Reverse domain hijacking

[Raider]

Ex forum member that got caught hijacking.

 

[katherine]

.What is AlienGG?

Banned domain hijacker: http://www.dnforum.com/member.php?u=81728
http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?t=234501

My suggestion: wait for their lawyer to contact you (if that happens).
They said they consulted with a lawyer, yet the C&D was not written by a lawyer. I am a bit skeptical but why not.
In the meanwhile dont make threats, dont make any further move.

 

[Focus]

I would avoid doing this. It's like you are at a bar and a guy is threatening to kick your ass, and you replying "go ahead and take your best shot tough guy." Maybe you can beat him up, but why take a chance that you'll get a black eye in the process. Like someone else said, if the name is worth keeping, consult an attorney. They could have common law rights perhaps, and maybe it isn't worth fighting. Oftentimes people expect a difficult time dealing with domain investors so they come out with cannons blazing. This is probably a result of dealing with tactics that people like Focus obviously display. Sometimes common sense prevails and you both can be happy with the agreement. Better to have a fair settlement rather than a domain name you can't develop without fear of a lawsuit.

For the record "EJS" I am very level headed and very nice to "them" I give back domains all the time for reg fee or snap cost..I don't hang out in BARS, not sure about you and your examples..lol
I also don't get in childish fights with others as I don't want to have to hurt somebody over something stupid or God forbid they pull out a knife or bottle and I have to shoot them where they stand, if I were in a BAR. lol

My response and advice was only given to him based on the information he presented..in these cases the nice guy does not always win...fyi, it is not my first go round in a situation like this, and personally I would fight it, and tell them to kiss my a$$ or show me the cash...esp if they are being rude and unwilling to deal. Which usually means: they don't have cash to buy it, and they don't have resources to sue you. Do what you want dude, good luck. k:

 

[Deleted member 70408]

For the record "EJS" I am very level headed and very nice to "them" I give back domains all the time for reg fee or snap cost..I don't hang out in BARS, not sure about you and your examples..lol
I also don't get in childish fights with others as I don't want to have to hurt somebody over something stupid or God forbid they pull out a knife or bottle and I have to shoot them where they stand, if I were in a BAR. lol

My response and advice was only given to him based on the information he presented..in these cases the nice guy does not always win...fyi, it is not my first go round in a situation like this, and personally I would fight it, and tell them to kiss my a$$ or show me the cash...esp if they are being rude and unwilling to deal. Which usually means: they don't have cash to buy it, and they don't have resources to sue you. Do what you want dude, good luck. k:

Maybe I am naive, but I don't believe sending an aggressive response is necessary or productive. If you happen to be in the wrong, you will piss off an attorney who is probably working off of someone else's dime and doesn't care about filing a lawsuit instead of a UDRP. If you are in the wrong and are nice, you may lose the name, but you don't have to worry about someone knocking on your door to serve you a lawsuit. If you are in the right, whether you act aggresively or not, you will be able to handle your business appropriately. If the name is worth keeping, hire an attorney and he will do your talking for you. Why get in a pissing contest with someone when it isn't a valuable use of your time or energy?

 

[Dave Zan]

If the name is worth keeping, hire an attorney

And one who's specifically well-versed in this matter.

I wonder about the thread title. No one's going to know if this is an RDNH.

 

[INVIGOR]

People really have no idea about trademarks, patents, IP. Taught me a lot, a WHOLE, WHOLE, WHOLE, WHOLE WHOLE, lot. Hmm... FIRE and WIRE, two words that rhyme, are dictionary words, "common" etc. 24 trademarks on uspto.gov.

Best thing to do is SHUT UP (no offense) and get an attorney or give it to them for the best terms you can negotiate. Eveything you post here may eventually get in their hands, etc., etc., etc. JUST GET A LAWYER. Why do you think the first thing they tell you when you get arrested is YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT....Oh, they tell you: BECAUSE ANYTHING YOU SAY CAN AND WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU IN A COURT OF LAW.

GET A LAWYER LIKE BERRYHILL, LIEBERMAN, ETC.

 

[Deleted member 70408]

People really have no idea about trademarks, patents, IP, etc., taught me a lot, a WHOLE, WHOLE, WHOLE, WHOLE WHOLE, lot. Hmm... FIRE and WIRE, two words that rhyme, are dictionary words, "common" etc. 24 trademarks on uspto.gov.

Best thing to do is SHUT UP (no offense) and get an attorney or give it to them for the best terms you can negotiate. Eveything you post here may eventually get in their hands, etc., etc., etc. JUST GET A LAWYER. Why do you think the first thing they tell you when you get arrested is YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT....Oh, they tell you: BECAUSE ANYTHING YOU SAY CAN AND WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU IN A COURT OF LAW.

GET A LAWYER LIKE BERRYHILL, LIEBERMAN, ETC.

Agreed. Those guys are good from what I hear. Another good attorney is Brett Lewis.

 

[jberryhill]

John, I don't want to take your time too much since I can appreciate your position, but what do you mean by strike one, two, etc, was I wrong in trying to verify if the company that did own the name is connected with the person who is contacting me, and why was it wrong to temporally take down to parked page, no infringement if the name points to nowhere.

Strike one - if indeed the person who contacted you was an officious intermeddler, pot-stirrer, or prankster, then you have (a) drawn in someone who might not have cared, and (b) based on general observations here, most likely said something damaging.

Strike two - you were either infringing or you weren't. However, one need not examine the question because their warning about a maybe or maybe-not TM claim caused you to change your behavior. This is often interpreted as an admission on your part that you were doing something wrong.

Does a complainant need a registered trademark? No.

This just in:

http://domains.adrforum.com/domains/decisions/1008008.htm

Complainants are HandHeld Entertainment and Kieran O'Neil (collectively, “Complainant”), represented by John Berryhill, 4 West Front Street, Media, PA 19063. Respondent is WhoisGuard a/k/a WhoisGuard Protected (“Respondent”), 8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #110 - 732, Westchester, CA 90045.
[...]

The domain name at issue is <holylemon.com>, registered with Enom, Inc.
[...]
Complainant attempts to establish rights in the HOLYLEMON mark through a claim of continuous and extensive use of the mark for over four years. Complainant sets forth news articles in defense of its claim of rights in the HOLYLEMON mark. In addition, Complainant provides evidence indicating that it has consistently and prominently used the HOLYLEMON mark in the headline of the website at the <holylemon.com> domain name as a mark, and not merely as a domain name. In light of this evidence, the Panel finds that Complainant has sufficiently demonstrated that the HOLYLEMON mark has acquired secondary meaning and, therefore, Complainant has common law rights in the mark pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).


I've highlighted some of the types of things one might use to demonstrate common law trademark rights.

And before anyone accuses me of going over to "the dark side"... it all started with the hi-jacking of a free email account....


At some point after entering into its asset purchase agreement with HandHeld Entertainment, Mr. O’Neill encountered difficulties logging into his e-mail account and soon thereafter discovered the he could no longer access the <holylemon.com> domain name, and that the domain name was somehow also transferred to another registrar. Mr. O’Neill believes this was the result of using public Wi-Fi Internet access while traveling to meet with HandHeld Entertainment.

 

[Dave Zan]

Holy lemon...

 

[neopolus]

Holy lemon...

Touche .....

Good luck with the issue, out of the bat , get a lawyer .. for your peace of mind, and protection, you never know who is after that domain...

Neo -

 

[Raider]

I would wait and see where this goes before actually retaining an Attorney, In the meantime, learn what you can about your rights, let him make all the moves, and as I stated earlier, DONT communicate at all with this guy without legal representation, its sounds as though your creating issues that can come back and bite you later, if your not sure what to do, ask John or Brett and post to this thread, and whatever you do, DONT disclose the domain.

 

[Focus]

Definitely hire John Berryhill if he will take the case and you need someone...I have only heard great things about him and he is the first person I would goto if I had to spend money on an online dispute :smile:

 

[Amdek]

Thanks to all,
It sounds like based on John's comments that I already screwed things up and I guess I should just roll over and turn the name over to them, based on the common law case that John pointed out HolyLemon, sounds like anyone that has used a name for business for a few years has an automatic common mark.

I don't want to wait for the next move , because that next move might just be a suit, not a C&D, why fight something you're going to lose anyway.

Thanks again.

 

[Domagon]

Web consulting firm messes up and seeks parked / unused domain back ... ah yes, that sounds familiar ...

The "client" they represent not even exist ... or just as likely is a small outfit with little to no available financial resources to even start a challenge let alone carry it through; they didn't actively utilize the domain, no registerered TM, etc.

In a nutshell, the letters are probably more bark than bite.

I've been in similar situations ... typically, best to reply back something to the effect the domain expired / domain was available, and there's nothing more to discuss.

Even though you've replied back with much more than that, it's, in my view, still not too late to set things right ... ignore their questions, etc and simply reply back with a one liner to the effect the domain expired / was available and there's nothing more to discuss - and drop it.

Is that risky ... yes, but replying with in-depth responses as you have, in my view, is far more risky than a terse response that states a simple fact and leaves it at that.

Ron

 

[jberryhill]

It sounds like based on John's comments that I already screwed things up and I guess I should just roll over and turn the name

Umm.... no. I have utterly no idea what you should do, and I have utterly no idea what, if any, their rights may be.

sounds like anyone that has used a name for business for a few years has an automatic common mark.

I choose my words carefully, and expect them to be read carefully.

Whether they have a common law trade mark depends on a number of things like:

-where they have used the term;

-how they have used the term;

-whether the term is inherently distinctive, or whether the term may have acquired distinctiveness;

- whether their use has been substantially exclusive and continuous;

...and that's just off the top of my head.

Some posters are under the impression that all legal questions are "simple", and that law is a set of black and white rules. It doesn't work that way.

For example, let's say someone asks:

"Can I shoot someone and take their money?"

Folks here would say, "No, that's illegal."

Me? I'd say, "It depends. Is the guy escaping from a bank robbery with hostages? If he is, then by all means shoot him and get the money back."

But I wouldnt want you to then post something like, "It sounds like John says it is okay to shoot someone and take their money."

Under some circumstances it is illegal, under other circumstances it is not only legal but commendable.

 

[yingyang]

2)I did offer to sell them back the name for a very fair price, and he claimed he cannot afford that fee.

Wont be able to afford a lawyer or a udrp either lol...........silence is golden...

sounds alot like they let the domain fall out of reg....I dont know about .coms but if a .eu falls out of reg into a 45 day bucket....you got to pay an extra 80 dollars to take it back out.....maybe they couldnt afford that either......

either way.....stop conversing till you see something on official paper....it could be a bidder from snap who has the hump.....