If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the largest domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 105,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.
Register Today on DNForum IT'S FREE!
Li Ka Shing - Worlds 16th Richest Man - Linked to Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Li Ka Shing, the 16th richest man in the world with $16.2 billion, has been linked to an unusual case of reverse domain name hijacking.
Thoughts?
For me it's too funny...
http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-...hijacking/5701
Respondent has posted here:
http://www.idnforums.com/forums/138524-post8.html
Seems to be the first case of RDNH of an IDN
Great result for all concerned, Zak Muscovitch deserves a mention and I forsee a busy time ahead for him ..
I guess this story is important in that the domain in question is an IDN.com.
Profoundly influenced by #Bauhaus, Nameslave unrepentantly embraces Minimalism in his #multimedia portfolio. His early works include an experimental adaptation of Chekhov’s Cherry Orchard using the #Minimalist method inspired at least partly by the music of Robert Fripp. His totally irrelevant M.Ed. dissertation examines Organizational Culture and Change Management.
Too bad, Mr. Li did not ask me for a consultation. But who are the real winners? The solicitors of course.
Not mentioning it went before ADNDRC HK beforehand and altering the submission to suit their 'cause' was tantamount to failure. Regardless of that fact, I feel the panel would have found in favour of the respondent.Originally Posted by tekz999
A desperate and stupid move on the behalf of complainants counsel ..Respondent notes that Complainants filed a Complaint in accordance with an established format, except that they deleted the section requiring Complainants to disclose “Prior Legal Proceedings” pursuant to paragraph 3(b)(x)(i) of the Rules, and adjusted the numbering of the remaining paragraphs accordingly. Respondent argues that this deletion evidences a calculated effort to deceive the Panel into believing that the current Complaint was the first such legal proceeding, when in fact, there was a previous proceeding which resulted in a previous decision in favor of Respondent.
Li Ka Shing cant afford the asking price? Hmm ...
Li Ka Shing can't take it with him when he dies.
True ...Li Ka Shing can't take it with him when he dies.
But missing out on the 'face' factor will hurt him a lot more than death itself
wtf... this is the same dude who recently invested in the swedish Spotify music service (which I would recomend to my own mother)
Posting Permissions
View Profile
View Forum Posts
View Forum Threads
View Friends
View Blog Entries
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks