Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WCVB Boston)   Cops in rich Boston 'burb discover the IT guy who's been running their department web site for free for the last 20 years apparently no longer works for the town. Whoopsie   (wcvb.com) divider line
    More: Amusing, Constable, Criminal Investigation Department, city of Newton, Boston, Mayor Fuller, Boston Herald, Police, Boston Globe  
•       •       •

7846 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Aug 2022 at 4:25 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



79 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-08-13 3:29:43 AM  
1. Just once.

2. Last I remember, Newton is a city unto itself -- not just a suburb. It is immediately to the west of Boston (specifically, the westernmost Brighton neighborhood of Boston) and Brookline (which is also a separate town and is often mistakenly thought as part of Boston)..

3. Yes, it is very, very wealthy. Brookline too. But Brighton is one step above Allston (the student ghetto).

/ username checks out
 
2022-08-13 5:24:20 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-13 5:25:48 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-13 6:41:11 AM  

bostonguy: 2. Last I remember, Newton is a city unto itself -- not just a suburb. It is immediately to the west of Boston (specifically, the westernmost Brighton neighborhood of Boston) and Brookline (which is also a separate town and is often mistakenly thought as part of Boston)..


Newton, aside from being its own city due to predating Boston owning Allston, Brighton, Charlestown, Eastie and all the southern neighborhoods, also contains at least half of the land Boston College sits on too. The city limits cut between Conte Forum and Higgins Hall (on some maps Higgins & O'Neill Library get clipped by the line) then echo Campanella Way before clipping the front corner of the church and heading towards Comm Ave. (Most of the "Boston" part of BC is built on reclaimed land - the Chestnut Hill Reservoir used to extend into that space, hence the line.)

\and yes, for those who didn't know, Newton is named because it was the "New Towne" west of Boston
 
2022-08-13 6:44:55 AM  

FriarReb98: \and yes, for those who didn't know, Newton is named because it was the "New Towne" west of Boston


And I don't know if it's true or an urban legend, but supposedly Fig Newtons were invented there.
 
2022-08-13 6:50:21 AM  

bostonguy: FriarReb98: \and yes, for those who didn't know, Newton is named because it was the "New Towne" west of Boston

And I don't know if it's true or an urban legend, but supposedly Fig Newtons were invented there.


F=ma where F stands for Fig, amirite
 
2022-08-13 7:04:40 AM  
What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished
 
2022-08-13 7:35:54 AM  

Northern: Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished


I'll make a Wordpress site for them for half the cost.
 
2022-08-13 8:06:40 AM  
Not familiar with the site, or the cost of running it.
Was anything of value lost?
 
2022-08-13 8:07:47 AM  

Northern: What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished


500k redesign?  Lol Wayback Machine.

200k a year?  Rofl.  Maybe 10k.
 
2022-08-13 8:09:55 AM  
LOL Newton police are scumbags, they deserve this.
 
2022-08-13 8:19:57 AM  

Intrepid00: Northern: Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished

I'll make a Wordpress site for them for half the cost.


GeoCities isn't good enough for you, Mr. FancyPants ?
 
2022-08-13 8:24:39 AM  

bostonguy: FriarReb98: \and yes, for those who didn't know, Newton is named because it was the "New Towne" west of Boston

And I don't know if it's true or an urban legend, but supposedly Fig Newtons were invented there.


Pretty sure it's true, and Toll House cookies were invented in Whitman.
 
2022-08-13 8:34:04 AM  
"The website showed a grey screen with red text that said, "This site is not experiencing technical difficulties.""

Probably could have been worse
 
2022-08-13 9:11:35 AM  
As an IT Contractor, I absolutely have no support for the Admin here

You feel you've been wronged? Address it calmly and professionally, and see if you can work it out. If you can't find a path to amicable resolution, take them to court. If they ask for the code and content, hand it over ASAP regardless of if you've been paid

Under no circumstances do you ever do anything to cause any form of harm, ever.
Because if you do, you open yourself up to litigation and severely muddy the waters when it comes to coming to a favorable resolution

It's sucks, but you just have to grin and bear it. Simply because as the contractor, you need to be the sole injured party if you expect an amicable resolution or a favorable outcome in court, harming the client gives them a counter claim and severely weakens your case

Thanks to his unprofessionalism and petulance, he's now exposed himself to potential lawsuits from the City and sure as shiat put an end to any hope of amicable resolution. And he's now got his name out on the interwebs as being exactly the sort of IT guy to avoid at all costs
 
2022-08-13 9:24:12 AM  

Northern: What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished


Last I saw prices like that I had a pets.com sock puppet on my desk.
 
2022-08-13 9:28:15 AM  

BunchaRubes: Northern: What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished

500k redesign?  Lol Wayback Machine.

200k a year?  Rofl.  Maybe 10k.


Small rich towns have no idea what it costs and will be billed accordingly
 
2022-08-13 9:38:38 AM  
Yeah... my post that was made in seriousness and based on 20+ years experience as an independent context it and gives solid advice for any contractor regardless of profession gets funnied and treated like a joke while some offhand captain obvious remark about how it "could've been worse" gets a bevy of "smart" upvotes

Welcome to fark I guess. Let that be my lesson to post anything of actual value.
pearls before dipshiats
 
2022-08-13 9:41:15 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: As an IT Contractor, I absolutely have no support for the Admin here

You feel you've been wronged? Address it calmly and professionally, and see if you can work it out. If you can't find a path to amicable resolution, take them to court. If they ask for the code and content, hand it over ASAP regardless of if you've been paid

Under no circumstances do you ever do anything to cause any form of harm, ever.
Because if you do, you open yourself up to litigation and severely muddy the waters when it comes to coming to a favorable resolution

It's sucks, but you just have to grin and bear it. Simply because as the contractor, you need to be the sole injured party if you expect an amicable resolution or a favorable outcome in court, harming the client gives them a counter claim and severely weakens your case

Thanks to his unprofessionalism and petulance, he's now exposed himself to potential lawsuits from the City and sure as shiat put an end to any hope of amicable resolution. And he's now got his name out on the interwebs as being exactly the sort of IT guy to avoid at all costs


He's not just the admin, he's the creator and owner therefore according to ICANN he can park whatever he wants on that domain and the local government can't do anything about it as it's not front-running.
 
2022-08-13 9:53:25 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Yeah... my post that was made in seriousness and based on 20+ years experience as an independent context it and gives solid advice for any contractor regardless of profession gets funnied and treated like a joke while some offhand captain obvious remark about how it "could've been worse" gets a bevy of "smart" upvotes

Welcome to fark I guess. Let that be my lesson to post anything of actual value.
pearls before dipshiats


It's not your advice that's at issue, it's just not applicable in this situation.  He wasn't an independent contractor.  He wasn't paid for what he did, there was no contract.
 
2022-08-13 10:02:18 AM  

ThieveryCorp: The Exit Stencilist: As an IT Contractor, I absolutely have no support for the Admin here

You feel you've been wronged? Address it calmly and professionally, and see if you can work it out. If you can't find a path to amicable resolution, take them to court. If they ask for the code and content, hand it over ASAP regardless of if you've been paid

Under no circumstances do you ever do anything to cause any form of harm, ever.
Because if you do, you open yourself up to litigation and severely muddy the waters when it comes to coming to a favorable resolution

It's sucks, but you just have to grin and bear it. Simply because as the contractor, you need to be the sole injured party if you expect an amicable resolution or a favorable outcome in court, harming the client gives them a counter claim and severely weakens your case

Thanks to his unprofessionalism and petulance, he's now exposed himself to potential lawsuits from the City and sure as shiat put an end to any hope of amicable resolution. And he's now got his name out on the interwebs as being exactly the sort of IT guy to avoid at all costs

He's not just the admin, he's the creator and owner therefore according to ICANN he can park whatever he wants on that domain and the local government can't do anything about it as it's not front-running.


Yeah, you don't have a clue about what you're talking about.

Interestingly enough, I just helped a client with a very similar situation just a couple weeks back. They too went through a personal acquaintance who registered their domain name and set their site up back in 2007. Who knows what happened, but apparently he washed his hands of it in 2017 and the name got transferred to another party over lack of payment. I got the ball rolling on reclaiming the name because regardless of what YOU think, ICANN isn't the hands off issuer it was some 20+ years back. After the sleazeball domain squatting BS of the mid-90s, there's rules and governance now and there's sure as shiat ways to claw domains back from parties who acquire those domains regardless of intent

Anyway, my client got their domain back. And this Admin asshole from the article needs to get his ass reamed in court for his behavior

While I don't have the full inside story, I see no circumstance in which any entity would say "we won't pay you anything, shut the site down if you want". I'm absolutely certain he did this with little to no warning and even if he ran the servers the site was hosted upon, has an obligation to provide reasonable means to resolution before doing so, or at least provide timely notice and allow for them to move the site elsewhere

His actions caused demonstrable harm and his demands smack of extortion, so he might even face criminal charges, though I think that might be unlikely - but we've seen many times what can happen with small time municipal orgs when they get Avery and have law enforcement at their disposal, so no bets are off

Anyway, I'm done in this thread - the ignorance expressed and the fact that my wealth of knowledge and experience are  seen as a joke let's me know I'm only wasting my time
 
2022-08-13 10:04:12 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Yeah... my post that was made in seriousness and based on 20+ years experience as an independent context it and gives solid advice for any contractor regardless of profession gets funnied and treated like a joke while some offhand captain obvious remark about how it "could've been worse" gets a bevy of "smart" upvotes

Welcome to fark I guess. Let that be my lesson to post anything of actual value.
pearls before dipshiats


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-13 10:04:25 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Thanks to his unprofessionalism and petulance, he's now exposed himself to potential lawsuits from the City


Fellow IT contractor here: technically anyone can sue for anything, but I don't think the city has a prevailing case in this instance.

There was no contract and no compensation for services. The city's in the wrong here. The only unprofessional part of this is that he initially gave his skills away for free.
 
2022-08-13 10:06:31 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Anyway, I'm done in this thread - the ignorance expressed and the fact that my wealth of knowledge and experience are seen as a joke let's me know I'm only wasting my time


So you're not getting a kick out of these replies?
 
2022-08-13 10:15:44 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: As an IT Contractor, I absolutely have no support for the Admin here

You feel you've been wronged? Address it calmly and professionally, and see if you can work it out. If you can't find a path to amicable resolution, take them to court. If they ask for the code and content, hand it over ASAP regardless of if you've been paid

Under no circumstances do you ever do anything to cause any form of harm, ever.
Because if you do, you open yourself up to litigation and severely muddy the waters when it comes to coming to a favorable resolution

It's sucks, but you just have to grin and bear it. Simply because as the contractor, you need to be the sole injured party if you expect an amicable resolution or a favorable outcome in court, harming the client gives them a counter claim and severely weakens your case

Thanks to his unprofessionalism and petulance, he's now exposed himself to potential lawsuits from the City and sure as shiat put an end to any hope of amicable resolution. And he's now got his name out on the interwebs as being exactly the sort of IT guy to avoid at all costs


We don't really know enough about his situation to say this.  If he gave the city or the mayor enough time to act and they declined to, he is well within his rights to stop providing a service that no one is paying for.  He's only in the wrong if he didn't notify, give time for a reply, or if the city was in the middle of good-faith negotiations.  Presumably the city has its help-lines, 911, and direct lines to police officers, so they can't claim he cut meaningful connection to a service that the city never budgeted for in the first place.
 
2022-08-13 10:19:18 AM  
I know this isn't quite the same, but anyone remember the incident years back with a city official trying to get on the city's web page only to find they hadn't paid the bill?
I believe all it was, was an Apache placeholder. But the genius city manager was accusing Apache of hacking the city's web page.
I know it made the rounds cause I could swear someone linked it here.
 
2022-08-13 10:23:10 AM  
Oh and before some dumbass come in with "burrrt, they didn't own the domain, the domain was registered by the IT wizard and he created the site too - it was all his and he can do what he wants durr hurr"

• the domain was specific to the police department and therefore, rightfully theirs. At any time they (or any other entity with the same LEGAL NAME) could have laid claim to the domain and stripped it from the IT guy's possession

• the fact that the police department had access to it to the point they considered it "theirs" shows there was a relationship between the PD and the admin.

• This relationship would reasonably constitute a CONTRACT. So in this case, providing time and material for free for many years then turning around and demanding "back payment" would be breach of contract and unreasonable and any actions taken to harm the "client" or recipient of the time and materials provided would be actionable in a court of law.

Legally, the IT Guy just farked himself good and hard. And most likely, he will be forced to at a minimum hand over the domain, and website software and content and likely suffer some legal bills, and that's if the city plays real nice, which I suspect they might not

Really what happened here AFAICT is the guy took it upon himself to do create the site, donated the time and material for decades and gave them access to the service. He's now yanking the cord, locking them out and demanding monies. Clearly not realizing that a demonstrated relationship especially one for so long is in itself a contract which will be recognized by a court of law and by radically altering that contract unilaterally and harming the city by shutting the site down in a shake down attempt, he's just opened himself up to liability and possible criminal charges

But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I
 
2022-08-13 10:32:06 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I


Well, you've changed my mind. F*ck this IT guy. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
2022-08-13 10:33:04 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Oh and before some dumbass come in with "burrrt, they didn't own the domain, the domain was registered by the IT wizard and he created the site too - it was all his and he can do what he wants durr hurr"

• the domain was specific to the police department and therefore, rightfully theirs. At any time they (or any other entity with the same LEGAL NAME) could have laid claim to the domain and stripped it from the IT guy's possession

• the fact that the police department had access to it to the point they considered it "theirs" shows there was a relationship between the PD and the admin.

• This relationship would reasonably constitute a CONTRACT. So in this case, providing time and material for free for many years then turning around and demanding "back payment" would be breach of contract and unreasonable and any actions taken to harm the "client" or recipient of the time and materials provided would be actionable in a court of law.

Legally, the IT Guy just farked himself good and hard. And most likely, he will be forced to at a minimum hand over the domain, and website software and content and likely suffer some legal bills, and that's if the city plays real nice, which I suspect they might not

Really what happened here AFAICT is the guy took it upon himself to do create the site, donated the time and material for decades and gave them access to the service. He's now yanking the cord, locking them out and demanding monies. Clearly not realizing that a demonstrated relationship especially one for so long is in itself a contract which will be recognized by a court of law and by radically altering that contract unilaterally and harming the city by shutting the site down in a shake down attempt, he's just opened himself up to liability and possible criminal charges

But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I


I for one appreciate your input and experience on this matter.  I haven't dealt with domain names since I gave up my personal domain 15 years ago, so I find the discussion on who's in the wrong in this case interesting, even though I have nothing to contribute to it.

Word of advice though... it is a little hard to *smart* your posts when the last sentence keeps making me laugh and want to post a "welcome to fark" meme.  I know I'll sometimes *funny* something based on my final feeling, not the content of the whole post.

I suggest separating the posts... have one informative and another complaining about not being taken seriously. Then we can *smart* the informative one and *funny* the other.
 
2022-08-13 10:35:11 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Oh and before some dumbass come in with "burrrt, they didn't own the domain, the domain was registered by the IT wizard and he created the site too - it was all his and he can do what he wants durr hurr"

• the domain was specific to the police department and therefore, rightfully theirs. At any time they (or any other entity with the same LEGAL NAME) could have laid claim to the domain and stripped it from the IT guy's possession

• the fact that the police department had access to it to the point they considered it "theirs" shows there was a relationship between the PD and the admin.

• This relationship would reasonably constitute a CONTRACT. So in this case, providing time and material for free for many years then turning around and demanding "back payment" would be breach of contract and unreasonable and any actions taken to harm the "client" or recipient of the time and materials provided would be actionable in a court of law.

Legally, the IT Guy just farked himself good and hard. And most likely, he will be forced to at a minimum hand over the domain, and website software and content and likely suffer some legal bills, and that's if the city plays real nice, which I suspect they might not

Really what happened here AFAICT is the guy took it upon himself to do create the site, donated the time and material for decades and gave them access to the service. He's now yanking the cord, locking them out and demanding monies. Clearly not realizing that a demonstrated relationship especially one for so long is in itself a contract which will be recognized by a court of law and by radically altering that contract unilaterally and harming the city by shutting the site down in a shake down attempt, he's just opened himself up to liability and possible criminal charges

But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I


The demographic of Fark is 45 year old IT workers so I suspect there are plenty of people who know a lot about it here.

And the guy might be farked or he might not. It will come down to who the court sides with. There's not enough information in the article for anyone to really speculate.  What I do know is that it's really dumb to get random people or friends to register domains in their name and not have access to them because at the end of the day someone will likely need courts and lawyers to work it out.

/ I'll take my legal advice from lawyers
// also try not being a dick
 
2022-08-13 10:36:17 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I


But I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express once...
 
2022-08-13 10:38:03 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Thanks to his unprofessionalism and petulance, he's now exposed himself to potential lawsuits from the City and sure as shiat put an end to any hope of amicable resolution. And he's now got his name out on the interwebs as being exactly the sort of IT guy to avoid at all costs


The Exit Stencilist: Legally, the IT Guy just farked himself good and hard. And most likely, he will be forced to at a minimum hand over the domain, and website software and content and likely suffer some legal bills, and that's if the city plays real nice, which I suspect they might not


Yep. As an IP lawyer, you've nailed it.
First, he worked for the town doing IT, so this was likely within the scope of his employment contract even if no one explicitly asked for it (and as the town's IT director, he'd be the one asking for it, so he really has no claim to say that this was a side project) - Mass has strong automatic IP assignment rules, due to all of the research universities, so the town likely already owns it by law.
Second, even if they don't automatically own it under the above, they could easily seize it under the UDRP since his retention of it now - particularly with just that one page telling Newton residents to tell the mayor to buy it - would constitute cybersquatting, and his demand for outrageous payment would be evidence of bad faith.
Third, even if somehow the town had to pay, he's suddenly asking for $200k for his past 20 years of hosting... Aside from the statute of limitations being 6 years for contracts in Mass., the Laches doctrine would significantly limit his recovery anyway.

/of course, they also know where he lives, and how much do you want to bet the Newton Police set up a speed trap at the end of his driveway?
 
2022-08-13 10:38:19 AM  

Northern: What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished


My guess is that he built the website on paid time for the city and just registered it in his own name instead of the city.  Just go back and see who paid for the hosting of the website all these years.
 
2022-08-13 10:40:06 AM  

cfreak: And the guy might be farked or he might not. It will come down to who the court sides with. There's not enough information in the article for anyone to really speculate...


As a Mass. IP lawyer, this guy is farked.
 
2022-08-13 10:46:04 AM  

Intrepid00: Northern: Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished

I'll make a Wordpress site for them for half the cost.


then you too can be a Fark article as they also refuse to pay you to build and maintain it.
 
2022-08-13 10:46:53 AM  

ComaToast: Intrepid00: Northern: Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished

I'll make a Wordpress site for them for half the cost.

GeoCities isn't good enough for you, Mr. FancyPants ?


they at least deserve Angelfire
 
2022-08-13 10:51:05 AM  
ComaToast:

Angelfire is still around.
 
2022-08-13 10:53:31 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Yeah... my post that was made in seriousness and based on 20+ years experience as an independent context it and gives solid advice for any contractor regardless of profession gets funnied and treated like a joke while some offhand captain obvious remark about how it "could've been worse" gets a bevy of "smart" upvotes

Welcome to fark I guess. Let that be my lesson to post anything of actual value.
pearls before dipshiats


if you haven't noticed the world lately, "worse" would have been selling the domain name to a porn site or an oine scam site.

or forwarding it to somethingawful.com

so yeah, the response for not getting paid could have been worse.
 
2022-08-13 11:04:37 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: ThieveryCorp: The Exit Stencilist: As an IT Contractor, I absolutely have no support for the Admin here

You feel you've been wronged? Address it calmly and professionally, and see if you can work it out. If you can't find a path to amicable resolution, take them to court. If they ask for the code and content, hand it over ASAP regardless of if you've been paid

Under no circumstances do you ever do anything to cause any form of harm, ever.
Because if you do, you open yourself up to litigation and severely muddy the waters when it comes to coming to a favorable resolution

It's sucks, but you just have to grin and bear it. Simply because as the contractor, you need to be the sole injured party if you expect an amicable resolution or a favorable outcome in court, harming the client gives them a counter claim and severely weakens your case

Thanks to his unprofessionalism and petulance, he's now exposed himself to potential lawsuits from the City and sure as shiat put an end to any hope of amicable resolution. And he's now got his name out on the interwebs as being exactly the sort of IT guy to avoid at all costs

He's not just the admin, he's the creator and owner therefore according to ICANN he can park whatever he wants on that domain and the local government can't do anything about it as it's not front-running.

Yeah, you don't have a clue about what you're talking about.

Interestingly enough, I just helped a client with a very similar situation just a couple weeks back. They too went through a personal acquaintance who registered their domain name and set their site up back in 2007. Who knows what happened, but apparently he washed his hands of it in 2017 and the name got transferred to another party over lack of payment. I got the ball rolling on reclaiming the name because regardless of what YOU think, ICANN isn't the hands off issuer it was some 20+ years back. After the sleazeball domain squatting BS of the mid-90s, there's rules and governance now and there's sure as shiat ways to claw domains back from parties who acquire those domains regardless of intent

Anyway, my client got their domain back. And this Admin asshole from the article needs to get his ass reamed in court for his behavior

While I don't have the full inside story, I see no circumstance in which any entity would say "we won't pay you anything, shut the site down if you want". I'm absolutely certain he did this with little to no warning and even if he ran the servers the site was hosted upon, has an obligation to provide reasonable means to resolution before doing so, or at least provide timely notice and allow for them to move the site elsewhere

His actions caused demonstrable harm and his demands smack of extortion, so he might even face criminal charges, though I think that might be unlikely - but we've seen many times what can happen with small time municipal orgs when they get Avery and have law enforcement at their disposal, so no bets are off

Anyway, I'm done in this thread - the ignorance expressed and the fact that my wealth of knowledge and experience are  seen as a joke let's me know I'm only wasting my time

my client got their domain back.


I think this is the disconnect.  The town never owned the domain to begin with. It wou

This guy bought the domain name and created the site on his own time and at his own expense which turned out to be popular.   He offered to sell it to the city, and they declined.  Neither party had contractually committed to anything, therefore there is no reason for any court, civil or criminal, to get involved.

How much work do you do for free and then just give away?  What happens if you decide to stop paying to host a site?
 
2022-08-13 11:11:11 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I


The best one I've seen in recent memory on here was being told by multiple people that "anti-aircraft tanks" was proper nomenclature as demonstrated by use of it in an article on a big boy site. The internet is great, obviously, but it also makes everybody an expert on everything even if they didn't know about the existence of something five minutes prior to speaking authoritatively about it.
 
2022-08-13 11:13:58 AM  

the voice of raisin: This guy bought the domain name and created the site on his own time and at his own expense which turned out to be popular.


The city was literally paying him to be the IT director, which would include creating websites for the town. What makes you think this was "on his own time"?

He offered to sell it to the city, and they declined.

Why should the town have to pay him for something they likely legally already own? Refusing to pay a ransom is not "declining an offer."

Neither party had contractually committed to anything, therefore there is no reason for any court, civil or criminal, to get involved.

Even if all of your premises were true, you'd still be wrong under the UDRP.
 
2022-08-13 11:23:23 AM  
In a statement, Mayor Ruthanne Fuller told WCVB that she and the current police chief are committed to transparency and have launched a full investigation of the matter, as well as a review of police department policies, procedures and controls.

Which will bring in more consultants and cost a million dollars.
 
2022-08-13 11:33:15 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: ThieveryCorp: The Exit Stencilist:

Anyway, I'm done in this thread - the ignorance expressed and the fact that my wealth of knowledge and experience are  seen as a joke let's me know I'm only wasting my time


c.tenor.comView Full Size
 
2022-08-13 11:41:08 AM  

Theaetetus: the voice of raisin: This guy bought the domain name and created the site on his own time and at his own expense which turned out to be popular.

The city was literally paying him to be the IT director, which would include creating websites for the town. What makes you think this was "on his own time"?

He offered to sell it to the city, and they declined.

Why should the town have to pay him for something they likely legally already own? Refusing to pay a ransom is not "declining an offer."

Neither party had contractually committed to anything, therefore there is no reason for any court, civil or criminal, to get involved.

Even if all of your premises were true, you'd still be wrong under the UDRP.

Why should the town have to pay him for something they likely legally already own? Refusing to pay a ransom is not "declining an offer."


Which is where you are wron.  ftfa:

It turns out, the former tech director owned and had sole control over the domain and not the city of Newton.

If running the website was part of his job, they could just fire him and still have access to the code and domain.

He's not "holding it for ransom", he's giving them one last shot at buying him out before he deletes his code from his webserver under his domain.

ftfa, the city literally owns none of it.  I was surprised he didn't just let  the site 404, which is the next step.

afaik, city governments cant "eminent domain" a website or domain.
 
2022-08-13 11:47:24 AM  

Northern: What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished


I suspect he was asked to do it informally but not provided any budget.

The Exit Stencilist: You feel you've been wronged? Address it calmly and professionally, and see if you can work it out. If you can't find a path to amicable resolution, take them to court. If they ask for the code and content, hand it over ASAP regardless of if you've been paid

Under no circumstances do you ever do anything to cause any form of harm, ever.
Because if you do, you open yourself up to litigation and severely muddy the waters when it comes to coming to a favorable resolution


Except this isn't a work for hire.  This is his personal project.

deadsanta: We don't really know enough about his situation to say this. If he gave the city or the mayor enough time to act and they declined to, he is well within his rights to stop providing a service that no one is paying for. He's only in the wrong if he didn't notify, give time for a reply, or if the city was in the middle of good-faith negotiations. Presumably the city has its help-lines, 911, and direct lines to police officers, so they can't claim he cut meaningful connection to a service that the city never budgeted for in the first place.


That's how I see it, also--and I suspect the city didn't have money allocated in the budget cycle so they're having a problem buying it.

Theaetetus: Neither party had contractually committed to anything, therefore there is no reason for any court, civil or criminal, to get involved.

Even if all of your premises were true, you'd still be wrong under the UDRP.


The city certainly can get the domain name, but why would they be entitled to the website material?
 
2022-08-13 11:56:41 AM  

Northern: What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished


Um, wow, web devs and hosting services in your town get paid a lot
 
2022-08-13 11:58:11 AM  

The Exit Stencilist: Oh and before some dumbass come in with "burrrt, they didn't own the domain, the domain was registered by the IT wizard and he created the site too - it was all his and he can do what he wants durr hurr"

• the domain was specific to the police department and therefore, rightfully theirs. At any time they (or any other entity with the same LEGAL NAME) could have laid claim to the domain and stripped it from the IT guy's possession

• the fact that the police department had access to it to the point they considered it "theirs" shows there was a relationship between the PD and the admin.

• This relationship would reasonably constitute a CONTRACT. So in this case, providing time and material for free for many years then turning around and demanding "back payment" would be breach of contract and unreasonable and any actions taken to harm the "client" or recipient of the time and materials provided would be actionable in a court of law.

Legally, the IT Guy just farked himself good and hard. And most likely, he will be forced to at a minimum hand over the domain, and website software and content and likely suffer some legal bills, and that's if the city plays real nice, which I suspect they might not

Really what happened here AFAICT is the guy took it upon himself to do create the site, donated the time and material for decades and gave them access to the service. He's now yanking the cord, locking them out and demanding monies. Clearly not realizing that a demonstrated relationship especially one for so long is in itself a contract which will be recognized by a court of law and by radically altering that contract unilaterally and harming the city by shutting the site down in a shake down attempt, he's just opened himself up to liability and possible criminal charges

But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I


You are correct because he worked for the city, so any work created is city property.

I automated my job at a Telco (it doesn't exist anymore so it was Sprint) that interacted with their mainframe and DMS switches and made a nicely designed, informative, useful frontend for it. I tried to sell it to the company for the price of my annual salary but they said no, gave me a $100 "At-a-Boy!", took it from me, gave it to IBM contractors who neglected it until it died

In response, I quit my job and founded my own ISP and developed and automated businesses and frontends for some clients. F*ck Sprint.

I don't work for free anymore, period, but you have to do it the right way. The rouge IT guy in the article will learn
 
2022-08-13 12:26:26 PM  

AuralArgument: ComaToast:

Angelfire is still around.


Mom?
 
2022-08-13 12:49:09 PM  

Loren: Northern: What likely happened was that the outgoing IT director developed the site including maintenance for years, outside of his job description, at his cost (he owns the web site not the town).  People really like the web site.  So he goes to the mayor and offers to sell it to the town for $115,000 or whatever is in TFA.  The mayor scoffs and tells him to Fark off.
Now Newton can pay $500,000 for the new web design and $200,000 a year to maintain it instead.
/mission accomplished

I suspect he was asked to do it informally but not provided any budget.

The Exit Stencilist: You feel you've been wronged? Address it calmly and professionally, and see if you can work it out. If you can't find a path to amicable resolution, take them to court. If they ask for the code and content, hand it over ASAP regardless of if you've been paid

Under no circumstances do you ever do anything to cause any form of harm, ever.
Because if you do, you open yourself up to litigation and severely muddy the waters when it comes to coming to a favorable resolution

Except this isn't a work for hire.  This is his personal project.

deadsanta: We don't really know enough about his situation to say this. If he gave the city or the mayor enough time to act and they declined to, he is well within his rights to stop providing a service that no one is paying for. He's only in the wrong if he didn't notify, give time for a reply, or if the city was in the middle of good-faith negotiations. Presumably the city has its help-lines, 911, and direct lines to police officers, so they can't claim he cut meaningful connection to a service that the city never budgeted for in the first place.

That's how I see it, also--and I suspect the city didn't have money allocated in the budget cycle so they're having a problem buying it.

Theaetetus: Neither party had contractually committed to anything, therefore there is no reason for any court, civil or criminal, to get involved.

Even if all of your premises were true, you'd still be wrong under the UDRP.

The city certainly can get the domain name, but why would they be entitled to the website material?


I'm curious if they can even get the name.

I think government entities may have a claim to .gov sites but not necessarily the .com


Possibly because it contains "police" but I don't know.


I am not a lawyer.
 
2022-08-13 12:50:48 PM  

Wine Sipping Elitist: The Exit Stencilist: Oh and before some dumbass come in with "burrrt, they didn't own the domain, the domain was registered by the IT wizard and he created the site too - it was all his and he can do what he wants durr hurr"

• the domain was specific to the police department and therefore, rightfully theirs. At any time they (or any other entity with the same LEGAL NAME) could have laid claim to the domain and stripped it from the IT guy's possession

• the fact that the police department had access to it to the point they considered it "theirs" shows there was a relationship between the PD and the admin.

• This relationship would reasonably constitute a CONTRACT. So in this case, providing time and material for free for many years then turning around and demanding "back payment" would be breach of contract and unreasonable and any actions taken to harm the "client" or recipient of the time and materials provided would be actionable in a court of law.

Legally, the IT Guy just farked himself good and hard. And most likely, he will be forced to at a minimum hand over the domain, and website software and content and likely suffer some legal bills, and that's if the city plays real nice, which I suspect they might not

Really what happened here AFAICT is the guy took it upon himself to do create the site, donated the time and material for decades and gave them access to the service. He's now yanking the cord, locking them out and demanding monies. Clearly not realizing that a demonstrated relationship especially one for so long is in itself a contract which will be recognized by a court of law and by radically altering that contract unilaterally and harming the city by shutting the site down in a shake down attempt, he's just opened himself up to liability and possible criminal charges

But go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong. I'm sure randos on fark have waaaay more domain experience in these matters than I

You are correct because he worked for the city, so any work created is city property.

I automated my job at a Telco (it doesn't exist anymore so it was Sprint) that interacted with their mainframe and DMS switches and made a nicely designed, informative, useful frontend for it. I tried to sell it to the company for the price of my annual salary but they said no, gave me a $100 "At-a-Boy!", took it from me, gave it to IBM contractors who neglected it until it died

In response, I quit my job and founded my own ISP and developed and automated businesses and frontends for some clients. F*ck Sprint.

I don't work for free anymore, period, but you have to do it the right way. The rouge IT guy in the article will learn


As for you first statement, I think that's only if your employment agreement states that, or if he did it on city payroll time.


I am not a lawyer.
 
Displayed 50 of 79 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.