Heard of CitizenHawk.com

[eCommando]

Have any of you heard of citizenhawk.com?
According to their web site, they have automated C&D letters and UDRP filings.

 

[jberryhill]

Bad people are stealing your money.

Send us money and we will stop them.

Doncha just love this world?

You want a business model?

Enlist TM clients. Typosquat their TM's with crummy whois data. File UDRP's to get the domains. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

If you think it doesn't happen, you are kidding yourself.

 

[Devil Dog]

Bad people are stealing your money.

Send us money and we will stop them.

Doncha just love this world?

You want a business model?

Enlist TM clients. Typosquat their TM's with crummy whois data. File UDRP's to get the domains. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

If you think it doesn't happen, you are kidding yourself.

wow...

just wow.

 

[Dave Zan]

But it does happen. There's no limit to what some people will do to get what
they want.

 

[jberryhill]

It's a variation on two common and very old scams in the trademark business.

1. You get a letter from a TM firm in Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, Russia, wherever. They send you a picture of a shopping bag from a store, or an item that was found in a 'raid' of a counterfeit goods operation, and "in the course of our investigation we found that you are the US representative of the trademark owner." With some more twists and turns, they then sell you on their services for securing your rights in their jurisdiction.

2. Similar to 1, they actually apply for your clients TM in that country using fake data. Then they send you the publication information for the TM when the opposition period rolls around, and they offer to oppose registration of the mark on your client's behalf.

There's a whole bunch of these types of things.

 

[Duckinla]

There was a dummy here a while back who got banned. His business idea was to register TM's and then offer to sell them to companies for less than the price of a UDRP. He seemed to think the idea was fool-proof* but yet he was always trying to recruit others here to do the actual contacting and selling.


*I love the word "fool-proof" because of a quote I once read: "It's impossible to make anyting fool-proof because fools are so ingenious."

 

[Brett Lewis]

You can't automate this stuff. The best that technology may offer in the future is a domain attorney-machine hybrid.

These scams prey on the assumption that everything can be automated or standardized. There is no single complaint or response that can be replicated to address every conceivable fact pattern.

 

[Dave Zan]

The best that technology may offer in the future is a domain attorney-machine hybrid.

I shudder the day that happens.

 

[jberryhill]

The best that technology may offer in the future is a domain attorney-machine hybrid

You mean like David Steele?

(heh, I gotta send him this thread)

There is no single complaint or response that can be replicated to address every conceivable fact pattern.

I have a couple templates, but I consistently under-estimate the time I need for a response. There was probably one time out of dozens that the response was largely cut & paste, since I had two "domain registered before trademark rights arose" cases in one month.

A lot of complaints are poorly-written, most likely in anticipation of a respondent default in a clear slam-dunk situation.

 

[typist]

A lot of complaints are poorly-written, most likely in anticipation of a respondent default in a clear slam-dunk situation.

Another strategy seems to be to ship 5 pounds of documents, hoping that the respondent - or his lawyer - won't have time to respond.

 

[Mr. Deleted]

Bad people are stealing your money.

Send us money and we will stop them.

Doncha just love this world?

You want a business model?

Enlist TM clients. Typosquat their TM's with crummy whois data. File UDRP's to get the domains. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

If you think it doesn't happen, you are kidding yourself.

Yep. I can see that happening.

 

[Biggie]

It's a variation on two common and very old scams in the trademark business.

1. You get a letter from a TM firm in Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, Russia, wherever. They send you a picture of a shopping bag from a store, or an item that was found in a 'raid' of a counterfeit goods operation, and "in the course of our investigation we found that you are the US representative of the trademark owner." With some more twists and turns, they then sell you on their services for securing your rights in their jurisdiction.

2. Similar to 1, they actually apply for your clients TM in that country using fake data. Then they send you the publication information for the TM when the opposition period rolls around, and they offer to oppose registration of the mark on your client's behalf.

There's a whole bunch of these types of things.

So, are you saying or implying that this company is not legit?

Are they not "official' representatives of these companies that they issue "TM" complaints for?

Trying hard to read "in-between-the-lines" here.

 

[Mr. Deleted]

So, are you saying or implying that this company is not legit?

Are they not "official' representatives of these companies that they issue "TM" complaints for?

Trying hard to read "in-between-the-lines" here.

1. no he was not saying that, but I will: the same investment company that invested in IREIT, also invested in CitizenHawk

2. No. They hire themself to the companies, they are not on the boards of these companies.

3. ya I guess...

Domain Name with that Latte?

Starbucks founder’s VC firm hedges its Internet bets.
May 2, 2007

By Leah Messinger


Is Starbucks chairman and founder Howard Schultz a typosquatter? Or is he a typosquasher?

Apparently, he’s both. Mr. Schultz, through his venture capital firm, has made a strategic investment decision that is rare, if not unprecedented. He put money into two companies with opposing missions: one that promotes so-called typosquatting, the buying of Internet domain names that closely resemble big brand names, and another that combats it.

It is extremely unusual for a VC firm to invest in two companies with such seemingly opposite goals, according to National Venture Capital Association vice president of research John Taylor. “It wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense for them to try to build a company that would be at direct loggerheads with the first company,” he said.

Mr. Schultz’s venture capital firm, Seattle-based Maveron, and H. Ross Perot’s investment arm last month plowed $38 million into iREIT, a Houston-based company that has been accused of typosquatting by telecom giant Verizon. But earlier this year, Maveron also invested in Aliso Viejo, California-based CitizenHawk, which makes software that helps trademark holders identify typosquatters and initiate legal action against them.

No one knows for sure how big the typosquatting market is. Groups like iREIT make money by purchasing domains in bulk with the hopes of selling highly coveted names for huge profits. In 1999, Marc Ostrofsky, a co-founder of iREIT, sold business.com for $7.5 million. Typosquatters can also cash in by selling click-through ads on these sites. Some estimates suggest typosquatting costs trademark owners millions, or even billions, of dollars in lost traffic and advertising.

Mr. Schultz declined to talk to Red Herring, but Maveron co-founder Dan Levitan said he didn’t see a contradiction between his firm’s investments. He said iREIT’s core business was to purchase and monetize generic domain names such as bands.com and officesupply.com. All told, iREIT owns more than 300,000 domain names.

He argued that iREIT did not intentionally seek out misspelled domain names, but rather, has acquired them inadvertently when it purchased domains in bulk. “In the process of aggregating a domain portfolio, we have purchased names in large quantities and have systematically weeded out the undesirable ones,” said Mr. Levitan .

He noted that iREIT has worked with trademark owners to resolve infringement claims and that, in the past, the company has simply dropped domain names or transferred them to the trademark owner.

But Verizon sees things differently. The company in March filed a lawsuit against iREIT, alleging that it had “registered over ninety domain names which are confusingly similar to the Verizon marks,” including verisonwirelss.com and verisonsuperpages.com. Sarah B. Deutsch, a Verizon vice president, said that as news of the lawsuit became public, iREIT appeared to transfer its Verizon-like domain names to anonymous accounts in the Cayman Islands. iREIT declined to comment for this story.

CitizenHawk, Mr. Schultz’s typosquashing investment, said it has worked with iREIT to help cleanse its portfolios of domains that closely resemble brand names but CEO Graham MacRobie acknowledged that iREIT has some “serious issues.” He also acknowledged that Maveron’s investment strategy is a bit unorthodox. “We think it certainly raises eyebrows,” he said. “It’s actually very prudent on Maveron’s part and on iREIT’s part.”

In an interesting twist for Mr. Schultz, attorneys familiar with the Verizon case pointed out that iREIT previously owned at least 13 Starbucks-related names, including astarbucks.com and starburcks.com. Attorneys said that after Maveron’s investment in iREIT gained attention, the company gave up those domains. They were then bought by typosquatters such as Unasi and UltraRPM, which industry experts claim are a more malicious breed of squatter.

Perhaps Mr. Schultz should stick to Frappuccinos.

 

[Biggie]

1. no he was not saying that, but I will: the same investment company that invested in IREIT, also invested in CitizenHawk

2. No. They hire themself to the companies, they are not on the boards of these companies.

3. ya I guess...

If they are NOT official reps of these companies, then how can they send out "C&D" letters to domain holders claiming such authorizations to do so?

is that not "mis-representation"?

 

[Mr. Deleted]

They are hired, as I said they are not on the boards etc, but they are hired to "stop the bad people" as John put it, from taking the company's money. If they can get the domain, they get paid, and they charge the company a lot of money for it. And the company that they are "representing" may be a victom in it all, as companies like this (citizenhalk) could be the ones that own the cybersquatted domains themself.

Lets put it this way:

CitizenHawk registers ibmserbers.com, puts fake whois info in the domain name, then as a rep for IBM, they sent a C+D for the domain to this fake contact info, then when it is returned as invalid, they file a UDRP, get the domain, get the $$$$$ from IBM. Easy money. Repeat with a new domain.

 

[rentdn]

Recently got a C&D for one of my domain from this company ( it is typo ) , and after reading this I'm not sure what to do

1. to give the domain back

2. or simply to ignore ?