|Auction for Domain with Live Site|
Is this unusual?
I just watched a G-daddy auction over the last few days that I really don't understand.
The domain in question expired on 3/20/2010 and the auction for it ended yesterday, 3/24/2010.
The domain did not have the usual G-daddy holding page up. It had (and still has) a live site on it. I think it's a blogspot site redirected to a stand-alone domain.
Is it unusual for a domain being auctioned to have live site on it like that?
I've never read/heard of GD auctioning "sites".
I'd hesitate to "buy the site at auction" (versus the domain name) absent clear indicatio/proof that the site's content was also being included in the auction AND I'd ask for (require) a separate signed license/sale agreement for the sale/transfer of the site's content . . and I'd probably Copyscape the site before agreeing to anything at all . . .
For the reasons/concerns I just stated I somewhat doubt that GD wants/intends to get into the business of auctioning sites - at least sites connected with expiring domains.
if you go into advanced search on the auction page, you can see a selection box for "web site"
Sedo has auctioned domains with sites for a long time now, I thought it was pretty much standard practice, though not with expiring domains.
Ah, I didn't know they did that with expired domains either.
This domain expired last month and even today, 24-hours after the auction closed, the same site is still being hosted on it.
jk, I'm going to assume you already know this, but for those less sophisticated, absent/without specific written/signed authorization, an auction service has absolutely "0" authority to sell/resell anything / any part of a website, even if the underlying domain expired. Copyright would attach to the site's verbiage, images, unique site design elements, unique code, etc. Without more all the domain auction house can deliver is control of the domain.
I'd never "buy a site at auction" - no matter who provides the "auction services" (read their disclaimer, it probably confirms what I'm saying) - without specific written and signed agreements (disclosure, affidavit of ownership, itemized agreement of sale, indemnification agreement, etc.) from the creator of the site AND FROM the rights holders of any constituent elements.
No matter what the size/scale of the site, IF someone has filed for copyright for any constituent element(s), you may be buying yourself a statutory $100K headache.
GD or Sedo may provide "auction services" but that is not the same as "selling the rights" and "delivering good ~title". What Sedo or GD "~delivers" is or should be rather tightly defined in their TOS. If you read the TOS regarding developed site sales (I haven't) I'm pretty sure you will not rest easy . . absent other signed writings.
Forgive the alarmist tone but I would urge anyone looking at picking up "a site from an expired domain" to . . . not do it. :-/