Domainer stands up to a C&D and hijack attempts by filing suit

[BGray]

In case you guys didn't know about this story I wanted to post it here for a bit more exposure.

Mike Berkins wrote a post about Greg Ricks filing suit against a Las Vegas company that used a C&D letter and other hijacking techniques to try and obtain a domain Greg registered in 1999.

You can see Mike's story here: http://www.thedomains.com/2009/08/03/greg-ricks-responds-to-c-d-letter-by-filing-suit/

The original Las Vegas Sun story is here: http://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/aug/03/vegas-company-sued-over-web-site-promoting-escorts/

From what I understand the suit worked and terms were eventually settled out of court.

It's a really good story of a domain holder standing up to hijacking attempts and turning the tables and I wish it would have gotten more run.

Nice job Greg!

 

[gafadi]

well i am a newbie so this may seem noobish but from what i understand , many domainers want to stand up to fight against such c&d and hijack but most of the times its not worth it , either they try to settle it or drop it.

Most of the domainer 95 % probably are part time / extra income type of domainer, i am pretty sure if the domain is such premium and you are a domainer by profession ( full time ) you would stand up against such because you have that kind of resource . But part time domainer dont think its worth fighting for unless its very premium domain we are talking about.

Just my oponions, could be wrong

 

[David G]

In case you guys didn't know about this story I wanted to post it here for a bit more exposure.

Mike Berkins wrote a post about Greg Ricks filing suit against a Las Vegas company that used a C&D letter and other hijacking techniques to try and obtain a domain Greg registered in 1999.

You can see Mike's story here: http://www.thedomains.com/2009/08/03/greg-ricks-responds-to-c-d-letter-by-filing-suit/

The original Las Vegas Sun story is here: http://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/aug/03/vegas-company-sued-over-web-site-promoting-escorts/

From what I understand the suit worked and terms were eventually settled out of court.

It's a really good story of a domain holder standing up to hijacking attempts and turning the tables and I wish it would have gotten more run.

Nice job Greg!

I always wanted to do that myself with a Reverse Domain Hijacking case but did not know how to word the pleadings and process and could never find an attorney who would at a minimum do the paperwork and pleadings for me for a flat fee cost. Anyone else have success doing it?

 

[Soofi]

great, thanks for sharing bud!! +++

 

[JuniperPark]

I like the idea of going for trademark revocation!

 

[Soofi]

I like the idea of going for trademark revocation!

It was like hammering reverse hijacker in the balls lmao

 

[BGray]

It's not the fact that he defended himself as much as that he went on the offensive and filed suit himself. Action like that will make people think twice. Reverse hijacking penalties are a slap on the wrist but a legit lawsuit is another ballgame all together.

 

[David G]

I always wanted to do that myself with a Reverse Domain Hijacking case but did not know how to word the pleadings and process and could never find an attorney who would at a minimum do the paperwork and pleadings for me for a flat fee cost. Anyone else have success doing it?

There are 4 such lawsuits I could file if I only had the pleadings for just one of them so I could modify and customize the others to a degree based on the somehwat different facts.

 

[DigiNamesDigiNames is verified member.]

Good on him, companies think they can just bully a domain owner and they will give in. Way to go.

 

[Zak MuscovitchZak Muscovitch is verified member.]

Thanks for pointing out this interesting story.

At first I thought the registrant issued a lawsuit merely in response to a C&D letter, but after reading the news article, apparently the registrant really filed the lawsuit primarily because he needed to invalidate the other party's trademark registration; otherwise his use of the domain name would be severely limited and his rights to the domain name would have been threatened. Accordingly, this is similar to the CHEAP TICKETS case where we issued a lawsuit after winning a domain name arbitration to cancel the trademark of the complainant...

Nevertheless, I have often considered the act of issuing a lawsuit merely as a result of receiving a C&D letter. Such a lawsuit would be for "declaratory relief" alone, i.e. asking the court to declare who "really owns or has rights to the domain name". Since a C&D letter usually claims that the claimant "is the rightful owner" of the domain name, a "lis" is created, i.e. a dispute is created, which by itself is arguably enough for the recipient to ask a court to intervene and decide the issue. Normally of course, such aggressive action is not necessary and premature, and of course expensive, but it is within the arsenal of a domainer.

In case you guys didn't know about this story I wanted to post it here for a bit more exposure.

Mike Berkins wrote a post about Greg Ricks filing suit against a Las Vegas company that used a C&D letter and other hijacking techniques to try and obtain a domain Greg registered in 1999.

You can see Mike's story here: http://www.thedomains.com/2009/08/03/greg-ricks-responds-to-c-d-letter-by-filing-suit/

The original Las Vegas Sun story is here: http://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/aug/03/vegas-company-sued-over-web-site-promoting-escorts/

From what I understand the suit worked and terms were eventually settled out of court.

It's a really good story of a domain holder standing up to hijacking attempts and turning the tables and I wish it would have gotten more run.

Nice job Greg!

 

[DomainFatigue]

Way to go Rick!

I bet it settled out of court. Do you think an escort service wants to be subject to the discovery process during civil litigation? With records available to the public and err Uncle Sam?

And to think if his asking was too high all they had to do was make a reasonable offer for my talentcheck_._com

Sorry, I measnt to say Ricks and for some reason can't edit my post...

Way to go Ricks!

I bet it settled out of court. Do you think an escort service wants to be subject to the discovery process during civil litigation? With records available to the public and err Uncle Sam?

And to think if his asking was too high all they had to do was make a reasonable offer for my talentcheck_._com

Way to go Ricks!

I bet it settled out of court. Do you think an escort service wants to be subject to the discovery process during civil litigation? With records available to the public and err Uncle Sam?

And to think if his asking was too high all they had to do was make a reasonable offer for my talentcheck_._com

What the hell is going on that I can't edit my posts and trying to clean it up in a repy doesn't work. Mods can you do so?

 

[Fearless]

Thanks for pointing out this interesting story.

At first I thought the registrant issued a lawsuit merely in response to a C&D letter, but after reading the news article, apparently the registrant really filed the lawsuit primarily because he needed to invalidate the other party's trademark registration; otherwise his use of the domain name would be severely limited and his rights to the domain name would have been threatened. Accordingly, this is similar to the CHEAP TICKETS case where we issued a lawsuit after winning a domain name arbitration to cancel the trademark of the complainant...

Nevertheless, I have often considered the act of issuing a lawsuit merely as a result of receiving a C&D letter. Such a lawsuit would be for "declaratory relief" alone, i.e. asking the court to declare who "really owns or has rights to the domain name". Since a C&D letter usually claims that the claimant "is the rightful owner" of the domain name, a "lis" is created, i.e. a dispute is created, which by itself is arguably enough for the recipient to ask a court to intervene and decide the issue. Normally of course, such aggressive action is not necessary and premature, and of course expensive, but it is within the arsenal of a domainer.

Canceling the TM was secondary. Preventing a reverse hijacking was my primary objective. Especially since I'm involved in another lawsuit with a party that is using the same law firm. They thought they perfected the perfect road map to reverse hijacking domain names. I put up a road block.

 

[BidNo]

Thanks Bryan, I did miss that story. And along with congratulations to Greg, let me add my thanks.

Cheers,

 

[Sonny Banks]

Props to Greg!

 

[Zak MuscovitchZak Muscovitch is verified member.]

Well, good work in any event. Nothing like a good offense to be the best defense...

Canceling the TM was secondary. Preventing a reverse hijacking was my primary objective. Especially since I'm involved in another lawsuit with a party that is using the same law firm. They thought they perfected the perfect road map to reverse hijacking domain names. I put up a road block.

 

[Domainator]

I love it when the fuxxxr gets fuxxxd

Congrats to Greg and a warning to all the fuxxxr's out there!