Try:

In a 2-1 decision, the Kentucky Appeals court found the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the case, because domains are not ‘gambling devices,’ as prohibited by the Kentucky statute:

ALSO:

“So bottom line, a win is a win, and the action of the appeals court solves the current crisis, but it does not give domainers, or gambling site owners, much reason to sleep any better.”

TRY:

“So, bottom line: a win is a win, and the action of the appeals court solves the current crisis. But, it does not give domainers or gambling site owners much reason to sleep any better.”

Certainly I would not advice people to use a registrar in China for their domains.

However I think people have less exposure in using a registrar offshore in a “safe” country that doesn’t have to honor decisions from courts in the US or China.

If someone wants to stay with a US registrar, then I agree they need to take note of past conduct of registrars that protect people’s interests and those that give them up away.

I agree with your assessment of US based registrars and personally, would recommend people use moniker.com, if they want to stay within the US

Unfortunately, Michael, the U.S. does not have a monopoly on overzealous prosecutors and government officials. They can be found most everywhere in the world. (look what’s happening in China).

However, the lesson to be learned is that there are registrars out there that do not look out for their customers such as eNom and GoDaddy that turned the subject domains over to Kentucky, while Moniker did NOT. Now those 2 registrars are in the embarrassing position of trying to get the domains back from Kentucky.

I believe moniker.com is the best US registrar.

An offshore registrar will offer more protection in certain situations, it will have to be your call

Anyhow, I have my domains with Moniker, which I chose because of their good reputation and security against hijacking. And price. And convenience.

Now I’m wondering whether or not another registrar might offer more protection against seemingly arbitrary court rulings

As Dave said It depends on the case.

In this situation that came up in Kentucky having your domains in an offshore registry definitely would have helped because the order of seizure went out to the registrars and those offshore just disregarded it.

Some of the US based registrars gave up the domains and had the order been upheld they would have had to give up the domains.

Now certainly things like WIPO’s and UDRP’s cut across the board to all ICANN registrars.