K. Bravo
State of California Department of Justice
Public Inquiry Unit
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244
RE: Global Internet Solutions, Complaint ID Number: 211649

Dear K. Bravo

I have received your letter dated April 22, 2008 along with the response from GISOL, Inc, the company that was the subject of my complaint.

I wish to dispute certain of GISOL’s statements as being untrue or misleading.

1) “When the customer renews their package, it has nothing to do with renewing their domain name.”

That statement would be true for most web hosting companies, however all sites registered by GISOL are registered in GISOL’s name. (GISOL is the ONLY web hosting company I have found that employs this tactic.)

As such, only GISOL can renew a domain name registered in this way. This means that GISOL can hold hostage any site that it has registered. In my case, GISOL accepted payment to host my website while at the same time making it impossible to for me to renew the domain name on my own and then by neglect or deceit allowed my domain name to expire.

Indeed GISOL consistently uses this ploy to demand what amounts to a ransom payment from site owners, else they lose use of that name. In the website business, domain names are like a theater marquis. Without a domain name, a website is a useless collection of files that no one can access except the site owner.

The Internet is replete with instances of GISOL’s duplicity with respect to the ransom of domain names and the illegal tactics that GISOL employs to intimidate susceptible website owners.

2) During the Redemption Period, the Registry (Dotster/ICANN) gives the owner of the domain one more chance to re-activate the domain. Their cost to re-activate the domain is $399.”

As a statement of fact, Dotster’s charge to renew a domain name in redemption is $99.95, not $399.

3) “GISOL just acts as a middleman between a registrar and the customer”

Once again, the owner of all domains registered by GISOL is GISOL. GISOL therefore is not just a middleman but instead is the owner of the domain names used by its customers to make their websites accessible by the public.

If GISOL happens not to inform a customer and forward the payment to renew a domain name, GISOL would have to pay Dotster $99.95 (not $399) to re-activate the domain.

Rather than admit to the error and make restitution, I maintain that GISOL either allows the expiration process to continue to completion while cutting off all attempts by the site owner to contact them or attempts to extract a ransom to cover the expense and in most instances, make a further profit by intimidation or fraud.

4) “GISOL registers domain names for its’ customers as a courteously (sic) and as an act of good faith emails all customers 45 days, 30 days, 15 days and on the day of their specific expiration date.”

I never received any emails from GISOL regarding the expiration of my domain name. In any case, I could do nothing without the GISOL’s concurrence and they did not respond to any of my emails or phone calls.

5) “xxxxx obviously did not want to redeem their domain name, chose to not continue services with GISOL,…”

As I have said, a website without a domain name is useless. Why would I have authorized a website renewal payment to GISOL if I had no intention of allowing public access via a domain name? Had GISOL contacted me I would have readily renewed the domain name as well.

6) “…and while Breaching the Service Contract, xxxxx attempted to defraud GISOL into giving him money.”

This is a red herring. I would like to know in what way I have breached the service contract. I would also like to know how I have attempted to defraud GISOL into giving me money
___________________________________________

I am very disappointed that you have elected to side with a company that has harmed and continues to do injury to the public on an enormous scale and with complete disdain for the rule of law. Perhaps this is merely a reflection on the strength of my complaint and the fact that my losses were relatively minor.

However, what about the hundreds of other consumers that GISOL has defrauded. Is each to be handled in the same way without any consideration of the sheer number of complaints that have been lodged against GISOL.

Consider that the Better Business Bureau has received over 440 complaints against GISOL and has assigned it an F rating. According the BBB:

“We rate this company as having an unsatisfactory business performance record. Complaints allege unauthorized credit card charges, dissatisfaction with services, and difficulty implementing cancellation and refund policies. Some customers complain of getting continual credit card charges for service, long after cancellations are submitted.”

“The company responds to some complaints by denying allegations or disputing the validity of the complaint. Other complaints are addressed by sending advisories stating the customer was unable to contact service representatives due to an incorrect Email address listing.”

Clearly you have not done as I suggested and searched the web using the term “GISOL FRAUD”. Had you performed this search it would have become clear that my complaint against GISOL is not an isolated instance of a “difference of opinion” but is instead an accounting of a well orchestrated criminal enterprise that has operated with impunity for several years.

It is no wonder that the public loses faith in the government when a criminal organization masquerading as a business can so easily manipulate the system and continue to bilk the public.