My First 72 Hours on Clubhouse.




Morning Folks!!



So I was invited to participate in a Clubhouse social with fellow domainers on Friday night. The modern-day "Party Line" with a purpose and some interesting views and voices.



On Sunday I stumbled into "DomainInvesting247" and before I know it I was on stage and fielding questions for 5 or 6 hours. I saw and spoke to folks I have not run into for many years. It is certainly addictive. I am realdomainking there if you want to follow me.



Since then I have been in some other rooms and have been exposed to some great stuff.



Last night I stumbled into a sales-room. I was invited on stage for a brief time. I would highly recommend domainers learn how to sell if they want to make more money with each and every sale. There was so much bonafide info that can be learned in minutes. There are rules of the road. There are ways to approach. But so much value so quickly and it can only make you $$$. Valid info by qualified folks hitting head-on sales mistakes.



Clubhouse will siphon off and suck the traffic off of Twitter, Linkedin and others. It may also spawn others doing similar things. So I look forward to the new and more fluid collaboration that is taking place in realtime 24/7. It is also therapeutic and humbling to listen to the stories and the paths folks have taken and the obstacles they overcome. Many have been homeless. MANY!! Incredible stories of success. Most people that are successful have overcome great adversity. Their stories are all unique but there is ALWAYS a common thread. The common lesson, you have to take charge of your own destiny!



So far the biggest takeaway and the biggest common thread, is staying away from losers and those that think negatively. It has been the single most common story of Rags to Riches I have heard there by DOZENS. They all divorced everyone in their life that was negative. They took control. The #1 path to success!!



A tip of the hat to all those giving and learning! Everyone from the most seasoned professionals to the novice of novices. But entertaining and educational it is.



So we will see where it leads.....Good luck to all.



Rick Schwartz


@DomainKing Rick Schwartz Returns to Twitter. Led Exclusively by Brand Protection.


Morning Folks!!



As some of you may know Valentine's Day was especially sweet this year. I can't go into the details, but Capitalism is alive and well. I was able to get my @DomainKing twitter handle and my trademarked name back on Thursday afternoon.



When I left Twitter on 12/312017, there was a note that in 30 days the account would be permanently deleted. However, if you are a verified user with a Blue Check, (which I was), you get 1 year. So I put a reminder on my calendar. 10 months later I tried to reactivate and no way Jose! Maybe I should have tried a direct contact but I don't have much faith in contacting twitter directly.



https://twitter.com/DomainKing/status/1096757072497205248


There are some advantages to having a new and clean Twitter account since anything and everything you say on Twitter can and WILL be used against you. So a Twitter re-birth may be a good thing!



Until the other day, I had been under the impression that once a twitter handle was retired it was never available again. That would have been okay and no need for me to get it back. But just like the 1-year deal, that was not true either. So once it was out there again, I had no choice but to secure it. It's embedded in me. Branding is about not having leaks. If the @DomainKing door does not exist there are no worries. But if the @DomainKing were to bring you to another destination, that is a huge branding faux paux.



Domaining for investing and having a "Domain Strategy" as an end-user is the holy grail of the Internet and what we all do. End-users have a DUTY to protect themselves in every way they can on the Internet. So that includes domains that are close or might be easily misspelled or are confusing.



That's why a gTLD without the corresponding .com exact math is DEAD IN THE WATER. They can point to whatever success they like, any funding they want but they are FOOLS, FOOLS FOOLS and they are FOOLISH when they IGNORE gaping holes in their branding strategy. Would you get on a ship with a captain that wants to leave port with a gaping hole, water pouring in and he just ignores it?? There is NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever! Both are fools and what does it say about professionals that don't realize something so SIMPLE??



For years there has been a battle between Facebook and Twitter. I have to anoint Twitter as the absolute winner as far as identity and business. Facebook is for the family. Everyone I see in print and TV uses their Twitter handle. 2 years ago it was not that way. Facebook led and Twitter was second string. No more! Facebook has been exiled and Twitter rules. The International conversation is on Twitter!



I have 5 pages and many years of blog posts about Social Media and the effects. The way to see the future is by calibrating the past and seeing how it dovetails with the current reality. You will see warnings from many years ago that are clearly evident today. You or I don't have to get it all right. But we do have to get the big stuff right. In business, Marketing, Branding, and SALES are the big stuff followed by LEAKS! Who ignores leaks?? FOOLS! And "Branding" is about circulation and how good your product or service is. My brand is my solid advice and different ways of looking at domains and business and being way ahead of the curve with a record of nearly 25 years. I add to my brand with every post or bit of info that helps me or my readers with valid and tried and true info or when events I predict long in advance actually materialize. On the record, for the record.



Rick Schwartz


The Sky That Never Fell. Progress Never Hurt the Market, It Reinvents it!


Morning Folks!!



Ever notice most so-called experts are clueless? Who deemed them experts when they never get things right? They may be "Professional Experts" because they are social climbers that hang with the Kool Kids. Those are folks that know very little, but they play a part and pretend to know what the hell they are talking about. Most don't have a clue. How many times do you have to be wrong before you lose your title of expert??



Experts come in every field and every walk of life. Some even in the domain business. You can probably name a few right off the tip of your tongue. The pretenders.



They say things according to what the Kool Kids like and want them to say. Puppet and Ventriloquist. Countless in domaining over the years. I call them "Intellectual Body Snatchers".



But to understand what goes on in domaining you have to be acutely and keenly aware of the motives of everyone you speak or listen to. If you don't do that as a habit, you are basically getting into the car of a man with candy when you were 3 years old. Maybe it's time to grow out of that trait or at least recognize that trait when you see it.



Advertising was "Weaponized" decades ago. The Beef industry vs. the Poultry industry. That was the first one I ever recognized and is still invisible to most humans.



Another famous one was Las Vegas Vs Orlando and Disney. Those are the top 2 destinations in the USA and each tried to hurt the other. It's been going on for decades. Billions of dollars are at stake each and every WEEK! Maybe, DAY!



The Insurance industry fights with humor. I like that! They sell sizzle with a little steak.



McDonalds advertises by inspiring as does Nike and others.



The single worst offender may be The National Weather Service. Back in the 1980's they changed their software and ever since then their predictability levels have gone down 75% or more. Want the weather, the Farmers Almanac from 200 YEARS ago has a better predictability rate. There are national motives and local ones. Misinformation moves millions of people to plan perhaps not to go to the beach cuz they say it will rain. That keeps people and MONEY in the city. That's called a MOTIVE!



There are silent wars and there are loud wars.



AT&T vs Verizon is an example of a loud war. Other companies go after each other. Hertz and Avis for example. But that was before weaponization of advertising.



But now let's get to Jobs and Progress. Progress never lost a job. It reinvented and created new and better and safer and more rewarding jobs. It has done that throughout history. It may displace some in the short term. It will enrich in the long term. It always has and always will.



The point of all this is to illustrate some of the invisible crossfire that is and has been happening all around us. You can choose to be aware of all this or not. But as a business person, as a domain investor, as someone looking to better their lives, these are important things to develop not ignore.



When you can see what can't be seen with the naked eye, you will find an opportunity. Lots of opportunities. They will cross your path all the time. It's another dimension! Oh, I forgot, they don't teach that to you in College. They can't. How can they teach what they don't know and don't see? Higher education?? Maybe not!



And that is why on the days or weeks or months that I decided to find a great domain, there is always one to be had and millions not worth looking at. But the good domain jumps off the page. They stand out from the crowd. Domain trophy hunters recognize them in an instant. Have Berkens, Shilling, Rosener and myself look at a list of 1000. Bet we would pick the same 3 domains almost every time. Allow the masses of domainers to do the same thing, they will won't pick the same ones.



The latest shiny object is marijuana domains. There will be some of value. But let's say 1 million of these names have been registered. Maybe 10 million. So many domains start with "420". Less than 100 have value and even less will be bought by end users. You better have something really good. Just cuz it starts 420BLAHBLAHBLAH.com does not give it value.



I have some of these type domains. GetStoned.com for example. Which leads me to "Prefixes" and "Verbs" and "Nouns." "GetWhatever.com" is a domain "Vein." You can put "Get" in front of so many words, goods, and services. Same with "Visit." It's a franchise within a franchise — Visitmiami.Com, VisitRome.com, etc. So I would rather see a newbie or others drill down on those that ARE still around than wasting time and money with silly and confusing new GTLD's with no circulation.



Again, this is simply history repeating itself in a different form but with far greater rewards. I have about 15 domains starting with "Get". My first one was GetLaid.com. I guess you know where my mind was at. I immediately saw the great potential online to get laid.



I completely missed the "Visit" franchise. That was a good one!! I had to settle for visit domains using .co and not .com and since there was no demand for .co, I let them all drop and, YEARS later they are still sitting there for registration.



Here is some more history in 2 unrelated fields. Pilots vs Doctors. The ONLY reason we have our health care crisis TODAY is because of WEAK DOCTORS back in the 1950's that acquiesced to the insurance industry instead of having the BACKBONE to stand up to them. Compare that to pilots. To this day a pilot can and WILL refuse to fly a plane that is either unsafe or go up in unsafe weather. The Pilot has the final call. That's a BIG and very important difference and outcome. One group had BALLSm and the other did not!



When you REALLY want to find answers, whether you like what you find or not, simply FOLLOW THE MONEY! Who gains, who loses. You will then be able to unmask motives and define the real situation, not the one painted for you and composed for you. And when/if they get angry, BINGO!!! You just hit a nerve and that means you just got SMART!



Courses are being taught in classes about domain names by people that have never been in the domain industry, and nobody here has ever heard of them. How is that possible? How can that even work? WTF are they teaching them?? Wouldn't WE like to know? And imagine if they are teaching your kid, while you are spending $250k to put them thru college to be guided by people with a lack of experience and credentials. I sure as hell would be concerned. More concerned about that than "Progress" hitting the job market.



When I was in school they were scared that all the computers would put humans out of work. Can't we agree that the "Experts" got it ass-backward? AGAIN! Computers created more jobs and opportunity in places where there was no opportunity for a million years! It provided the greatest financial boon in the history of mankind. It may be up there with Fire, the wheel, electric, the phone! The experts are IDIOTS! Kind of like consultants. They are always between jobs!



When you study history in different forms it creates a blueprint for the future. That is the remedy for chasing yesterday. Don't chase tomorrow, you can untangle things and predict tomorrow with a fair amount of certainty. Then ACT!



Rick Schwartz


The World’s Financial and Political Squeeze is on! Fasten your Seatbelts!


Morning Folks!!



Do you know how many TRILLIONS of dollars have been lost since my 2 late November posts warning of the possible problems? Apple down nearly $500 BILLION in value. That's stunning!!! They have plenty of company. Many others lost $100 Billion or more in value. It's not over!



My Post #1 from November 21st about Critical Mass hitting the Internet



Post #2 from November 23rd about Black Friday turning into Red Friday



Just one year ago I announced that I was leaving Social Media starting with Twitter and followed by Facebook. Those decisions were pretty far out ideas. Fast Forward to today. These platforms are hemorrhaging users like me and you at a very fast rate. The dangers are now obvious to the masses. That was not true 1 year ago. I discuss here why Social Media is Dangerous!



Tech is going to have to suffer some disruption. They have hit critical mass. The planet is inundated with their devices. Do you really need the latest new iPhone? Do you really need to replace your laptop? Do you think the average Joe can survive with one several years old?



Now the problem I see is about to be compounded. 2018 was a FANTASTIC year for business. Historical in fact. But the market looks forward. With that fantastic year comes fantastic amount of taxes. And here is the BIG problem! Big taxes are due when wallets have taken a major haircut. That is going to HURT! Choppy waters ahead!



The market is not reacting to the shutdown imho. It's reacting to more things than I can list and that is an even bigger problem. What you are seeing is a deflation across the board. It's akin to a plane that sometimes nosedives. I doubt we are done and of course it could not come at a worse time. The Christmas season. That will pour some water on that fire! Malls and chains are already in trouble and this will accelerate their issues big time!



It's hard to be optimistic when we have dysfunctional governments and societies The world is in chaos like never in my lifetime. The window of opportunity to regain control is slipping away by the day. Uncertainty rules from Paris to London, to Berlin, to Washington and beyond.



Business has entered into politics. Not too smart! While Nike may have had a big day yesterday, that was for the 2nd quarter before they waded into issues. Their 3rd and 4th quarters are not going to be as sweet! The crash of Facebook should have been evident early in the year. Snap? Are they even viable?



The point of all this is we are going through an historical shakeup. A worldwide realignment. To be honest, it is shaping up to be WW1 issues all over again. It's that close to spiraling out of control. Things are changing faster than I can write this. But if you are not familiar with history then this will all be nonsense to you!



But again, that brings opportunity in different forms. So spend some time during the next couple weeks to really think DEEPLY about the fallout and the direction and the new doors that will open as others close theirs.



The big one that I see is that discretionary spending by big business which until a few weeks ago would have likely been at record levels for 2019 are in jeopardy and probably off the table with the losses suffered and that it is so widespread. Will that have an impact on high end truly premium domains? YUP!



Rick Schwartz


Critical Mass. Has the Internet Peaked for Now? YUP!

Morning Folks!!

The biggest shift in Internet use in nearly 2 decades has occurred in 2018. The shift may be invisible to the masses but they should be vividly clear if you make your living online.

As I stated in an earlier post this month, "Social is no longer Social, it's Dangerous." So the major cratering that is occurring started there. That's ground zero for this Internet Earthquake we ARE experiencing.

General Electric, once one of the world's largest, richest and most distinguished companies is in trouble. They are selling off assets to survive.

We all know the story with Sears. Everyday for them is "Black Friday" because they are selling everything including their land and their gondolas. Bye Bye Sears.

This year there is no Toy's R Us.

The largest amount of retail closings will start happening at the end of December right into January.

And retail is just one sector. Manufacturing could wobble depending on the sector.

But I have not even reached the real problems. As a trained eye could see, Facebook is now down about 40% from their high and still going down. Same with Twitter and many others. Is it possible their best days are behind them? YES IT IS! How is MySpace doing these days?

The bean counters have been so geared to growth that they ruined many of their own products. They tarnished brands. Remember when Apple had GREAT customer service? That was what propelled them along with a great product. Now, Apple has among the worst Customer Service. Rivals other large firms in a race to the bottom.

AT&T screwed up Directv. Directv used to have great customer service. Now they don't. I am sure each and every one of you have you own stories of companies that you used to be a fan of but now, not so much.

Sony was baloney for 20 years now. But Apple may catch up if their current trend continues.

Online companies taking political stances are playing with fire regardless of the stance or the direction. Those idiot bean counters may not see it in the numbers today or last quarter, they sure as hell will see it in 2019 and beyond.

The stock market has taken a severe hit. Will this be the year the Grinch Stole Christmas? For some it will. Amazon and Google and many others have both sides of the political spectrum angered. That will have a financial impact of some sort. Stay tuned.

Just remember that just 12 months ago Bitcoin was the hottest Christmas Gift since the Pet Rock. Trading at nearly $20k. I stated many times I was a buyer UP TO $5,000. It is trading as low as $4300 in the past 24 hours. A lot can change in a very SHORT 12 months.

Ugly has not even started. There is a shift in progress and some fault lines are going to be exposed. Some may be very surprising. Fasten your seat belts.

The Internet was the last big thing that saved the financial universe. What's the next one?

Rick Schwartz

PS: Always remember that during turbulent times, some of the best opportunities present themselves.

 

Social Media is No Longer Social, It’s Dangerous!

Morning Folks!!

Social Media is no longer social. It's almost anti-social at this stage and won't be getting better. It will continue to get worse as hate and agendas now control it. It's not even safe!

Social Media has been weaponized. It has destroyed people and careers by the thousands! Your personal data has been distributed to every crook in the universe.

There is simply nothing "Social" about Social Media. It's a war zone.

The only Social Media I still deal with is Linked-in and to be honest, I never made a penny or got a connection via their platform. They may be next. It's a time waster not a money maker. Mostly spammers. I left Twitter and Facebook last year for multiple reasons, but sparked by the Berkens incident.

The Internet in general stokes hate as many of us have seen first hand starting early on in the 1990's. It's just gotten worse and BILLIONS of people are participating all with their own hate, anger and prejudices. As it organizes, it becomes very  dangerous. More dangerous than any other media in history.

Social Media may be the front lines of a war that is sure to come. A World War.

Rick Schwartz

The Good Domain Names are Gone! So is all the Land and Every Street Address! So What?!

Morning Folks!!

When you and I were born all the land was gone. Somebody owned every parcel every acre every nook and cranny. The Government owned the rest. Used or not it was owned. 

I remember as a young boy of 5 or so standing on the corner near my house and wondering how I would be able to get something everyone already owned? To a kid, that was a scary thing.

Maybe you can relate? That feeling did not go away until I finally owned my first home when I was in my mid 30's. It was a struggle to get there. But was one of the most satisfying days of my life walking in that front door for the first time. 

So, to me, domains are just real estate. Some domains are commercial real estate. Some are recreational real estate, some are income producing real estate, some are residential or even social real estate. A domain represents that piece of land but the access to that land is not from the immediate area, but the entire world. It has much greater value as I see things. The single domain name is the key to empires. Just think these companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars and approaching Trillion Dollar Valuations, mostly work out of ONE .com address.

The beauty of a great domain name is no matter how big you get, you can still use your original domain and be able to build something bigger and grander and taller than 100 Empire State Buildings! Than 1000 Empire State Buildings. THAT is the power of a domain name. A single domain name with a brilliant and profitable idea. There is no limit! 

I'd venture to say that Amazon.com or Facebook.com or instagram.com are worth more than the Empire Stat building. Matter of fact dozens of Empire State Buildings. Maybe 1000's. Who woulda thunk it? So, in my mind and the way I think, domains have tremendous value yet to be discovered by Big business and those small businesses that want to be big. The door is open to all. The ONLY limit is our ideas. 

When I was a kid I remember the hub-bub when the Empire State Building sold for a whopping and unbelievable $65 Million. But they bought the building. NOT THE LAND! 

"1961: August 23, Lawrence A. Wien, Peter L. Malkin, and Harry B. Helmsley buy the building for $65 million. The price, which does not include the land, is the highest ever paid for a single building." http://www.esbnyc.com/explore/historical-timeline 

No Land. The Domain is the land. How did that happen? Well you have to rewind to 1951 before we rewind again:

1951: The John J. Raskob estate sells the building for $34 million to a syndicate including Roger I. Stevens and the Chicago Crown family who immediately sell the building to Prudential Insurance Company of America for $17 million, which then enters into a long-term ground lease with the Stevens syndicate. http://www.esbnyc.com/explore/historical-timeline

Now the original parcel of land was bought for $2600 in 1799. But you can't look at how much value 200 years later. They are all dead 5x over. So I always took that into account with domain names and why they will outlive each and every one of us. The good news is the Internet has accelerated progress. However progress takes breaks every now and then. So you need to know the difference of a life cycle of something and something in hibernation and taking a break. Domains are still at the start of their life cycle. It's basically a teenager with little direction and lots of pent up energy. Maturity is coming and with maturity comes a deeper and better understanding. The Empire state building started as a farm. 

If you are a domainer and you are not looking for real world comparisons, historical comparisons, then you might be lost in the woods. There are EXACT, PERFECTLY EXACT PARALLELS. Once you connect this parallels, you make a spark. Once you make a spark you have a source of energy. Once you have a source of energy, you have a way to make money

This is EXACTLY what I said in my previous post.

"When a person learns where East really is he/she can then figure out where West is. Where North is. Where South is. Where Northeast is. Where Southwest is and so on. From that ONE single answer, you get 100% of the info. Accurate info. It's a choice! You may not be able to control everything or be successful at everything but by understanding our own building blocks, we dramatically increase our chances."

Own a great domain name and you own a piece of Times Square AND the Empire State Building. And the single most incredible part. The revolving front door that you use to enter the Empire State building form 34th street, has a powerful new mechanism in that a domains revolving door enters from the entire universe. 

Own something that means nothing to nobody and you have genuine legendary Florida Swamp Land. 80%+++ of the industry owns swampland by their own financial admissions! I have seen portfolios of 1000 parcels of pure swampland. It's the norm NOT the exception. Sad but true!. 

What gives a gas station value is TRAFFIC. What gives the Empire State Building value was traffic. If no cars pass the station goes out of business. If that were not true, they would build gas stations and skyscrapers in the woods 1000 miles from civilization. What gives anything value is TRAFFIC. There is no traffic in the swamp nor is there the possibility of getting any.

You can't buy the Empire State Building for $2600 again. Or $65 Million, or even $1 Billion. Today the Empire State Building is a public stock that is traded and has a value in excess of $2 Billion. A GREAT address, a great property, a great location will always have rising values while swampland languishes at worthless now and forever. The raw land that a great domain name represents is always of value and capable of building a skyscraper! In the swamp. you can't even pitch a tent! When you KNOW the difference, you will have successfully calibrated your compass and see things in an entirely new light and a new "Pattern" will have emerged! 

Have a GREAT Day!

Rick Schwartz

It Takes 20 Years to Germinate the Seed of Change. Here is How I Picked 20 Years.

Afternoon Folks!!

Some think I just pulled the 20 year number out of thin air. They would be thinking wrong. It was a calculated number based on more factors than I have time to list. But it starts with 18-36 months that most any business needs to germinate. It includes population, human behavior, parallels and other timelines throughout history.

So when I considered all the variables and the enormity of what was about to take place and how long that adaptation would take, it came out to 20 years. I looked at it from several different views and each of those views yielded the same answer. 20 years. And when I wrote about this crap in 1996 you can imagine the even bigger crap I was met with and a chorus of laughter. Laughter that I used to reinforce the course I could clearly see and nobody else would even look at.

Along the way I had to prove certain things at certain points or it would all be blah, blah, blah. And so I did. And now on the eve of year 18 I am going to savor and enjoy and relish in what is at our doorstep. The crystallization and the reality of it all happening exactly as scheduled.

For years I have talked about mile markers that marked the way as proof of where this was all heading. Here is a post from December 201o entitled:

"My Annual Post 2010, The Viral Social Mania and Now….The Home Stretch 2011-2015"


What is the difference now in 2013? The difference is what I have been saying and seeing are now within sight for many. Those mountain ranges can now be seen. It is not a 20 year plan any longer. It is now merely a 2-3 year plan. A manageable plan. That timeline and time range is within sight and I am just going to enjoy the hell out of it! Hope you enjoy it too.


In 2003 men.com $1.32MM sale was a rarity and made newspapers around the world and even on CNN and other broadcast media. Today a 1.35MM sale is not a big deal at all. There have been more 7 figure deals done in the last 90 days than perhaps the preceding few years. More are coming. Many more. An avalanche of these deals are coming. It was need, want, desire that could be seen nearly 18 years ago when they were a value few could see or understand.


Rick Schwartz

On The Record! Jaguar and Land Rover Added to RDNH List! #45

Evening Folks!!

I am sure you are sick of reading these and I am sick of posting them. But what has to be has to still be done to stop Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

As I posted on Monday, Jaguar/Landrover is the most recent Fortune 500 Company found GUILTY of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. They Join Procter & Gamble as the 2nd fortune 500 to risk tarnishing their respective brands this year. Will there be a company wide shake up? Time will tell.

The attempt was so blatant, that the panel found for the respondent without the respondent even answering the complaint. A HUGE VICTORY for all!! But this is a really  GREAT case because there was no response by the domain owner and the panel still found Jaguar/LandRover guilty of RDNH. Jennifer M. Hetu of Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP, Michigan, USA got defeated by a ghost. How does a debacle like this unfold?

I will repost the following post each and every time there is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Decision. The best thing domain owners can do is Tweet, Like, Post and/or Share. So just don't sit there! You CAN do something to circulate these offenders. So do it! That's REAL SEO! I need your HELP. I can't do this alone. Charity starts at home and that means protecting what is yours. 

Want to stop RDNH and get the $$$ instead of a NAF or WIPO action? THIS is the way to start. Someday there WILL be a legal and CRIMINAL penalty but until then there IS a social penalty if YOU CHOOSE. And believe me, the social penalty is MUCH more severe than a fine that can be easily absorbed and forgotten about. This is PERMANENT! THEY have to live with the social consequences of their actions. The best thing you can do is Tweet, Like and/or Share instead of throwing your hands up in the air and doing NOTHING! Doing nothing is what these little pricks count on! Let them know! I can only do so much and I need your help to DEFEAT this practice.

 

Morning Folks!!

There really is a penalty for Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and it is far more severe than anything monetary. I have been defending my domains from predators and would-be Domain Name Hijackers for over 14 years. When the Saveme.com case (Start at bottom of link page) came to me as a GIFT about 16 months ago I RELISHED my opportunity to change things. It was such a slam dunk that I was going to make this case an example for others and a warning of the SEVERE CONSEQUENCES that come with it. I may lose a domain, but a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER loses their entire reputation and it can't be repaired.

When I was a kid my parents and my teachers would scare me to be good as they would tell me if I was bad it would be on my "Permanent Record". Well when you commit a crime, it is on your permanent record. Misbehaving in school? Not so much.

So I have used the SaveMe.com case as well as others like Procter and Gamble to illustrate just how bad a decision trying to STEAL somebody else's domain really is. And so I did. I PROMISED to make Márcio Mello Chaves FAMOUS!! Promise kept baby!!

Go to Google or go to Bing and search for Márcio Mello Chaves or Marcio Mello Chaves.

THAT is how SEO REALLY works!!!

RELEVANCY!! Be relevant and you will have no problem being searched. Marcio Mello Chavez is relevant to Ricksblog.com and more importantly to Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. How does he EVER fix it?? It's a permanent record of FACT!

Search procter and gamble domains. You no longer get a list of domains they own.

Search Jaguar or LandRover. Because of this, they too are subject to being reminded that what they did was so over the top it is permanent.

Tell me how much it is worth to undo what can't be undone and they are responsible for?

And reputation management software?? HATE IT! And thankfully it does not work! Most folks don't need to repair the reputations. They just do things the right way to begin with. Not so much in corporate America.

So I believe the SOCIAL PENALTY far outweighs anything else. A $100k fine is nothing when you talk of a 7 figure domain and a multi-billion dollar company. A win could be viewed as a "Discount".  But when you have to deal with the SOCIAL FALLOUT, it is MUCH more SEVERE and I am proving it!

The Scarlett Letter of Domain Hijacking will follow those throughout their entire lifetimes and beyond. Here are MY POSTS about Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and those involved. The NEXT guy DESERVES what he gets because he has been warned and I am going to change their futures more than they can change their futures.

So this July 4th I feel like this year has been the turning point in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). And yes, I like to write out in full Reverse Domain Name Hijacking as many times as I can to associate a name with the deed! My only obligation to a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker is to make them FAMOUS! They try to destroy MY BUSINESS or YOUR BUSINESS?? Then they MUST live with the PERMANENT consequences. Did they show you mercy? Well they are warned and they OWN their decisions.

Did the biggest Company Shake up in 100 YEARS at Procter and Gamble have something to do with Reverse Domain Name Hijacking? Don't discount the possibility! Somebody made the decision to SOIL their companies stellar name. In government it may be overlooked or you get promoted. In business, you get you ASS kicked to the curb with all involved! And deservedly so!

I have 18 years and many millions of dollars invested in my online business as well as many of you readers. So if some IDIOT thinks he can just STEAL our hard work by hiring some hotshot and thinking $15k is all the skin they have in the game, then they have to live with the fallout and that fallout can be severe and  life changing. That's what BOTH the attorney and the client get from now on because attorney's know better at this point in time. So the job of the attorney is not be part of a hijacking and to AID and ABET. It is to educate their client or FIRE their client. Your CHOICE and just remember that YOUR NAME will be included in the fallout. It's not up to you and it is not in your control once you AID and ABET. And make NO MISTAKE, the panels today are not ignorant. The attorney is the mastermind of the hijacking as well as the driver of the car the way I see it. You have been hired as a contract hit man but the hit is not on a person, it is on property. Your client is in the back seat directing you and paying YOU to help him HIJACK a domain name. The MOMENT you go along with that, you are just as guilty because YOU KNOW what you are doing. It is premeditated. You are just as guilty aren't you my attorney??

Wrong minded? ok. But THAT is EXACTLY the way I see the roles and THAT is the passion I will write with every single time. Remember we are not talking about an honest difference of opinion where you need a ruing. We are talking when that ruling comes in that STATES that you have ABUSED the process. For that Mr. Attorney, YOU will be held accountable. Your choice? Tell your client the FACTS or FIRE your client. It may be the most important decision you ever make in life. And I get to write about YOU and mention NAMES whenever I feel like.

Molly Megee Hankins and Heitor Chavez are examples of what I am talking about as they represented Reverse Domain Name Hijackers and knew better! I will add more to the list as I look through the decisions to see which lawyers abused the process. 

I am going to stop this practice in it's tracks! If you are a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER or are found GUILTY of ABUSING the process, then You and your attorney will be known far and wide and throughout the world and it will follow you folks like a shadow on sunny days AND cloudy days and even in the dark!

Then you have the KING of all. Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL who represented Procter and Gamble. Have THEY been fired? Let me give them a second mention Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. I would assume these are top notch folks. HOW could they ALLOW their client to walk into this? I guess it would  take real balls to fire P&G. They might lose the account? Wonder if they were fired?

So if you are being unfairly threatened about your domain name, just point them here. It is FREE and EFFECTIVE because it is all based on FACT and PASSION! Give them a little window into how things may unfold because when YOU WIN and they get found GUILTY of REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING, I am going to write about them right here and make them famous too!

And what can you do? Circulate this post. Retweet it. Like it. Comment on Linkedin. Circulate it. THAT is a very small effort to help protect your livelihood and your assets that costs nothing and helps put these folks on notice. THAT is how to help STOP Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Rick Schwartz

 

Here is the current list I have of RDNH cases with our newest inductee. This list that the NEXT SCHMUCK gets to join and LIVE WITH!

So from now on we must ROAST these Reverse Domain Name Hijackers (RDNH). Ah you say but Rick what have you been doing if you are not already roasting them? Well there are some innovative ways we will begin to get the attention of these companies. But we will leave that for another day because this CONTENT is right here and not going away anytime soon.

Harsh? You bet!! These folks join Procter and Gamble and Jaguar/Landrover and many others. But P&G BOUGHT the domain name later on.

Try to hijack a domain name and you will be shamed publicly because public opinion is the way to stop bad behavior when the laws out there are not adequate enough to do the job. Each of these companies will receive an increasingly HARSHER post from me because they are not ignorant of what they are doing. In almost every case they KNEW what they were doing and their INTENT was to STEAL using a governing body as their pawns!

The PUBLIC now OWNS the reputation of each of these companies and individuals as well as the attorney's that KNOWINGLY aid and abet because they KNOW BETTER. They are all now BRANDED in the most despicable way and so all the $$$ they spent to familiarize us with their products just got a mighty damaging blow.

Well there have been more findings of Reverse Domain Hijacking in the last 12 months that any preceding 12 month period. So the cat is out of the bag and they can no longer fool panels into being their unknowing accomplice.

So when I get threats, THIS IS WHAT THEY CAN LOOK FORWARD TO

I have 45 such cases so far of RDNH and this resource has 150 or more. Each win will discourage the next would-be hijacker. A tip of the hat to all owners below that fought and a big congrats to the attorney that represented them! I will list any and all cases as I learn of them. In time we hope decisions like these will will make the next IDIOT think twice before they attempt to STEAL something they have no legal or moral rights to. We now OWN YOUR REPUTATION and we will circulate!

And a special tip of the hat to John Berryhill who is the leading RDNH attorney in the world. I am counting and will post how many wins he has recorded on behalf of his clients. I would guess about 1/3 of all decisions. So if you are up against Berryhill or Neu or Goldberger, or Keating or a few others, good luck! You'll need it. Save yourself a great loss and embarrassment and WITHDRAW your case and send the other party their expense money and then get down to this thing we call "Capitalism" and NEGOTIATE!!

Otherwise you get to be labeled what "I" want to label you as and you will be tagged with that DESERVED recognition each and every time a new client does a search to find the good, the bad and the ugly. Want to know which group "Fuckers" will end up in?

And with each conviction I will be a bigger PRICK than the post before UNTIL this crap stops and will begin the tedious job of making REVERSE DOMAIN HIJACKING a CRIMINAL offense as we move forward.

If you are on thin ice, and found out to be GUILTY, you and your company will be listed right here and in all future blog posts and interviews relating to this and I reserve my right to use your attempted theft at every chance I get. Let the PUBLIC decide who is the THIEF! Who is the party found GUILTY of REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING! Each case will be included in the book I am writing as well.

SaveMe.com The Grand daddy of RDNH. Here is my post on this very big win against Márcio Mello Chaves, aka Márcio Chaves aka Marcio Chaves.

The Complainant is G.W.H.C. - Serviços Online Ltda., E-Commerce Media Group Informação e Tecnologia Ltda. of Sao Paulo, Brazil, represented by Almeida Advogados, Brazil. Found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

But in even a bigger case, Swash.com Complainant Procter and Gamble Represented by Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. Procter and Gamble is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker.

Case #1 is our Friend Scott Day of Digimedia who won a $100k+ judgment againstGOFORIT ENTERTAINMENT, LLC who IS a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER.

Case #2 Rain.com Media Rain LLC engaged in Reverse Domain Hijacking

Case #3 CinemaCity.com The Complainant is Prime Pictures LLC of Dubai, United Arab Emirates (“UAE”), represented by Law offices of Vince Ravine, PC, United States of America (“USA”). Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #4 CollectiveMedia.com The Complainant is Collective Media, Inc., New York, United States of America, represented by Lowenstein Sandler PC, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #5 Elk.com The Complainant is ELK Accesories Pty Ltd. of Preston, Australia represented by Pointon Partners, Australia is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #6 ForSale.ca Globe Media International Corporation is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #7 Mess.com Kiwi Shoe Polish Company, The Complainant is Mess Enterprises, San Francisco, California, of United States of America, represented by Steve Clinton, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #8 Goldline.com The Complainant is Goldline International, Inc., represented by Spataro & Associates is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #9 K2R.com The complainant is a Swiss company, K2r Produkte AG of Haggenstrasse45, CH 9014 St. Gallen, Switzerland is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #10 CarSales.com The Complainant is carsales.com.au Limited of Burwood, Victoria, Australia represented by Corrs Chambers, Westgarth, Australia is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #11 Proto.com The Complainant is Proto Software, Inc., New York, New York, United States of America, represented by Byron Binkley, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #12 TrailBlazer.com The Complainant is Trailblazer Learning, Inc. dba Trailblazer, Caledonia, Michigan, United States of America, Self-represented by Brett W. Company COO, Caledonia, Michigan, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker.

Case #13 DreamGirls.com The Complainant is Dreamgirls, Inc., Tampa, Florida, United States of America, represented by Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP, Los Angeles, California, United States of America and have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case #14 Mexico.com The Complainant is Consejo de Promoción Turística de México, S.A. de C.V., Colonia Anzures, Mexico, represented by Bello, Guzmán, Morales Y Tsuru, S.C., Mexico is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #15 Windsor.com Complainant in this administrative proceeding is Windsor Fashions, Inc., a California corporation with a principal place of business in Los Angeles, California, United States of America. Complainant is represented in this proceeding by Abraham M. Rudy, Esq. and Julie Waldman, Esq., Weisman, Wolff, Bergman, Coleman, Grodin & Evall LLP, Beverly Hills, California, United States of America. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case #16 Mindo.com Complainants are Scandinavian Leadership AB and Mindo AB of Uppsala, Sweden, internally represented. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 17 and Sha.com he Complainant is Albir Hills Resort, S.A. of Alfaz del Pi Alicante, Spain, represented by PADIMA, Abogados y Agentes de Propiedad Industrial, S.L., Spain. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 18 etatil.com The Complainants are ÖZALTUN OTELCİLİK TURİZM VE TİCARET LTD. ŞTİ. of Istanbul, Turkey, Allstar Hotels LLC of New York, Unites States of America and Mr. Metin ALTUN of Istanbul, Turkey, represented by Istanbul Patent & Trademark Consultancy Ltd., Turkey. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 19 Takeout.com. Complainant is Tarheel Take-Out, LLC of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America (“U.S.”), represented internally. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 20 WallStreet.com  The Complainant is Wall-Street.com, LLC of Florida, United States of America (the “United States” or “US”), represented by Flint IP Law, United States. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 21 parvi.org found for the complainant in 2009 but in 2012 the courts rules that theCity of Paris, France was guilty of "Reverse Domain Name Hijacking" in a landmark case that resulted in a $125,000 judgement against the city.

Case #22 Gtms.com The Complainant is Sustainable Forestry Management Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of Bermuda, with its principal place of business in London, United Kingdom. The Complainant is represented by its general counsel, Mr. Eric Bettelheim. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case #23 PetExpress.com The Complaintant is Airpet Animal Transport, Inc. represented by Mark W. Good of Terra Law LLP, California, USA. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker"

Case #24 ColdFront.com Complainant is Personally Cool Inc. (“Complainant”), New York, USA. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker"

Case #25 Unive.com Complainant is Coöperatie Univé U.A. of Arnhem, Netherlands, represented by Novagraaf Nederland B.V., Netherlands. "Given the circumstances, the Panel finds that the Complaint was brought in bad faith, in an attempt at Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, and constitutes an abuse of the administrative proceeding"

Case #26  eCase.com AINS, INC. (“Complainant”), represented by Janice W. Housey of Symbus Law Group,  LLC, Virginia, USA. The panel concludes that the Complaint was brought in bad faith in an attempt at Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Case #27 TinyPrint.com Complainant is Tiny Prints, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by CitizenHawk, Inc., California, USA "Complaint was brought in bad faith and that, accordingly, Complainant has attempted to engage in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking"

Case #28 Enki.com Complainant is Enki LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Eric A. Novikoff, of California, USA. "This is a frivolous proceeding which should never have been filed by Complainant. Accordingly, the Panel finds that Complainant is guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking"

Case #29 SFM.com Complainant is State Fund Mutual Insurance Co. represented by Peter G. Nikolai, of Nikolai & Mersereau, P.A., Minnesota, USA The Panel finds "Complainant has engaged in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking."

Case  #30 Swash.com Complainant Procter and Gamble Represented by Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. Procter and Gamble is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

"It is impossible to believe that the Complainant, who employs ultra-sophisticated marketing methods, was not aware that the disputed domain name, <swash.com>, had been registered and used by other entities for some years when the Complainant introduced its SWASH product line in 2009. 

The entire Panel finds it more extraordinary still that in its Complaint the Complainant represented the SWASH brand to be a worldwide brand of longstanding with multi-million dollar sales, stating that over the last 4 years alone the brand had gained sales of over USD 40,000,000. When this was challenged by the Respondent, the Complainant was forced to admit that the brand had only been on the market for 4 years, that sales had been restricted to the USA and that sales over those four years had totaled under USD 60,000. 

Had the Respondent failed to respond, there is a very real risk that the Panel, relying upon the 1993 International registration and the substantial sales volumes claimed for the brand, would have found in favor of the Complainant. This Complaint fell very far short of what the Panel was entitled to expect from a Complainant of this stature.

In all of the circumstances present here, the Panel finds that the Complainant has abused the process in an attempt at reverse domain name hijacking in contravention of the UDRP Rules at paragraph 15(e). The Panel majority also finds the Complainant has attempted reverse domain name hijacking because it must have known that the Respondent did not know of (nor had any reason to be aware of) any relevant trade mark rights in the SWASH name when the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in 2004."

Case  #31 3dCafe.com Complainant is 3DCafe, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Danielle I. Mattessich of Merchant & Gould, P.C., Minnesota, USA. The panel finds "Complainant acted in bad faith. The Panel therefore makes a finding of reverse domain name hijacking."

Case  #32 xPand.com The Complainant is X6D Limited of Limassol, Cyprus, represented by Bracewell & Giuliani LLP, United States of America. "The Panel therefore accepts the Respondent’s allegation that the Complainant is using the UDRP as an alternative purchase strategy after the acquisition of the disputed domain name failed. Therefore, the Panel finds that the Complaint was brought in bad faith, in an attempt of reverse domain name hijacking: The Complainant knew or should have known at the time it filed the Complaint that it could not prove that the domain name was registered in bad faith."

Case  #33 Webpass.com The Complainant is Webpass, Inc. of San Francisco, California, United States of America represented by Law Office of Richard J. Greenstone, United States of America.

D. Reverse Domain Name Hijacking


Paragraph 1 of the Rules defines Reverse Domain Name Hijacking:

“Reverse Domain Name Hijacking means using the Policy in bad faith to attempt to deprive a registered domain-name holder of a domain name.”

The general conditions for a finding of bad faith on the part of a complainant are well stated in Smart Design LLC v. Carolyn Hughes, WIPO Case No. D2000-0993 (October 18, 2000):

“Clearly, the launching of an unjustifiable Complaint with malice aforethought qualifies, as would the pursuit of a Complaint after the Complainant knew it to be insupportable.”

These conditions are confirmed in Goldline International, Inc. v. Gold Line, WIPO Case No. D2000-1151 (January 4, 2001) and Sydney Opera House Trust v. Trilynx Pty. Limited, WIPO Case No. D2000-1224 (October 31, 2000) (where the condition is stated as “the respondent must show knowledge on the part of the complainant of the respondent’s right or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name and evidence of harassment or similar conduct by the complainant in the face of such knowledge”), which in turn cites Plan Express Inc. v. Plan Express, WIPO Case No. D2000-0565 (July 17, 2000).

The Complainant knew when it filed the Complaint that the registration of the disputed domain name preceded by several years any rights that the Complainant may have acquired in the mark WEB PASS. Indeed, the Complainant annexes a printout of the WhoIs registration to the Complaint, and that printout indicates that the domain name was created well before the Complainant’s first use in commerce of its mark. In this Panel’s view, this is sufficient to find reverse domain name hijacking. See NetDeposit, Inc. v. NetDeposit.com, WIPO Case No.D2003-0365 (July 22, 2003) (finding reverse domain name hijacking because “Respondent's domain name registration preceded the Complainant's creation of its trademark rights”).

The Panel finds that the Complainant has attempted Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Case  #34 BSA.com Complainant is Bin Shabib & Associates (BSA) LLP (“Complainant”), represented by Jimmy Haoula, United Arab Emirates.

The panel finds that Complainant has failed to present any evidence to support its claimed rights in the disputed domain name.  It only provided an application for trademark registration which does not establish any enforceable rights under the UDRP.  It did not offer any evidence to support a finding of common law rights in the disputed mark.  Also, the Panel finds that Complainant knew or should have known that it was unable to prove that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name or that Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.  Based on the foregoing, the panel finds that reverse domain name hijacking has occurred.

See NetDepositVerkaik v. Crownonlinemedia.com, D2001-1502 (WIPO Mar. 19, 2002) (“To establish reverse domain name hijacking, Respondent must show knowledge on the part of the complainant of the Respondent’s right or legitimate interest in the Domain Name and evidence of harassment or similar conduct by the Complainant in the fact of such knowledge.”); see also Labrada Bodybuilding Nutrition, Inc. v. Glisson, FA 250232 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 28, 2004) (finding that complainant engaged in reverse domain name hijacking where it used “the Policy as a tool to simply wrest the disputed domain name in spite of its knowledge that the Complainant was not entitled to that name and hence had no colorable claim under the Policy”).

Having failed to establish all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be DENIED. The Panel further finds that Complainant engaged in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking."

Case #35 adjudicate.org.au The Complainant is Adjudicate Today Pty Limited of Mona Vale, New South Wales, Australia represented by Moray & Agnew, Australia. The domain, adjudicate.org.au. Futureworld Consultancy (Pty) Limited v. Online Advice, WIPO Case No. D2003-0297 states that a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking may be made if the Complainant “knew or should have known at the time it filed the Complaint that it could not prove that the domain name was registered or used in bad faith”. Given that the Complainant would have been aware that the Respondent had a more than negligible adjudication business in Australia at the time the Complaint was filed, the Panel is of the opinion that the Complainant knew or should have known that it could not prove that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith. Therefore, the Panel finds that this is an instance of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Case #36 Joopa.com Complainant is Edward Smith (“Complainant”), represented by Kuscha Hatami of Raj Abhyanker P.C., California, USA.  “the Complainant filed its trademark application shortly after it was unable to acquire the Disputed Domain Name from the Respondent on acceptable terms. "The panel finds that failing in this effort, the Complainant undertook to use the Policy to acquire the Disputed Domain Name.” “The panel finds that the Complaint has attempted reverse domain name hijacking in violation of the Rules.”

Case #37 PoliceAuction.com Complainant is Vortal Group, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Roger N. Behle Jr., of Behle Law Corporation, 575 Anton Boulevard, Suite 710, Costa Mesa, CA 92626. "Moreover, the Panel finds that filing a UDRP proceeding - which on its face can be qualified as frivolous - without any basis to do so should be construed in the present case as harassing. Here, Complainant admitted it knew that the domain name was registered prior to its using the at-issue mark in commerce. When, as in the present case, Complainant is unable to show trademark rights through use or otherwise which predate registration of the at-issue domain name, then it becomes impossible for it to prevail. In the case before the Panel, there is no way that Complainant could have reasonably expected to prevail and its counsel should have known better." Vortal Group, Inc. is a convicted Reverse Domain Name Hijacker and "counsel should have known better"

Case #38 Opulence.com Complainant is Horizon Publishing, LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Marc J. Kesten of Marc J. Kesten, P.L., Florida, USA.
Horizon Publishing, LLC of Fort Lauderdale, Florida is the latest to be labeled a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER by the governing body.

Case #39 Avayo.net Complainant is Avaya Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Joseph Englander of Shutts & Bowen LLP, Florida, USA. “The Respondent correctly notes that the Complainant has previously filed domain name cases, and lost in two of such cases when it brought proceedings against legitimate businesses such as the Respondent.  See Avaya Inc. v. Sudhir Sazena, FA 1229266 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 9, 2008); and Avaya Inc. v. Moayyad Hamad, FA 1456063 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 14, 2012). ” “Consequently, the Panel finds that the Complaint was submitted in an attempt to hijack Respondent’s domain name” Avaya Inc. is a convicted Reverse Domain Name Hijacker 

Case #40 hivinnocencegrouptruth.com and hivinnocenceprojecttruth.com. Office of Medical & Scientific Justice, Inc. represented by Matthew H. Swyers of The Trademark Company, LLC, Virginia, USA. was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) in attempted theft of the domain names.

Case #41 Complainant is the Honorable Ron Paul of Lake Jackson, Texas, United States of America, represented by LeClairRyan, United States of America." Ron Paul has been found GUILTY of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. I certainly invite the congressman and/or the domain owner to comment here or even write a guest blog post. 

Case #42  The Complainant is Ryan P. Boggs of Los Angeles, California, United States of America, represented by Molly Megee Hankins, ESQ., United States of America. The three person panel found (pdf) that Boggs “engaged in duplicitous dealings with the Respondent in relation to potential purchase of the disputed domain name”. "Complaint makes express and implied assertions that are false. These false assertions might have misled the Panel had not the Respondent provided the evidence, readily available to the Complainant, that refutes these assertions. Furthermore, it is simply not fair to require the Respondent to provide evidence establishing that the Complainant’s case is without basis when the Complainant must have, or at least should have, known this fact. The egregiousness of these deficiencies of the Complaint is compounded by the fact that the Complainant was represented by counsel. "

Case #43 Complainant is Aptus Tech LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Max Moskowitz, of Ostrolenk Faber LLP, New York, USA.  Respondent is Name Administration Inc. (BVI)(“Respondent”), represented by John Berryhill, Pennsylvania, USA

Aptus Tech LLC represented by Max Moskowitz, of Ostrolenk Faber LLP, has now been found GUILTY of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. (RDNH)

"In this case, the evidence indicates that Complainant clearly knew that the disputed domain name was registered many years before it could establish rights in the KLIPZ mark and, thus, that it would not be able to establish that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith, which is one of elements one must establish in order to prevail under the Policy."

Case #44 Consuela, LLC  represented by Erik Paul Belt of McCarter English, LLP, Massachusetts, USA found GUILTY Reverse Domain Name Hijacking of Consuela.com Respondent is Alberta Hot Rods (“Respondent”), represented by Ari Goldberger of Esqwire.com Law Firm, New Jersey, USA.

"According to the majority of the Panel, not only did the Complainant present its Complaint when it was obvious that it could not succeed, it actually pressed its case by submitting an Additional Submission which did not address the key issue raised by the Respondent.  The Complainant thus harassed the Respondent by pursing the Complaint after the Complainant knew it to be insupportable.

A minority of the Panel is of the view that reverse domain name hijacking should not be found without evidence of some knowing effort to seize someone else's intellectual property.  However, the minority accepts the majority’s view.

Consequently, the Panel finds that the Complaint was submitted in an attempt to the hijack the Respondent’s domain name."

Case #45 Jaguar/Land Rover is the latest to have been found GUILTY of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) on the domain name MountainRovers.com. Complainant is Jaguar Land Rover Limited (“Complainant”), represented by Jennifer M. Hetu of Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP, Michigan, USA.

The attempt was so blatant, that the panel found for the respondent without the respondent even answering the complaint. A HUGE VICTORY for all!! But this is a really  GREAT case because there was no response by the domain owner and the panel still found Jaguar/LandRover guilty of RDNH. Jennifer M. Hetu of Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP, Michigan, USA got defeated by a ghost. How does a debacle like this unfold? You assume you are dealing with top notch professional folks at every level.

 

My hope is this is the last RDNH case I will ever have to post. The reality is this post will be re-posted EVERY SINGLE TIME there is a case of RDNH. Every time and now maybe some value based companies will think twice before flirting with this tactic and come to the bargaining table un good faith instead of being labeled forever with bad faith. The net is written in INK!

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL! Stop trying to steal and start doing BUSINESS! Feel free to repost FAR and WIDE!

Rick Schwartz

 

Consuela, LLC represented by Erik Paul Belt of McCarter English, LLP, MA, USA, GUILTY, Reverse Domain Name Hijacking of Consuela.com

Morning Folks!!

Another great day for domainers!

Guys, your NAMES are in Lights!! Congrats! Way to go! Proud???

Hey Morons, it's called capitalism! If you want something you PAY for it you don't try and abuse the systems so you can STEAL it. So now you have to live with the consequences of you being labled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker" forever.

Consuela, LLC  represented by Erik Paul Belt of McCarter English, LLP, Massachusetts, USA.  Live with it!! Hope you are PROUD! You are now case #44 below.

I will repost the following post each and every time there is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Decision. The best thing domain owners can do is Tweet, Like, Post and/or Share. So just don't sit there! You CAN do something to circulate these offenders. So do it! That's REAL SEO! I need your HELP. I can't do this alone. Charity starts at home and that means protecting what is yours. 

Want to stop RDNH and get the $$$ instead of a NAF or WIPO action? THIS is the way to start. Someday there WILL be a legal and CRIMINAL penalty but until then there IS a social penalty if YOU CHOOSE. And believe me, the social penalty is MUCH more severe than a fine that can be easily absorbed and forgotten about. This is PERMANENT! THEY have to live with the social consequences of their actions. The best thing you can do is Tweet, Like and/or Share instead of throwing your hands up in the air and doing NOTHING! Doing nothing is what these little pricks count on! Let them know! I can only do so much and I need your help to DEFEAT this practice.

Consuela, LLC  represented by Erik Paul Belt of McCarter English, LLP, Massachusetts, USA found GUILTY Reverse Domain Name Hijacking of Consuela.com

Morning Folks!!

There really is a penalty for Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and it is far more severe than anything monetary. I have been defending my domains from predators and would-be Domain Name Hijackers for over 14 years. When the Saveme.com case (Start at bottom of link page) came to me as a GIFT about 16 months ago I RELISHED my opportunity to change things. It was such a slam dunk that I was going to make this case an example for others and a warning of the SEVERE CONSEQUENCES that come with it. I may lose a domain, but a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER loses their entire reputation and it can't be repaired.

When I was a kid my parents and my teachers would scare me to be good as they would tell me if I was bad it would be on my "Permanent Record". Well when you commit a crime, it is on your permanent record. Misbehaving in school? Not so much.

So I have used the SaveMe.com case as well as others like Procter and Gamble to illustrate just how bad a decision trying to STEAL somebody else's domain really is. And so I did. I PROMISED to make Márcio Mello Chaves FAMOUS!! Promise kept baby!!

Go to Google or go to Bing and search for Márcio Mello Chaves or Marcio Mello Chaves.

THAT is how SEO REALLY works!!!

RELEVANCY!! Be relevant and you will have no problem being searched. Marcio Mello Chavez is relevant to Ricksblog.com and more importantly to Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. How does he EVER fix it?? It's a permanent record of FACT!

Search procter and gamble domains. You no longer get a list of domains they own.

So I believe the SOCIAL PENALTY far outweighs anything else. A $100k fine is nothing when you talk of a 7 figure domain and a multi-billion dollar company. A win could be viewed as a "Discount".  But when you have to deal with the SOCIAL FALLOUT, it is MUCH more SEVERE and I am proving it!

The Scarlett Letter of Domain Hijacking will follow those throughout their entire lifetimes and beyond. Here are MY POSTS about Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and those involved. The NEXT guy DESERVES what he gets because he has been warned and I am going to change their futures more than they can change their futures.

So this July 4th I feel like this year has been the turning point in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). And yes, I like to write out in full Reverse Domain Name Hijacking as many times as I can to associate a name with the deed! My only obligation to a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker is to make them FAMOUS! They try to destroy MY BUSINESS or YOUR BUSINESS?? Then they MUST live with the PERMANENT consequences. Did they show you mercy? Well they are warned and they OWN their decisions.

Did the biggest Company Shake up in 100 YEARS at Procter and Gamble have something to do with Reverse Domain Name Hijacking? Don't discount the possibility! Somebody made the decision to SOIL their companies stellar name. In government it may be overlooked or you get promoted. In business, you get you ASS kicked to the curb with all involved! And deservedly so!

I have 18 years and many millions of dollars invested in my online business as well as many of you readers. So if some IDIOT thinks he can just STEAL our hard work by hiring some hotshot and thinking $15k is all the skin they have in the game, then they have to live with the fallout and that fallout can be severe and  life changing. That's what BOTH the attorney and the client get from now on because attorney's know better at this point in time. So the job of the attorney is not be part of a hijacking and to AID and ABET. It is to educate their client or FIRE their client. Your CHOICE and just remember that YOUR NAME will be included in the fallout. It's not up to you and it is not in your control once you AID and ABET. And make NO MISTAKE, the panels today are not ignorant. The attorney is the mastermind of the hijacking as well as the driver of the car the way I see it. You have been hired as a contract hit man but the hit is not on a person, it is on property. Your client is in the back seat directing you and paying YOU to help him HIJACK a domain name. The MOMENT you go along with that, you are just as guilty because YOU KNOW what you are doing. It is premeditated. You are just as guilty aren't you my attorney??

Wrong minded? ok. But THAT is EXACTLY the way I see the roles and THAT is the passion I will write with every single time. Remember we are not talking about an honest difference of opinion where you need a ruing. We are talking when that ruling comes in that STATES that you have ABUSED the process. For that Mr. Attorney, YOU will be held accountable. Your choice? Tell your client the FACTS or FIRE your client. It may be the most important decision you ever make in life. And I get to write about YOU and mention NAMES whenever I feel like.

Molly Megee Hankins and Heitor Chavez are examples of what I am talking about as they represented Reverse Domain Name Hijackers and knew better! I will add more to the list as I look through the decisions to see which lawyers abused the process. 

I am going to stop this practice in it's tracks! If you are a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER or are found GUILTY of ABUSING the process, then You and your attorney will be known far and wide and throughout the world and it will follow you folks like a shadow on sunny days AND cloudy days and even in the dark!

Then you have the KING of all. Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL who represented Procter and Gamble. Have THEY been fired? Let me give them a second mention Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. I would assume these are top notch folks. HOW could they ALLOW their client to walk into this? I guess it would  take real balls to fire P&G. They might lose the account? Wonder if they were fired?

So if you are being unfairly threatened about your domain name, just point them here. It is FREE and EFFECTIVE because it is all based on FACT and PASSION! Give them a little window into how things may unfold because when YOU WIN and they get found GUILTY of REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING, I am going to write about them right here and make them famous too!

And what can you do? Circulate this post. Retweet it. Like it. Comment on Linkedin. Circulate it. THAT is a very small effort to help protect your livelihood and your assets that costs nothing and helps put these folks on notice. THAT is how to help STOP Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Rick Schwartz

Here is the current list I have of RDNH cases with our newest inductee. This list that the NEXT SCHMUCK gets to join and LIVE WITH!

So from now on we must ROAST these Reverse Domain Name Hijackers (RDNH). Ah you say but Rick what have you been doing if you are not already roasting them? Well there are some innovative ways we will begin to get the attention of these companies. But we will leave that for another day because this CONTENT is right here and not going away anytime soon.

Harsh? You bet!! These folks join Procter and Gamble and any others. But P&G BOUGHT the domain name later on.

Try to hijack a domain name and you will be shamed publicly because public opinion is the way to stop bad behavior when the laws out there are not adequate enough to do the job. Each of these companies will receive an increasingly HARSHER post from me because they are not ignorant of what they are doing. In almost every case they KNEW what they were doing and their INTENT was to STEAL using a governing body as their pawns!

The PUBLIC now OWNS the reputation of each of these companies and individuals as well as the attorney's that KNOWINGLY aid and abet because they KNOW BETTER. They are all now BRANDED in the most despicable way and so all the $$$ they spent to familiarize us with their products just got a mighty damaging blow.

Well there have been more findings of Reverse Domain Hijacking in the last 12 months that any preceding 12 month period. So the cat is out of the bag and they can no longer fool panels into being their unknowing accomplice.

So when I get threats, THIS IS WHAT THEY CAN LOOK FORWARD TO

I have 43 such cases so far of RDNH and this resource has 129 or more. Each win will discourage the next would-be hijacker. A tip of the hat to all owners below that fought and a big congrats to the attorney that represented them! I will list any and all cases as I learn of them. In time we hope decisions like these will will make the next IDIOT think twice before they attempt to STEAL something they have no legal or moral rights to. We now OWN YOUR REPUTATION and we will circulate!

And a special tip of the hat to John Berryhill who is the leading RDNH attorney in the world. I am counting and will post how many wins he has recorded on behalf of his clients. I would guess about 1/3 of all decisions. So if you are up against Berryhill or Neu or Goldberger, or Keating or a few others, good luck! You'll need it. Save yourself a great loss and embarrassment and WITHDRAW your case and send the other party their expense money and then get down to this thing we call "Capitalism" and NEGOTIATE!!

Otherwise you get to be labeled what "I" want to label you as and you will be tagged with that DESERVED recognition each and every time a new client does a search to find the good, the bad and the ugly. Want to know which group "Fuckers" will end up in?

And with each conviction I will be a bigger PRICK than the post before UNTIL this crap stops and will begin the tedious job of making REVERSE DOMAIN HIJACKING a CRIMINAL offense as we move forward.

If you are on thin ice, and found out to be GUILTY, you and your company will be listed right here and in all future blog posts and interviews relating to this and I reserve my right to use your attempted theft at every chance I get. Let the PUBLIC decide who is the THIEF! Who is the party found GUILTY of REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING! Each case will be included in the book I am writing as well.

SaveMe.com The Grand daddy of RDNH. Here is my post on this very big win against Márcio Mello Chaves, aka Márcio Chaves aka Marcio Chaves.

The Complainant is G.W.H.C. - Serviços Online Ltda., E-Commerce Media Group Informação e Tecnologia Ltda. of Sao Paulo, Brazil, represented by Almeida Advogados, Brazil. Found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

But in even a bigger case, Swash.com Complainant Procter and Gamble Represented by Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. Procter and Gamble is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker.

Case #1 is our Friend Scott Day of Digimedia who won a $100k+ judgment againstGOFORIT ENTERTAINMENT, LLC who IS a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER.

Case #2 Rain.com Media Rain LLC engaged in Reverse Domain Hijacking

Case #3 CinemaCity.com The Complainant is Prime Pictures LLC of Dubai, United Arab Emirates (“UAE”), represented by Law offices of Vince Ravine, PC, United States of America (“USA”). Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #4 CollectiveMedia.com The Complainant is Collective Media, Inc., New York, United States of America, represented by Lowenstein Sandler PC, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #5 Elk.com The Complainant is ELK Accesories Pty Ltd. of Preston, Australia represented by Pointon Partners, Australia is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #6 ForSale.ca Globe Media International Corporation is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #7 Mess.com Kiwi Shoe Polish Company, The Complainant is Mess Enterprises, San Francisco, California, of United States of America, represented by Steve Clinton, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #8 Goldline.com The Complainant is Goldline International, Inc., represented by Spataro & Associates is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #9 K2R.com The complainant is a Swiss company, K2r Produkte AG of Haggenstrasse45, CH 9014 St. Gallen, Switzerland is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #10 CarSales.com The Complainant is carsales.com.au Limited of Burwood, Victoria, Australia represented by Corrs Chambers, Westgarth, Australia is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #11 Proto.com The Complainant is Proto Software, Inc., New York, New York, United States of America, represented by Byron Binkley, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #12 TrailBlazer.com The Complainant is Trailblazer Learning, Inc. dba Trailblazer, Caledonia, Michigan, United States of America, Self-represented by Brett W. Company COO, Caledonia, Michigan, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker.

Case #13 DreamGirls.com The Complainant is Dreamgirls, Inc., Tampa, Florida, United States of America, represented by Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP, Los Angeles, California, United States of America and have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case #14 Mexico.com The Complainant is Consejo de Promoción Turística de México, S.A. de C.V., Colonia Anzures, Mexico, represented by Bello, Guzmán, Morales Y Tsuru, S.C., Mexico is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #15 Windsor.com Complainant in this administrative proceeding is Windsor Fashions, Inc., a California corporation with a principal place of business in Los Angeles, California, United States of America. Complainant is represented in this proceeding by Abraham M. Rudy, Esq. and Julie Waldman, Esq., Weisman, Wolff, Bergman, Coleman, Grodin & Evall LLP, Beverly Hills, California, United States of America. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case #16 Mindo.com Complainants are Scandinavian Leadership AB and Mindo AB of Uppsala, Sweden, internally represented. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 17 and Sha.com he Complainant is Albir Hills Resort, S.A. of Alfaz del Pi Alicante, Spain, represented by PADIMA, Abogados y Agentes de Propiedad Industrial, S.L., Spain. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 18 etatil.com The Complainants are ÖZALTUN OTELCİLİK TURİZM VE TİCARET LTD. ŞTİ. of Istanbul, Turkey, Allstar Hotels LLC of New York, Unites States of America and Mr. Metin ALTUN of Istanbul, Turkey, represented by Istanbul Patent & Trademark Consultancy Ltd., Turkey. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 19 Takeout.com. Complainant is Tarheel Take-Out, LLC of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America (“U.S.”), represented internally. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 20 WallStreet.com  The Complainant is Wall-Street.com, LLC of Florida, United States of America (the “United States” or “US”), represented by Flint IP Law, United States. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case # 21 parvi.org found for the complainant in 2009 but in 2012 the courts rules that theCity of Paris, France was guilty of "Reverse Domain Name Hijacking" in a landmark case that resulted in a $125,000 judgement against the city.

Case #22 Gtms.com The Complainant is Sustainable Forestry Management Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of Bermuda, with its principal place of business in London, United Kingdom. The Complainant is represented by its general counsel, Mr. Eric Bettelheim. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker".

Case #23 PetExpress.com The Complaintant is Airpet Animal Transport, Inc. represented by Mark W. Good of Terra Law LLP, California, USA. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker"

Case #24 ColdFront.com Complainant is Personally Cool Inc. (“Complainant”), New York, USA. They have been labeled a "Reverse Domain Name Hijacker"

Case #25 Unive.com Complainant is Coöperatie Univé U.A. of Arnhem, Netherlands, represented by Novagraaf Nederland B.V., Netherlands. "Given the circumstances, the Panel finds that the Complaint was brought in bad faith, in an attempt at Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, and constitutes an abuse of the administrative proceeding"

Case #26  eCase.com AINS, INC. (“Complainant”), represented by Janice W. Housey of Symbus Law Group,  LLC, Virginia, USA. The panel concludes that the Complaint was brought in bad faith in an attempt at Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Case #27 TinyPrint.com Complainant is Tiny Prints, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by CitizenHawk, Inc., California, USA "Complaint was brought in bad faith and that, accordingly, Complainant has attempted to engage in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking"

Case #28 Enki.com Complainant is Enki LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Eric A. Novikoff, of California, USA. "This is a frivolous proceeding which should never have been filed by Complainant. Accordingly, the Panel finds that Complainant is guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking"

Case #29 SFM.com Complainant is State Fund Mutual Insurance Co. represented by Peter G. Nikolai, of Nikolai & Mersereau, P.A., Minnesota, USA The Panel finds "Complainant has engaged in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking."

Case  #30 Swash.com Complainant Procter and Gamble Represented by Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. Procter and Gamble is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

"It is impossible to believe that the Complainant, who employs ultra-sophisticated marketing methods, was not aware that the disputed domain name, <swash.com>, had been registered and used by other entities for some years when the Complainant introduced its SWASH product line in 2009. 

The entire Panel finds it more extraordinary still that in its Complaint the Complainant represented the SWASH brand to be a worldwide brand of longstanding with multi-million dollar sales, stating that over the last 4 years alone the brand had gained sales of over USD 40,000,000. When this was challenged by the Respondent, the Complainant was forced to admit that the brand had only been on the market for 4 years, that sales had been restricted to the USA and that sales over those four years had totaled under USD 60,000. 

Had the Respondent failed to respond, there is a very real risk that the Panel, relying upon the 1993 International registration and the substantial sales volumes claimed for the brand, would have found in favor of the Complainant. This Complaint fell very far short of what the Panel was entitled to expect from a Complainant of this stature.

In all of the circumstances present here, the Panel finds that the Complainant has abused the process in an attempt at reverse domain name hijacking in contravention of the UDRP Rules at paragraph 15(e). The Panel majority also finds the Complainant has attempted reverse domain name hijacking because it must have known that the Respondent did not know of (nor had any reason to be aware of) any relevant trade mark rights in the SWASH name when the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in 2004."

Case  #31 3dCafe.com Complainant is 3DCafe, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Danielle I. Mattessich of Merchant & Gould, P.C., Minnesota, USA. The panel finds "Complainant acted in bad faith. The Panel therefore makes a finding of reverse domain name hijacking."

Case  #32 xPand.com The Complainant is X6D Limited of Limassol, Cyprus, represented by Bracewell & Giuliani LLP, United States of America. "The Panel therefore accepts the Respondent’s allegation that the Complainant is using the UDRP as an alternative purchase strategy after the acquisition of the disputed domain name failed. Therefore, the Panel finds that the Complaint was brought in bad faith, in an attempt of reverse domain name hijacking: The Complainant knew or should have known at the time it filed the Complaint that it could not prove that the domain name was registered in bad faith."

Case  #33 Webpass.com The Complainant is Webpass, Inc. of San Francisco, California, United States of America represented by Law Office of Richard J. Greenstone, United States of America.

D. Reverse Domain Name Hijacking


Paragraph 1 of the Rules defines Reverse Domain Name Hijacking:

“Reverse Domain Name Hijacking means using the Policy in bad faith to attempt to deprive a registered domain-name holder of a domain name.”

The general conditions for a finding of bad faith on the part of a complainant are well stated in Smart Design LLC v. Carolyn Hughes, WIPO Case No. D2000-0993 (October 18, 2000):

“Clearly, the launching of an unjustifiable Complaint with malice aforethought qualifies, as would the pursuit of a Complaint after the Complainant knew it to be insupportable.”

These conditions are confirmed in Goldline International, Inc. v. Gold Line, WIPO Case No. D2000-1151 (January 4, 2001) and Sydney Opera House Trust v. Trilynx Pty. Limited, WIPO Case No. D2000-1224 (October 31, 2000) (where the condition is stated as “the respondent must show knowledge on the part of the complainant of the respondent’s right or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name and evidence of harassment or similar conduct by the complainant in the face of such knowledge”), which in turn cites Plan Express Inc. v. Plan Express, WIPO Case No. D2000-0565 (July 17, 2000).

The Complainant knew when it filed the Complaint that the registration of the disputed domain name preceded by several years any rights that the Complainant may have acquired in the mark WEB PASS. Indeed, the Complainant annexes a printout of the WhoIs registration to the Complaint, and that printout indicates that the domain name was created well before the Complainant’s first use in commerce of its mark. In this Panel’s view, this is sufficient to find reverse domain name hijacking. See NetDeposit, Inc. v. NetDeposit.com, WIPO Case No.D2003-0365 (July 22, 2003) (finding reverse domain name hijacking because “Respondent's domain name registration preceded the Complainant's creation of its trademark rights”).

The Panel finds that the Complainant has attempted Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Case  #34 BSA.com Complainant is Bin Shabib & Associates (BSA) LLP (“Complainant”), represented by Jimmy Haoula, United Arab Emirates.

The panel finds that Complainant has failed to present any evidence to support its claimed rights in the disputed domain name.  It only provided an application for trademark registration which does not establish any enforceable rights under the UDRP.  It did not offer any evidence to support a finding of common law rights in the disputed mark.  Also, the Panel finds that Complainant knew or should have known that it was unable to prove that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name or that Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.  Based on the foregoing, the panel finds that reverse domain name hijacking has occurred.

See NetDepositVerkaik v. Crownonlinemedia.com, D2001-1502 (WIPO Mar. 19, 2002) (“To establish reverse domain name hijacking, Respondent must show knowledge on the part of the complainant of the Respondent’s right or legitimate interest in the Domain Name and evidence of harassment or similar conduct by the Complainant in the fact of such knowledge.”); see also Labrada Bodybuilding Nutrition, Inc. v. Glisson, FA 250232 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 28, 2004) (finding that complainant engaged in reverse domain name hijacking where it used “the Policy as a tool to simply wrest the disputed domain name in spite of its knowledge that the Complainant was not entitled to that name and hence had no colorable claim under the Policy”).

Having failed to establish all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be DENIED. The Panel further finds that Complainant engaged in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking."

Case #35 adjudicate.org.au The Complainant is Adjudicate Today Pty Limited of Mona Vale, New South Wales, Australia represented by Moray & Agnew, Australia. The domain, adjudicate.org.au. Futureworld Consultancy (Pty) Limited v. Online Advice, WIPO Case No. D2003-0297 states that a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking may be made if the Complainant “knew or should have known at the time it filed the Complaint that it could not prove that the domain name was registered or used in bad faith”. Given that the Complainant would have been aware that the Respondent had a more than negligible adjudication business in Australia at the time the Complaint was filed, the Panel is of the opinion that the Complainant knew or should have known that it could not prove that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith. Therefore, the Panel finds that this is an instance of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.

Case #36 Joopa.com Complainant is Edward Smith (“Complainant”), represented by Kuscha Abhyanker of Raj Abhyanker P.C., California, USA.  “the Complainant filed its trademark application shortly after it was unable to acquire the Disputed Domain Name from the Respondent on acceptable terms. "The panel finds that failing in this effort, the Complainant undertook to use the Policy to acquire the Disputed Domain Name.” “The panel finds that the Complaint has attempted reverse domain name hijacking in violation of the Rules.”

Case #37 PoliceAuction.com Complainant is Vortal Group, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Roger N. Behle Jr., of Behle Law Corporation, 575 Anton Boulevard, Suite 710, Costa Mesa, CA 92626. "Moreover, the Panel finds that filing a UDRP proceeding - which on its face can be qualified as frivolous - without any basis to do so should be construed in the present case as harassing. Here, Complainant admitted it knew that the domain name was registered prior to its using the at-issue mark in commerce. When, as in the present case, Complainant is unable to show trademark rights through use or otherwise which predate registration of the at-issue domain name, then it becomes impossible for it to prevail. In the case before the Panel, there is no way that Complainant could have reasonably expected to prevail and its counsel should have known better." Vortal Group, Inc. is a convicted Reverse Domain Name Hijacker and "counsel should have known better"

Case #38 Opulence.com Complainant is Horizon Publishing, LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Marc J. Kesten of Marc J. Kesten, P.L., Florida, USA.
Horizon Publishing, LLC of Fort Lauderdale, Florida is the latest to be labeled a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER by the governing body.

Case #39 Avayo.net Complainant is Avaya Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Joseph Englander of Shutts & Bowen LLP, Florida, USA. “The Respondent correctly notes that the Complainant has previously filed domain name cases, and lost in two of such cases when it brought proceedings against legitimate businesses such as the Respondent.  See Avaya Inc. v. Sudhir Sazena, FA 1229266 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 9, 2008); and Avaya Inc. v. Moayyad Hamad, FA 1456063 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 14, 2012). ” “Consequently, the Panel finds that the Complaint was submitted in an attempt to hijack Respondent’s domain name” Avaya Inc. is a convicted Reverse Domain Name Hijacker 

Case #40 hivinnocencegrouptruth.com and hivinnocenceprojecttruth.com. Office of Medical & Scientific Justice, Inc. represented by Matthew H. Swyers of The Trademark Company, LLC, Virginia, USA. was found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH) in attempted theft of the domain names.

Case #41 Complainant is the Honorable Ron Paul of Lake Jackson, Texas, United States of America, represented by LeClairRyan, United States of America." Ron Paul has been found GUILTY of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. I certainly invite the congressman and/or the domain owner to comment here or even write a guest blog post. 

Case #42  The Complainant is Ryan P. Boggs of Los Angeles, California, United States of America, represented by Molly Megee Hankins, ESQ., United States of America. The three person panel found (pdf) that Boggs “engaged in duplicitous dealings with the Respondent in relation to potential purchase of the disputed domain name”. "Complaint makes express and implied assertions that are false. These false assertions might have misled the Panel had not the Respondent provided the evidence, readily available to the Complainant, that refutes these assertions. Furthermore, it is simply not fair to require the Respondent to provide evidence establishing that the Complainant’s case is without basis when the Complainant must have, or at least should have, known this fact. The egregiousness of these deficiencies of the Complaint is compounded by the fact that the Complainant was represented by counsel. "

Case #43 Complainant is Aptus Tech LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Max Moskowitz, of Ostrolenk Faber LLP, New York, USA.  Respondent is Name Administration Inc. (BVI)(“Respondent”), represented by John Berryhill, Pennsylvania, USA

Aptus Tech LLC represented by Max Moskowitz, of Ostrolenk Faber LLP, has now been found GUILTY of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. (RDNH)

"In this case, the evidence indicates that Complainant clearly knew that the disputed domain name was registered many years before it could establish rights in the KLIPZ mark and, thus, that it would not be able to establish that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith, which is one of elements one must establish in order to prevail under the Policy."

Case #44 Consuela, LLC  represented by Erik Paul Belt of McCarter English, LLP, Massachusetts, USA found GUILTY Reverse Domain Name Hijacking of Consuela.com Respondent is Alberta Hot Rods (“Respondent”), represented by Ari Goldberger of Esqwire.com Law Firm, New Jersey, USA.

"According to the majority of the Panel, not only did the Complainant present its Complaint when it was obvious that it could not succeed, it actually pressed its case by submitting an Additional Submission which did not address the key issue raised by the Respondent.  The Complainant thus harassed the Respondent by pursing the Complaint after the Complainant knew it to be insupportable.

A minority of the Panel is of the view that reverse domain name hijacking should not be found without evidence of some knowing effort to seize someone else's intellectual property.  However, the minority accepts the majority’s view.

Consequently, the Panel finds that the Complaint was submitted in an attempt to the hijack the Respondent’s domain name."

 

My hope is this is the last RDNH case I will ever have to post. The reality is this post will be re-posted EVERY SINGLE TIME there is a case of RDNH. Every time and now maybe some value based companies will think twice before flirting with this tactic and come to the bargaining table un good faith instead of being labeled forever with bad faith. The net is written in INK!

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL! Stop trying to steal and start doing BUSINESS! Feel free to repost FAR and WIDE!

Rick Schwartz