Is Fairwinds Partners guilty of spamming with an unsolicited email to me? PART 2

Morning folks!!

Where do I start? Let's start with that I know a minimum of 3 people personally that have received this form letter or what most folks consider a spam letter from Fairwinds Partrners.

The spam itself was posted on the comments area of the previous post so no need to repeat. However let's start with the a couple of quotes in the return email I sent them:

"So let me recap. You THINK you are in the business of selling high end domains however you have never actually sold one. Have you?? I think you misrepresent your abilities. You call domainers cybersquatters and then send me that spam. That takes BALLS!!!"

"So good job at making your company look like a bunch of hypocrites. You trash domainers and then want to broker sales by spamming them? That makes you ALL look like FOOLS."

To which I got a response which included the following.

"While I am not involved in CADNA whatsoever, I have read the materials closely enough to know that CADNA also knows the difference between the two terms.  You may not have read the CADNA Web site yourself so I will draw your attention to the following text that appears at the top of the page"

        “Cybersquatting is defined by CADNA as the bad-faith registration of a domain name that includes or is confusingly similar to someone else’s trademark.
      
        CADNA is made up of many leading edge adopters and generators of new Internet best practices, and as such this organization knows the value of direct navigation practices and the importance of direct search to making the Internet more navigable and rewarding to worldwide web users.
      
        Many of the legal practices of Domainers that deliver relevant content to direct navigators are not to be discouraged, but celebrated. And as such, the object of CADNA is cybersquatting, not domaining.”

ok, now let's include some other points of fact about these folks who are heavily involved in coordinating CADNA. I see them as disingenuous.

1. Josh Bourne is still not telling the truth about the connection between DN tasting and phishing even after the Anti-Phishing Working Group refuted it with a September report that found that there was no relationship between domain tasting and phishing scams. Just to be clear, I'm adamantly against tasting and am proud that the ICA adopted a Code of Conduct that calls for an end to abusive tasting and all domain kiting and has called on ICANN and VeriSign to shut it down with new fees, but this is just illustrative of how CADNA ignores the facts and throws out unsubstantiated and disproven charges.

2. CADNA is a cybersquatter by their own definition that was cited to me above   (CADNA.com was registered by CADNA Automotive of Memphis, TN, which subsequently regsiered CADNA as a trademark, long before Fairwinds set up CADNA and registered the .Org). I have an entire blog post about this here. True, the CADNA definition printed above calls for bad faith as an element - but CADNA members have attacked the same bad faith reference in the ICA Code of Conduct.

3. Sarah Deutsch, a counsel for founding CADNA member Verizon, picked apart the new ICA code of conduct in a recent debate with ICA counsel Philip Corwin at the INTA (International Trademark Association) leadership meeting -- and had the temerity to say that when Verizon ISP run ads against TM typos under their new Advanced Web Search service that's customer service, not infringement, at the same time she's calling for higher statutory damages and criminal law penalties for domain registrants and questioning whether parked generic pages provide anything worthwhile to consumers. I think that is outrageous.

4. Now this one should make you all chuckle. Go to the Fairwinds Partners home page. Scroll to the bottom. There is a quote there that came directly from Steve Forbes. However that quote was made by Mr. Forbes specifically for T.R.A.F.F.I.C. and released by us for   in a press release before our October show where he was our keynote speaker.

"Internet traffic and domains are the prime real estate of the 21st century," comments Forbes. "This market has matured, and individuals, brands, investors and organizations who do not grasp their importance or value are missing out on numerous levels."

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070920/clth050.html?.v=101

Nothing wrong, but Chutzpah is the only word that really comes to mind. But don't worry, I am full of adjectives to describe these hypocrits. I may have to blog just on that. This is going to begin the unraveling of this garbage. I am not sure what their true agenda is as it is confusing to me. When I wrote the organization in the summer shortly after they came into being, my email was never answered to this day. I blogged about it at the time. So what is really going on here?

Some may think this is the end. Quite the contrary. This is the beginning. The only question is it a new beginning of cooperation and working together for what we have in common or will we have to slay this dragon as they continue to paint us all as "Cybersquatters" every chance they get? Unfortunately we may already have the answer and the evidence against them is mounting. The only question is when do the companies supporting CADNA see the true picture? It is my opinion that CADNA has the ability to tarnish the very companies and brands that they represent. Wonder what their take on spammers is?

My advice to both these companies is get your act together, contact the ICA and begin a constructive dialogue. Short of that, expect blog posts like these from every legitimate domain investor out there. It will eventually make its way to the media and there is going to be a lot of folks with egg on their face. I can see it now. Cybersquatters vs Spammers. the media would have a field day with that match up. Let the games begin. However we will win as we define the difference between Cybersquatting and Domain investing. On the other hand....a spammer is a spammer is a spammer and EVERYONE hates spammers.

Have a GREAT day!
Rick Schwartz

Comments

[owen frager]

They are all salesmen Rick, just like you and me.

Do you think Verizon ever has been honest in letting its customers know what the true charges are or by upgrading someone for two years as the fine print of taking a service call is any more morally sound business practice,

Only CNDA is more like the Senators that vote against gay rights then have sex with male prostitutes in bathrooms.

Like the Senators, because they come from register.com that abuse the trust people put in them by giving them privilege and access to information others can leverage for their competitive advantage.

Hope you nail the bastards. I hate hypocrisy,

[Andy]

Calm down Rick...calm down...breathe in...breathe out...you gonna have a heart attack...just calm down...it's all good!!!

[A. Non]

This is a funny coincidence?

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420ap_wa_microsoft_domain_fraud.html

Phil at Fairwinds was the microsoft domain account manager (sales person) during this entire time that this fraud occurred. He was their salesperson at register.com and NO DOUBT was enriched by collecting commissions off of this!

This could get interesting!!

Hope you spam filter doesn't block this comment but i prefer to post comments like this anonymously.

[Domainer Joe]

Check out this link of a recent interview with Josh Bourne.

http://tcattorney.typepad.com/domainnamedispute/2007/12/the-traverse-le.html

". You know, outside of this country, even in Canada, there really aren't any anti-cybersquatting laws. Some of the more cleaver cyber criminals who do practice cybersquatting or at least dabble in it to enable other things that they're doing that are harmful on the internet, have varies quickly offshore to other jurisdictions where they can find safe harbor."

"tion about what to look out for, they could help affect change by changing their own habits. You know, what they are likely or unlikely to fall for in terms of phishing or click schemes or other things that could attract their attention that they could help enable by falling into those kind of traps. The U.S. government; certainly ICANN could affect change through broader education platforms. The other groups that can affect change are small business owners. We get letters constantly from small business owners who say things like, you know, we're a small owner and somebody grabbed our name and the remedies available such as UDRP are too expensive for us and this other guy is getting all our traffic and they're confusing our customers, you know, what can I do about that?"

[Johnny B. Good]

Hey Rick,

I received this spam email too and still have it in my inbox.

So that makes four you can count!

Johnny B. Good

[Kate]

Just to comment on point #2: CADNA is using an acronym in good faith as far as I can see (no risk of confusion with the .com as they are in different, unrelated industries).

Response by RS:
That may be 100% right. However that never stopped WIPO or UDRP from taking away the domain. There has never been a rhyme or reason or prescedent set when it come to domain disputes. They run all over the place and THAT is the point.

[Enrico Schaefer]

RS: We handle a large number of UDRP proceedings from both sides. You are absolutely correct to note that there is some variability in the results before NAF and WIPO. However, the variability is not as great as you suggest. CADNA is not even close to the line under either trademark or UDRP precedent. There is clear legitimate use and no real argument on bad faith. Plus, acronyms are tough to protect under UDRP and trademark law because they are by nature weak marks with lots of potential non-infringing use.

Plus, there is no argument in reviewing www.cadna.com and www.cadna.org of consumer confusion.

Whatever someone might think of CADNA, cybersquatting is not an argument which would stick. UDRP would not even be an option for the registrant of cadna.com.