Membership is FREE – with unlimited access to all features, tools, and discussions. Premium accounts get benefits like banner ads and newsletter exposure. ✅ Signature links are now free for all. 🚫 No AI-generated (LLM) posts allowed. Share your own thoughts and experience — accounts may be terminated for violations.

Ardyss Guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking for Going After Distributor

Status
Not open for further replies.

companyone

DNF Regular
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Messages
1,333
Reaction score
12
Hi,



**Not my blog...not promoting anyone..."Just The Facts Mam"


Ardyss Guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking for Going After Distributor

Arbitrator says company tried to deceive panel.



Wellness and undergarment company Ardyss International has been found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking by a National Arbitration Forum panel.

Ardyss filed a complaint for the domain name ArdyssBodyMagicShop.com, claiming that the owner of the domain was not a contracted distributor for Ardyss and was selling counterfeit Ardyss goods on its web site. Ardyss included an affidavit from the company’s CFO stating that it had no business relationship with the respondent, according to the case decision.

The domain’s owner countered that it is indeed an independent distributor and has spent $240,000 with Ardyss, and provided documentation.

It appears that Ardyss provided an affidavit naming an entirely different person than the respondent and listing different domain names than from the instant case. A clerical mistake by Ardyss? Maybe so, but it’s surprising that they wouldn’t file an additional submission to clarify the facts or withdraw the case upon learning of its mistake.

Actual Ruling Click Here

Citing this conflicting story, the panelist wrote:

"This Panel cannot but draw the conclusion that the Complainant has engaged in a wilful attempt to deceive the Panel, hiding facts and making statements regarding Respondent that the Complainant presumably would easily have been able to correct after checking its internal records."

Source
_____

Best,
Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Who has viewed this thread (Total: 1) View details

Who has watched this thread (Total: 1) View details

The Rule #1

Do not insult any other member. Be polite and do business. Thank you!

Members Online

Premium Members

Upcoming events

Latest Listings

Our Mods' Businesses

*the exceptional businesses of our esteemed moderators

Top Bottom