BORLAND: Which companies did you register the domains [of]?

"Just for a bit of fun, we got together and we registered lots of names that were the names of well-known companies. And to put a long story short, they got very angry."

CONWAY: The companies that took us to court were British Telecommunications, PLC; Marks and Spencer, PLC; J. Sainsbury's, PLC; Ladbroke Group, PLC; Virgin Enterprises; and Telecom Securicor Cellular Radio Ltd., which trades in the U.K. as CellNet, which operates a mobile phone network.

BORLAND: Did you ever plan to use the domain names you registered?
CONWAY: No, not at all. We never used any of the domain names whatsoever.

BORLAND: Did you ever try to sell the names back to the companies?
CONWAY: We never actually approached any of the companies directly at all in the hope of selling them; we never contacted them at all. But several of the companies contacted us inquiring about our registration of them. We did try to reach agreement with one or two of the companies, and as part of that agreement, prices were named for the sale of the names. But we admit that some of the prices that were quoted were sort of ridiculous amounts, which we never thought the companies would pay. C O N T I N U E D . . . 2 of 2
BORLAND: But a judge did rule against you in the first case.

"The judge had already agreed with us -- that in the cases of all these names, except for one of them -- that there would be lots of different companies that would have a legitimate right to use these names."

CONWAY: That's right. In the outcome of the first case, the judge did order that the names be transferred over to the companies that were suing us. That's something that particularly annoyed us, because the judge had already agreed with us -- that in the cases of all these names, except for one of them -- that there would be lots of different companies that would have a legitimate right to use these names.

For example, in the case of BT, the domain name was bt.org. The .org domain names originally, and still are, really, perceived for use by nonprofitmaking organizations, individuals, and charities. Now, British Telecommunications certainly doesn't fit into either of those categories, but there are many individuals with the initials BT that may wish to have the domain name bt.org. And further, we were actually approached -- we didn't approach, but we were approached -- by a church in America called the Brooklyn Tabernacle. To be honest, I'd never heard of them beforehand, but I understand it is a fairly large and world-famous church, and we were approached by them to ask if we could give them the domain name bt.org for their church. They didn't know anything about the court case; they didn't know we were being sued by these companies.

BORLAND: Was there a financial judgment in the case?

"We are appealing the case. ... In the meantime, the companies are still entitled to have the names transferred to them."

CONWAY: There was a financial judgment in the case, yes. In the U.K. -- I don't know about America -- the losing party of any court case is in theory ordered to pay the costs of the other side. Now, the costs of the companies that were suing us was over 100,000 pounds, which was an awful lot of money. The judge ordered that they wouldn't be entitled to all the money that they had spent, or allegedly spent, and he actually ordered that the costs should be 65,000 pounds, which was a terrific amount of money, but it was something that neither of us could pay.

BORLAND: You are appealing the case currently?
CONWAY: We are appealing the case. The paperwork is in at the moment, and it could be several months. It does take a long time to get to the court of appeals, so it could be six months or more away.

BORLAND: And while the court is in appeal, the companies have the rights to those domain names?
CONWAY: That's right, while the original judgment still stands except for the order of costs, in the meantime the companies are still entitled to have the names transferred to them.