The Domain King's® thoughts on domain names, web traffic, increasing web sales, success, life, and plain-old Business & Marketing 101. Nothing happens until a sale is made!
Shortly after the LadyGodiva.com suit between Campbell's and yours truly and when I had first met Howard, I had another interesting conflict with another very large company.
In those days, domain owners just rolled over. Not me. I was going to be the mouse that roared because the Internet as a medium was meant to even the playing field and these SOB's were going to have to deal with the new reality.
I do not look for or pick these fights, but I relish them when they come. I relish them because it is these wins that protects my other domains and yours too!
'Hi Howard!!
In response to Lilly’s offer……I am confused by their lack of
understanding. Please ask them the following question:
If I am willing to spend 6 figures each on two separate
actions involving Lilly Industries to KEEP goofoff.com…….are they absolutely
insane and out of touch with reality to think that an offer like that is
reasonable???
I would have loved to see the mental process, if any,
involved to come to this? How ridiculous
and silly can a company that has been around 134 years look? I just don’t get it.
Let alone that the annual profit on goofoff.com is many times more than that!!
As I have said in several public forums this year……there are
companies of the last 100 years and companies of the next 100 years.
Please make it CLEAR to Lilly Industries that I am in this
for the duration. If they INSIST in publicly showing that THIS is the type of
outfit they are……they have a LOT more to lose than I do. Don’t let them
underestimate my resolve in this matter. Now not only am I dealing with a Corporate
Bully…….I now find myself dealing with Corporate IDIOTS!!
I want both of my days in court. I want the WORLD to see
this for what it is. I want my peers to understand what a terrible thing Lilly
and others are doing. If they want to settle, tell them to backoff and act in a
responsible way that you would expect such a corporation like Lilly Industries
to act.
Tell them I have taken SEVERAL polls and when asked if folks
were confused between Lilly, Ely Lilly and Lilly Industries, 500 out of 500 were
totally confused. When asked about goof off the paint remover and goofoff the
time waster, not a single person was confused.
I don’t want to be nasty and I sure did not look for this
fight……but the ONLY confusion here is on the part of 1 of those Lilly’s because
I still don’t have a clue of who’s who.
I have repeatedly said no to interviews with television and
radio in regards to this matter. On January 2, 2000, if not before, I am going
to begin to accept those invites. If this continues I want the world to know
what I know about the arrogance, ignorance, stupidity of Lilly Industries.'
They did not get any smarter over the years and came back at a 2nd bite at the apple. Here is where that is now. All Goofoff.com traffic goes to my blog post and all is ON THE RECORD FOR THE RECORD!!!
This post below is from 2013 but with all talk of SOB's lately and SOB.com pointed here, indulge me while I make an update.
First if you are here about Reverse Domain Name Hijacking the mother of all hijacking came in 2017 in the form of MY domain name Queen.com. Some SCHMUCK in Denmark, Frands Jepsen, did not heed my warnings. Now he is a convicted DOMAIN HIJACKER! Read the entire story right here
So that brings me to 9/26/2017. Thank you President Trump for increasing the value of SOB.com! Now it's for sale. We will trade the domain name for bitcoin. You can inquire as to how many by email.
Now back to my April 2013 post:
Some folks don't like my style. Sure, many domainers don't care about Reverse Domain Name Hijacking because they have no domains anyone would want to steal. So for them, ScrewYou.com. You protect your assets and family the way you see fit and I'll do the same. Except I live in the world of reality and in reality there are still corporate bullies roaming around taking things they are not entitled to legally or morally.
I have been defending these suits as long as they have been in the business of filing them. And it is a business. A BIG business. But it is no longer going to pay off and the risk is going to more than any rational company should be willing to take.
Shortly after the LadyGodiva.com suit between Campbell's and yours truly and when I had first met Howard, I had another interesting conflict with another very large company. In those days, domain owners just rolled over. Not me. I was going to be the mouse that roared because the Internet as a medium was meant to even the playing field and these SOB's were going to have to deal with the new reality.
I do not look for or pick these fights, but I relish them when they come. I relish them because it is these wins that protect my other domains and yours too! This has been a 15 year battle and I have INVESTED tens of thousands of dollars or more protecting my self and then using these cases to INSURE my other domains by defeating corporate bullies trying to take
LadyGodiva.com
GoofOff.com
TSTV.com
And others
and Reverse Domain Name Hijackers.
SaveMe.com
And thankfully 38 decisions on Reverse Domain Name Hijacking by other parties that I chronicle right here, some 130 case at RDNH.com and then a special post for Procter and Gamble that thought they were above all this and could lie to the presiding panel.
DOWN GOES FRAZIER! (look it up, if you don't know what it means)
Now if folks don't learn from this and don't realize if they slap down Procter and Gamble that they will swat you down in the same manner when you do the same thing, they are just schmucks that will get what they deserve. So if that is YOU that I sent here to read this, then PLEASE don't be that schmuck.
But if you ARE that schmuck............think twice. If YOU are convicted of RDNH, Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, No reputation management software will erase the ink. You will be stuck with the consequences of your actions. In time that may be equal to a prison record. I will OWN your reputation and I don't want to. But YOU are calling the shots because YOU are the PREDATOR. So if this rattlesnake bites, just make sure you blame yourself and not me.
Amazingly, not one of these fuckers have ever contacted me after the decision to say congratulations. To say they were sorry. To start a constructive dialogue. To ask if we could work something out. To make a bonafide business offer. These would-be thieves would 'steal' but when they got CAUGHT, never offered to pay. Low life scum comes to mind to describe that behavior.
And when we talk about Procter and Gamble, a domain dispute I was not involved in, famed domain attorney John Berryhill had this to say abot them as reported in DNJournal.com
'The entire premise of the UDRP proceeding was stunningly dishonest. They want the domain name for something else entirely, and concocted an utter work of fiction in order to attempt to stealit.'
Berryhill lays out the facts that prove his points - P&G wasn't interested in the domain because of a failed product they once marketed, they wanted it for a new offering. Unfortunately they didn't want to pay a fair and reasonable market price for it, for some bizarre reason, believing it would be smarter to try to steal it. Next time you look up the phrase 'penny wise and pound foolish' on the web, odds are you will see the P&G logo illustratingthe concept.
It was important enough to lie or steal or attempting both but not important enough to pay for??
FUCKERS! What do you want to call them? The domain in question 'Swash.com' Marchex was willing to let go for $30,000. Not exactly a shake down but an incredibly reasonable price. A domain I will state right here publicly has a high mid-6 figure value in my professional and personal opinion and I would have expected a 7 figure asking price. So $30,000???? What was the COST of the The cost of the action P&G filed? Now it cost them a lot more because this is ON THE RECORD!
'Well, it's not PROFESSIONAL to call them names.' Say some. Fine when PROFESSIONALS stop LYING and trying to STEAL, I'll stop calling them FUCKERS! How's that?
Am I harsh? Hell no! When companies and other folks try to steal from me and others, it would not surprise me if we were not the only folks they did it to. Just a common sense wild guess that I am sure has no merit at all. Right?
And believe me, as harsh as I have been, wait til you see what happens to the next FUCKER that tries and overstep their legal, moral and every other rights in hopes they can get something on the cheap that they have no RIGHTS to. They put their entire company and everyone working there in jeopardy when they mess with me. When they mess with you too. When they try and steal a domain.
Look, sometimes there is a legitimate dispute. The law is seldom black and white. So I respect when there is a true point of contention and then let the chips fall where they may and no hard feelings either way. However, when common sense is thrown by the wayside and folks make things up, then we have a serious mess and I am gonna milk that baby so the next FUCKER learns before they step in the ring.
They will read this. I will point them to it. Their decision whether they want to GAMBLE not only their company's reputation but their personal reputation as well and that of the attorney handling the case. Ya know, the ones that 'Should know better'. Do they really want to do that with all this EVIDENCE for them to see?
I don't sell mercy. I give a FREE WARNING of what might happen if you decide to illegally TRESPASS.
Here we go again! ANOTHER decision of 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacking has just come down and this time we have to go down under.
The Complainant is Adjudicate Today Pty Limited of Mona Vale, New South Wales, Australia represented by Moray & Agnew, Australia. The domain, adjudicate.org.au.
I have 35 such cases so far and 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 tey attempt to STEAL something they have no legal or moral rights to.
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 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!!
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.
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 #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 #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 #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 isPersonally 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 underUSD 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.
SeeNetDepositVerkaik 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 alsoLabrada 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.
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!
How long will I continue to write about Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH)? Until my domains and your domains and the domains of every mom and pop operation in the world are safe from predators like Procter and Gamble and the other 33 companies listed HERE.
I respect trademark holders. I am one. I understand. I get it. I can see it from both sides. I know what infringing is and looks like. But I also know what stealing is and looks like. So my job is to make a DEEP impression on the next company engaging in RDNH.
If you are a TM owner and you think some domain is worthy of a UDRP, you better make sure that if the respondent goes after you for Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, that you are on solid ground. If not, you have a MAJOR decision in LIFE! Read that again. IN LIFE! Because if you screw up on this, it will affect your life and that of your company.
You have to decide if the reputation of your entire company is worth it. You have to decide if MONEY is a better and safer alternative. You can no longer just think you can walk away with a domain name just because you want it. There is a marketplace and that's the arena that this all belongs in. So when you go out of the marketplace, you get what you get.
What would YOU have advised Procter and Gamble to do now that you KNOW it blew up in their face? What would you do? $30,000 to sell your companies reputation?? If the GIANT goes down, what is your shot? A $79 Billion dollar company has all the resources in the world and look where they ended up. As a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker found guilty of lying to a governing panel. I did not put that blemish on their name. I did not stain their name. They did that all be themselves. But I will be the PRICK that points it out at every opportunity because that's all we have. And ya know what? That will get it done!
You really want to gamble the future of YOUR company on the SAME BET Procter and Gamble took and LOST?? Do you really?
Then you are a total schmuck and you deserve to get treated like one. How's that?
Sorry, I don't have to be respectful of thieves and those thinking about stealing. My assets are GENERATIONAL and you can go to hell trying to get what my FAMILY owns! I took the risk and I paid to play!
Folks that are abusing the process and lose suffer no criminal or legal penalty as of today. That WILL change. But until then, our job is to tar and feather their deeds. Let folks know what the company they do business with is up to. Let them know their values. Let them know how they think. How they try and steal.
And remember this, in cases of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, that is a subject people will know more about in the future not less about. Our job is to discuss, write and HAUNT them. That's the only penalty and leverage we have at this UNTIL companies stop doing this. How does that happen? This is the way that happens. Words are very powerful. Thoughts are very powerful. Deeds are things you live with.
I want Procter and Gamble to do what is right. Why should they? It's their record. It's their name. It's their problem. And maybe doing what's right is actually something they should consider.
So the more people that know and find out the more the outrage. Someday these horse thieves of this century will pay a legal price. Until then these would-be horse thieves and cattle rustlers have to deal with whatever public fallout may occur as INFORMATION is circulated.
Our results may be invisible to us but it is not invisible. It takes its toll. Cut after cut. Punch after punch. The key is never to stop. And I never will. Its the ONLY way to protect our assets until the law catches up with this practice or companies stop engaging in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.
Common sense shows that stealing is wrong and for BIG companies to resort to stealing is pretty startling to the regular folks. That crap just does not fly for people with morals and values. Maybe a big company like P&G, that sold their stellar reputation for $30,000 should come out and say so! They sold their reputation to you and me. They no longer control it.
So these companies seem to lack morals and values and we will expose that to as many folks as possible as often as possible until THEY come out and address their misdeeds or criminal penalties are enacted. That's how I see it. You can all forget about it tomorrow. Somebody has to make sure the torch and the flame move on.
So if you file an action against a domain holder and they come back at you with a claim of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.....you better RETHINK what you are doing. Is it worth it? Would Procter and Gamble give $30,000 today if it knew what was about to happen?
Just plain DUMB, FOOLISH and costly and this is all in ink and every company pulling this crap will have a virtual 'Scarlet Letter' pinned to their name for the rest of time.
You just can't make this stuff up! Are they clueless? Are they out of touch? How do you excuse this colossal screw up? For $30,000, somebody or some department or departments PLUS their attorneys made a decision to put the reputation of Procter and Gamble on the line. For $30,000!!!!!!!!!!
You guys fill in the adjectives. I am off the rails on this. I just can't believe what I just read. Besides that, they were getting a BARGAIN for a domain like that. $30k??!! GEEZ! How do you not call the folks involved MORONS?? And worse!?
However you can start to fix it! What say you?? Isn't it worth the attempt? It can only get worse as the news spreads and it is spreading.
Ok, not me, then how about Cavuto? Go on his show. EXPLAIN who and why. You don't think heads should roll? Do you really think you can ignore this? What IDIOT is responsible?
This is outrageous and if I were you I would be fuming at this! 172 years came and went and a stellar brand has now been branded a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER! If you IGNORE this then I would interpret that as nothing learned.
Procter and Gamble (P&G) has been found GUILTY of trying to REVERSE HIJACK a domain that they did not own via an ABUSE of the governing body and LIED during the process. Saying they did $40 Million in business n the swash product when in FACT it was $60,000. That ain't just a little fib. That is misleading the governing body to influence them with a LIE! And if it were not for the attorney, Mr. Berryhill, it may never have come to light. (You can read some of his comments about the case here)
That is now around the neck of Procter and Gamble until they use their influence to PROTECT domain owners not ABUSE domain owners! To do business the right way and not THAT way! They have been doing this a long time. They KNOW the rules. But they decided to abuse those rules instead of abiding by those rules.
My question and yours now should be, HOW MANY OTHER TIMES AND TO OTHER PEOPLE DID PROCTER AND GAMBLE DO THIS TO?? HOW MANY DID NOT OR COULD NOT DEFEND THEMSELVES? How many of your 8000+ domain names have been gotten through less than honorable means?
Don't like those questions? TOO BAD! They are coming and they will continue to come. This MAY be the tip of the iceberg and I think we have a right to find out. Especially if the company does not address this directly. It's their reputation and right now and for the first time in 172 years, they don't control it.
Procter and Gamble has been a beacon of marketing for generations! It's one of America's finest companies. It HAD a stellar name. It hurts to go after a company I have admired and learned from all my life. This is not fun. Painful in fact. But I know a vaccine when I see one. I know this will be a HUGE lesson for the next guy. That's what this is about for me. An Inoculation to protect me and you and all domain owners big and small. Let them watch what happens when you get tagged with being a REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKER (RDNH).
I am upset and I have nothing to do with your company and don't own any stock in it. So if the folks that work there are not 100x as outraged as I am, that the name of a GREAT company has been FOREVER SOILED, then they are just CHUMPS that don't get it and there are 2 MEN rolling in their graves who would not be proud of this day or them. That's my opinion and I think the facts support that opinion.
We are starting to learn about the details of this unbelievable case involving Procter and Gamble. Now prepare to fall on the floor over stupidity and just being a cheap chump.
BizJournals is reporting: 'P&G asked Marchex in March 2012 to give it the name in exchange for registration and transfer costs. Receiving no response, it then offered $600. Marchex refused and asked for $30,000.'
So a 172 year old company got THIS and all the rest to come for not paying a LOUSY $30,000 for this $79 BILLION dollar company and had to try and STEAL the domain by LYING!?
The lie? They said they sold $40 MILLION on the Swash product when in FACT it was $60,000.
I am not happy that Procter and Gamble has been found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking but I am going to milk this story for every ounce it is worth and it may take me YEARS to do it. When it comes to Domain Names, Procter and Gamble was a guiding light in my book. Great respect because they figured it out. Even tho I vaguely recall them dumping a bunch of domains years ago. I think I might have gotten 1 or 2.
Reverse domain name hijacking (also known as reverse cybersquatting), occurs where a trademark owner attempts to secure a domain name by making false cybersquatting claims against a domain name's rightful owner. In this case not only did P&G make false claims, they also lied outright to the governing panel and got caught!
See when I started, P&G was already out there getting domain names or soon thereafter. So they understood about domain names very early. It is that reason that what they did is particularly troubling. I always liked and respected Procter and Gamble because they always moved well with the time and of course I like everyone else use a lot of their products. But all our lives. All my parents lives. All my grandparents lives and half of the life's of their parents before them. Whew!
They are the warm and fuzzy company that gave us many soap operas and toothpaste and all types of other things we use each and every day. They perfected the TV commercial long before any of us were even in the game or born. So it makes me sad to learn one of my heroes is now a would-be thief had the other party not fought back and exposed their fraud! Well done John Berryhill!
Who made that decision? Who was responsible for P&G overstepping in this outrageous manner? So outrageous that a 3 member panel called them out in a way I don't think I have seen before. Saveme.com case had very strong language. But this language seemed to be harsher in tone. I guess it is open to interpretation. But maybe because it was slapping a business giant as if he had no more standing than you and me. BRAVO!!
I am not mad at them. I am going to use Procter and Gamble to make many points over the next YEARS! Let companies KNOW if P&G is convicted of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, you will be too if you engage in this despicable act. But I would just as well have them tell the story. I'd like to ask why a company worth billions would STAIN their reputation with this act that the common man would find appalling? Why would they not just come to an agreement with the owner? Now they pay the price and the price is priceless. How stupid is that??
I am angry, upset and most of all disappointed in a company that wrote the book on marketing and other things. They were true leaders of an era. Of many eras.
So what MORONIC company wants to be NEXT!!?? Who made the decision to do this? Why did they do it? What transpired that allowed them to risk so much for so little?? That's what I really don't get.
I am very disappointed. I am still going to use their products but they can't force me to look at their company the same ever again. These companies are playing with fire.
Maybe they should do some research into history and see what some little old ladies did to big companies that tried to build malls where their homes were located. This is akin to that. But in an age like this news flies and it is in ink.
Some SCHMUCK working at SOME DEPARTMENT at Procter and Gamble, decided it was worth GAMBLING the reputation of a 172 year old company. 135,000 employees. $79 BILLION in sales in 80 countries. And they had to try and muscle some guy with a domain? What would you call that Mr. CEO of Procter and Gamble?? I CHALLENGE you Mr. McDonald to come to our trade show and explain it to this audience and the wider audience? I CHALLENGE YOU!!??
Wow! What a HUGE blunder. What have you learned? Are you going to use the same tactics again? Are you pissed at me? Maybe you should be pissed but I am not the one you should be pissed at. I would be pissed at the person, department or firm that put the reputation of your 172 year old company on the line and LOST!!??
Besides all this your company, P & G, was found to misrepresent facts to the panel. Nice touch! Were you personally involved in that decision? You should RESIGN TODAY if you were. This is all my personal as well as professional opinion. I'll assume you were not involved in a low level decision that was this stupid and worse.
What say you Mr. McDonald? Personally I am just disappointed that a company I have always looked up to would stoop to this. I am sorry for the bluntness of this post but our industry has suffered from corporate bullies for nearly 20 years and this time the giant of em all went down and went down very hard. Very hard! A company that otherwise has been very wise in their domains and how they have conducted themselves. But now this STAIN and none of your STAIN REMOVERS will be effective on this.
Mr. Berkens points out that your folks LIED to the panel when your company said they did $40 Million in business on the 'swash' product.
““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.”
Most importantly Mr. Berkens points out one last thing:
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.
So your company LIED Mr. McDonald in an effort to STEAL a domain that belongs to another company, Marchex, which just as easily could have been some mom and pop in Iowa that could not defend themselves and let you have the domain. You now join our 'Hall of Shame' and each time somebody is convicted of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking, we repost the entire list. Congrats!
So let me ask you directly Mr. McDonald, How many domains has your company gotten that it had to LIE about? Or that they had to make folks spend money they did not have to defend what was rightfully theirs and is now yours? Tell us that. Isn't that a fair question in light of what has happened? Maybe you should WANT to find out. WANT to make it right. If I have something wrong, please let me know.
Sir, I have been doing this for 18 years and what your company did is troubling and it is something that we as risk takers have had to UNFAIRLY endure. There is a free market place. Use it, don't abuse it. Right now you and your 172 year old company have to live with this. It probably means nothing to you but it may mean the WORLD to somebody else. So to get our message out we need to SHAME companies that engage in this abuse as there is no penalty for what we just saw happen. They just walk away.
Bob McDonald. CEO since 2009
Here is a list of Procter and Gamble Products. The asterisk are their *Billion Dollar Brands*. Come on Mr. McDonald. What say you about this? You sound like a stand up guy that served your country and company well. You have been with the company for 33 years. Don't you want to get to the bottom of this as well? Who put the companies good name in jeopardy for this? Who lied? What idiot is responsible? Marketing? Legal? Finance? Who? How many? Why would you allow this embarrassment to occur again or are you too big to be embarrassed? Any other abuse in the name of your 172 year old company. I sure as hell would want to know if I were in your position.
So we are forced to use Procter and Gamble as an example to sway the next MORON or the next company not to get involved with this despicable act of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH). Help us do that Mr. McDonald and you will find an ally and we can call it a great day!
And as I read the history of the company I stopped as it described the 'Joint Venture' that started this company back in 1837. Wonder what Mr. Procter and Mr. Gamble would have done given the same circumstance? Before they even had billions? My instinct says they would have acted in a different manner and somebody there violated a 172 year old trust just because he or she was a cheap bastard that played fast and loose with the facts and refused to pay either fair market value or find an alternative.
Just wanted to give you some important mid summer
updates.
T.R.A.F.F.I.C. is #1 because we set the pace and
are not afraid to try new things. The first silent domain auction, the first
live domain auction and now, with that in mind, T.R.A.F.F.I.C. is proud to
present another ground breaking first in the industry.
For the first
time at any domain show we are going to have multiple live auctions presented by
multiple auction houses. This is going to be a game changer! Howard and I have
nothing to sell. Our job is to promote the industry as best we can and also be
as inclusive as we can. In tough times like this there will actually be an
increase in domain acquisitions. Domains that would have never been sold will
now be on the auction block. Plus, with multiple companies promoting the live
TRAFFIC auctions in New York City, the bidding action and
excitement will be better than ever. Multiple companies trying to include end
users. Multiple companies competing for the best domains. Multiple companies
offering different type inventories at competitive prices. Multiple auctions with multiple auctioneers and different styles of auction.
As is stands now we believe there will be up to 5 different auction companies holding live domain auctions in New York City
in September. Moniker will continue to be the 'Premiere' auction at T.R.A.F.F.I.C. as
they have been. As you might imagine, this was not an easy decision. Monte and his crew have done a great service to us all over the years. Just sometimes what is good for one company may not be in the best interest of an entire industry. So kudos to Moniker for doing what others would not do when none of us knew the outcome.
Last year the New York TRAFFIC show produced a record breaking
$12M in auction sales. I believe that is more than all other live domain auctions at other shows
combined for both 2007 and 2008!! We have the right location at the right time
with the best domain audience.Including other
auction houses will be effective, good for the growth of the industry, make
things very exciting and open things up that will create lots of energy. Like I
said, this is a game changer and we are all big winners. More info will be
released soon.
We will also be announcing a T.R.A.F.F.I.C.
REWARD PROGRAM later this summer. This program will give perks/discounts to
future TRAFFIC shows starting at our San Francisco/Silicon Valley show next
April. Those spending $10,000 or more at the auction will be eligible for those
rewards. The reward program will be in effect during the New York City show in
September. The more you spend, the more perks you get.
That's about it. We are working hard to make sure
that TRAFFIC keeps way ahead of the pack. Since 2004 we have set the tone and
agenda for the industry by always providing cutting edge and trailblazing ideas
and agendas. Howard and I take great risks in an effort to bring the industry to
the forefront of marketing. Mix that with the biggest and the best and you get
TRAFFIC. We don't know the result of multiple auctions but it is going be a fun
thing to watch unfold. I expect we will announce the participants as early as
this week. I will update this blog with the companies as those companies commit.
Not only will this transform the domain aftermarket, it will transform the
auction houses that participate. Just look at the growth of our biggest partners
over the years. From DomainSponsor, to Moniker, to TrafficZ and others, TRAFFIC
has facilitated the growth of these companies. We are the 'King makers' and that
has been the bi-product of what we do and we can do it for many
more.
Now just a few quick reminders.
1. The group fees go up tomorrow (Tuesday)
The 5 pack goes up $1000.
The 10 pack goes up $2000.
2. The $1795
Preferred admission ends on July 31st.So sign up now and save. http://targetedtraffic.com/ny_register.html
3. The hotel rates will be going up on August 20th. Book your
rooms now as we are already 65% booked and the rates will go up by $200/night. http://targetedtraffic.com/ny_hotel.html
Now back to your regularly scheduled summer!
Have a GREAT day!
Rick Schwartz
Update: We can now announce 4 of the auction companies that will be holding live auctions at T.R.A.F.F.I.C.
Moniker.com
Thought Convergence
RickLatona.com
Bido.com
A year ago I decided to
write a book. 75 posts later, that book is done. It resides right here. 75
posts (Chapters) most of which are aimed at the corporate and investment world
along with the domain industry as well as other trailblazers. Free for the reading. I hope someday it is read by folks on Main
Street to Wall Street who can TRANSFORM their businesses if they can figure out just how EASY
it is to harness the power of the Internet. The posts are aimed at folks at
every level. As I have said for many years, there are countless ways to
climb this mountain, this was my path and this is my vision based on my
path. A 20 year plan. A plan based on timing. That success or failure has
a lot to do with timing. Sometimes timing is everything. So with that in mind,
it is TIME to do other things. Whatever I can say has been said. It is here. It
is on eRealEstate.com and it is on TargetedTraffic.com. Now the time that I
have always shared has to be devoted to other challenges and other projects.
The first of which opens today at Property.com. Widgets.com and others will soon follow. Time
to allocate my time in a new way. The industry is maturing and splintering and
becoming more serious and becoming more desperate. So the dynamics of the
cottage industry that gave birth to what we do is no more. The orbit has gone
to higher levels. Those in other orbits have to work hard to escape the gravity
of whatever orbit they are currently in to move to the next level. The safety
of mediocrity has to be overcome by the challenge of what the future promises.
Have a GREAT spring and
hope to see everyone in Orlando at the next TRAFFIC this May and in New York City in September. For any further thoughts, just read my previous post..
Transparency has emerged
as the key issue for 2008. T.R.A.F.F.I.C. tackled the problem in session after
session. Change won't come easy but it will come. A set of standards are now in
play and has wide support.
What does transparency
do? It educates. Education creates a bigger market with wider and deeper demand
because they have a clear understanding and that is something to build on. But
the way the system is set up, it rewards mediocre traffic while ignoring very
potent traffic and not filtering out the crappy traffic. So as long as you mix
those 3 groups together, the entire online advertising community is not capable
of taking advantage of this golden opportunity to steal market share from
traditional media. They are stuck with mediocre traffic no matter what. Blind
buying will choke online advertising. And I have yet to even mention a word about separating social traffic from commercial traffic which is a huge factor. Scratching your head? What am I talking
about?
Let's reverse things. Imagine
buying time on TV and not knowing if you are getting Super Bowl time or 3AM
bible music ads. IMAGINE how absolulutely INSANE that system would be!! How could you possibly build on that. There is no recipe. It's Russian Roulette. Well
welcome to OUR world of insanity. THAT is exactly what WE do on the online
advertising and why so much of the $$$ don't make it to the pockets of the
domain owners who supply that traffic and why the demand is not as high as it
could or should be for Google and Yahoo on top of the equation. That also suppresses
payouts because it is all about supply and demand and the demand has never been
what it should be because without knowing what you are getting it is impossible
to increase your buys for most businesses. It's basic stuff not rocket science. The result is easy to see when there is a flaw in the construction.
I URGE folks to start
thinking about grading traffic. Having transparency. Having Google and Yahoo
and PPC providers cooperating because as I illustrated above, the current
system is insane. It makes little sense. It is world's better than impression
based advertising but it is not good enough to compete with traditional media
for the long term and actually get those dollars that can be won over sooner
rather than later.
We have mediocre traffic
for a mediocre system because we mix all the laundry together and have yet
to learn to separate the colors from the whites, from the stuff covered in
Sh*t. The space will never evolve to its full potential until things like this
are understood and addressed. Not all traffic is created equal. Not all TV ads
are created equal. Not all magazine ads are created equal. The blueprint is
already in place from traditional media. Some of that blueprint may be
obsolete, but much of that blueprint for magazine circulation and TV ratings is
waiting to be deployed in what we do. Buyers need to know the 'Source' of the traffic they are getting and the system should be transparent enough for them to see. So when we talk about 'Transparency', we are talking about it on many levels. Domainers have a responsibility. Monetizers have a responsibility. Google and Yahoo and whoever shows up next, have a responsibility.
Recent Comments