
They requested nicely that we transfer the domain name to them.

Sean R.
BurstNET

Originally posted by BurstNET
We have no intention of confusing our product(s) with the hostgui product, and using the domain name to capture some of their traffic.

Err, this would've sounded a whole lot more sincere if hostgui.net wasn't pointing to the BurstNET site.

While I can't say Sean R. projects himself very well here... damn, he makes for some entertaining threads. Way to go!

Sean,
Quote from Burst.net
We happened across it and did what anyone else would do, we registered it. It was not a intent to be malicious, infringe on any product/trademark rights, nor cybersquat and sell them the domain at a huge price. We simply found it amusing that they would made such a basic mistake, and called them on it. We have no intention of confusing our product(s) with the hostgui product, and using the domain name to capture some of their traffic. We DID OFFER to give them the domain name (not sell it) if they asked us nicely...they HAVE NOT so far.


Frankly, Sean, this has nothing to do with bashing you. This has something to do with you wronging someone and we are all waiting for you to give them that domain with them having to ask..

Let me point out a couple of things...

One: If you had no intentions to "We have no intention of confusing our product(s) with the hostgui product, and using the domain name to capture some of their traffic" then why do you have the domain pointing to your home page. If you didn't have the domain pointing anywhere then your argument that you find it amusing might hold up. However, you do have it pointing to your domain. So you say you arn't after confusing it with their customers. What happens when someone sees hostgui and trys going to hostgui.net. Hrmmmmmmm????? Seems like it may be a little confusing for that individual so your argument doesn't stand. Not even a little. You have made it confusing for those that do not know that Jag made, and owns, hostgui...

Two: If I was them I wouldn't kindly ask for that domain either. I would SUE you for damages because what you did is just wrong, and you was in fact wrong early. Though they havn't applied for a trademark by paper one is automatically given to them.

Michael

It was not a intent to be malicious, infringe on any product/trademark rights, nor cybersquat and sell them the domain at a huge price. We simply found it amusing that they would made such a basic mistake, and called them on it. We have no intention of confusing our product(s) with the hostgui product, and using the domain name to capture some of their traffic.

well, if that's true, I would suggest jaguarpc not to do anything.

If burstnet happen to "be malicious, infringe on any product/trademark rights, or cybersquat, or confuse their product(s) with the hostgui product, and using the domain name to capture some of hostgui traffic", then sue them

If not, burstnet simply lost 10 bucks to register the domain, as well as any reputation they had because of this childish act.

If Sean is doing as he said, and transferring the domain to JaguarPC, then I think we should let the case rest there...

Ok, well I am glad to see that it is going to be worked out now...

That is good.

Michael

Ok.

I was just thinking.

Burst said before that if Jag asked he would hand the domain over to him.

Burst then said a few posts ago that Jag asked and they are working it out.

That means that when I check the whois database tomorrow afternoon the domain hostgui.net should be in Jag's name. So I believe it is fair to stop this conversation and give Burst at least until tomorrow afternoon to keep their word.

Michael

Originally posted by BurstNET
As usual this this thread just goes to show the type of individuals that frequent WHT. People just seem to want to attack other people no matter what chance they get...especially competitors. It really digusts me the way people jump on other members here any chance they get.
Surprise! When you act like an *******, people bring the Charmin. I don't think you should expect less, since if another host had registered burst-net, you can pretty much expect the backing of the forum, even if you didn't have enough sense/competance to register it first.

But go ahead and say all the nasty things you want about BurstNET...the fact still remains we supply one of the top services in the hosting industry, are growing extremely fast, and will be around for a very long time.
Again, you expected people to think this was a brilliant idea? A gutsy business move? Well, if you see it that way, I don't. I hope you don't make any more gutsy business moves in the future without thinking about it a bit more.

We didn't ban Championhost for non-forum related theft, and I have no intention of banning you for this. I should hope hosts have enough sense not to **** on eachother in this fashion however.

I agree with you chicken but lately a lot of people ripping on hosts has been taking place.

Somebody hurry and register these:

burstsucks.net
burstsucks.com
seanrosler.com
seanrosler.net
seanrosler.org


HAHA

And yet there are no unanswered reports in my WHT folder. All taken care of. If you see something you find off, report it please. I remove a lot of garbage, but we try to leave post unedited as much as possible, save for ad forum threads and completely off topic flames. If you have any suggestions, we're always open to hearing them.

Edit: Like the post that snuck in between yours and mine? *ahem*

Chicken I did that once back in december and feel quite well retarded for doing it and punishing me more isnt helping.

Originally posted by BurstNET
We DID OFFER to give them the domain name (not sell it) if they asked us nicely...they HAVE NOT so far.


Call me old fashioned, but I don't think they should have to "ask nicely" to get a domain back from you guys that you registered with malicious intent.

[B]Just read Seans posts[/] (all quoted from his posts):

We registered it because we knew it would cause alot of fuss on WHT...and that is always fun. We really don't care at this point what a handful of people on WHT say about it

What? Is the sky blue or green? Either you care what people say here or not.

And our opinion is that hostgui is nothing more than a knockoff/copy of CPanel...

I don't know HostGUI so far, but I know Cpanel and that the product had nearly the same features for a whole year, but since HostGui started Nick is adding new features at the speed of light (but new bugs at nearly the same speed).

...for people that do not want to or cannot afford to pay for the original genuine control product itself.

Simply wrong. The price of Cpanel is right. I don't mind paying $50 to $100 per server per month for a good control panel and so do many hosts. But what makes many people mad is the number of bugs and the way they are treated.

And a last word regarding hostgui.net: be honest, man.

Heres my opinion..

If hostgui.net was pointed to cpanel.net, then that would have been a problem.. Afterall, it's just pointed to burst.net, another hosting provider. Don't even relate burst.net to cpanel. Think of it as if it was pointed to ***** or something. Yes its wrong but Jag simply messed up... Anyway, burst transferred it to jag so we're all happy.

Originally posted by teck
Heres my opinion..

If hostgui.net was pointed to cpanel.net, then that would have been a problem.. Afterall, it's just pointed to burst.net, another hosting provider. Don't even relate burst.net to cpanel. Think of it as if it was pointed to ***** or something. Yes its wrong but Jag simply messed up... Anyway, burst transferred it to jag so we're all happy.




But pointing to Burst and CI are differnt things, Nick, who is the Cpanel developer, works for BurstNET, and Burst is a Cpanel distrubtor.....

But what if you didnt know that? It's just like going to www.abc.net - Right now, no big deal over it... ABC doesnt seem to care. But lets say we know that the owners of abc.net is an employee of foxnews.. That would be a problem.. Also, abc.new isnt pointing to foxnews.com, it's just some place holder.

Originally posted by teck
But what if you didnt know that?. . . . . . . Sean knew what he was doing.:rolleyes:
It may be, or had been, wrong. But, he knew full well.

rats you had to close the one i spent ages writing a well researched post in and leave the one i didnt :) sods law i guess. well if anyone wants clarification of the legal postition its in the other thread :(
summary for those that dont want gory details
1= Hostgui IS a trademark albeit a non registered one
2= im 100% certain Burst would have to release the domain
3= Burst MAY be liable to compensate depending on who has the best lawyers basicly.
4= Burst have acted like children and such an unprofessional and uninformed attitude has lost them business and is potentially going to cost them a lot of money.

why when people go into business do they not take the time to learn the law pertaining to their business?
if you want to run a hosting company you need to know business law, consumer law, tax law or at least hire someone to stop you from making such idiotic mistakes. would you trust your business to someone who hasnt a clue about copyright law (and even worse thinks he does) and acts like that?

"CPANEL™ &
WEBHOSTMANAGER™ AUTHORIZED
DATA CENTER AND
DISTRIBUTOR" - with a nice Cpanel image above it.

I wouldn't say there was too much of a difference between that and CPanel.net.

This is a terrible move by any host, and in my books puts you down there with ChampionHost.

Sean... is it Sean Rosler, or Shawn Arcus? I've been mixed up several times by your employees when I mention you, they say Shawn. I always thought Sean Rosler was a former worker of Burst since about a year ago?

<quote>from BURST: "and we couldn't care less if we lost 50% of our licensing clients" </quote>

.I guess that explains why your company takes weeks to answer support tickets for Cpanel clients now. Why don't you just stop selling it if you don't want our business. I never post negative comments here, and I even though I am not fond of your decision to register that domain, I would not have brought it up here either. But frankly Sean, that whole post really made me mad. In afterthought, I simply realize how arrogant and unprofessional you are. And about your little quote saying that only 1% of your clients come from this forum, I REALLY beg to differ. IMHO I never heard or thought of you until this forum and Cpanel made you what you are today.. to me. I am quite sure that you have much more than business from this forum then that!
You are Burst NET in our eyes, and your actions now make your company look just as bad. And frankly I am now going to sit back and laugh as you make yourself look like an A$$ in front of many potential and current clients. You just lost my next server purchase and I am canalling my Cpanel licenses with you too. I don't want to be a BOTHER!

The decent thing to have done would have been to have registered the domain, phoned JagPC and told them you would transfer the domain to them - hell I wouldn't have even wanted the $10 back from them.

So Sean, if HostGUI is a clone of CPanel, that makes CPanel a clone of the Alabanza system them. As for saying CPanel is a wuality product, how can you say that if it generates 50% of your support requests? Let's face it, since HostGUI came on the scene, some effort has been put into CPanel again, but it's all wasted by the lack of testing and understanding of users needs. I for one will be wanting to test HostGUI to offer to our smaller dedicated clients (Who can't justify HSphere) instead of CPanel.

As has been pointed out, it's unethical, you know it is, you also deep down know that a trademark does not have to be registered to be enforced - and lets face it, there are sufficient enough people frequenting WHT that have known about HostGUI for quite some time now to know it as a brand.

Well at this point, I think I'm just going to close the thread. The reason is self serving, as if Sean posts agin I might just freak out. Some of the comments were just whacked and I think it would be better if the thread dies. If the domain doesn't get transferred, then we'll all hear about it I'm sure.

For now, let's let it rest.

Added:
I know people hate it when threads are closed for no reason, it is just that this could go on for another 5 pages and I don't think anything else can really be said.