The job of the attorney is not to be part of a hijacking and actually Aid and Abet. It's the job of the attorney to educate their client or fire their client. Explain the self inflicted damage that can be done to them, their company, their brand, you as an attorney and the firm you work for. HallofShame will now begin to list you as the attorney and the firm you represent. It will be a stain you cannot remove and it will be all self inflicted because you knew better!
Aid and Abet? Make no mistake, the panels today are not ignorant. The attorney is the mastermind of the hijacking as well as the driver of the car the way I see it given what we know now. You have been hired as a contract hit man so to speak but the hit is not on a person, it is on property. Your client is in the back seat directing you and paying you to help him hijack a domain name when your real job is to protect him. The moment you go along with that scheme, you are just as guilty because you know what you are doing. It is premeditated. You are just as guilty aren't you Mr. Attorney?? If not, why not? I have read the decisons and the panels have been brutal when they get lied to. When lawyers and their clients fabricate accusations and get caught doing it!
Wrong minded? Outrageous? Over the top? ok fine. I may be guilty of bad taste. How does that measure up against being found guilty of Reverse Hijacking a domain name by the govering panel? Worth the gamble of ending up here at HallofShame.com and then what? Blame me? Threaten ME!?
All I am suggesting is you better be on solid ground when you hit somebody with a WIPO or NAF action. Your choice and just remember that Your Name will be included in the fallout. It's not up to you and it is not in your control once you are found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.
Client: Coca-Cola Femsa ( Mexico City, Mexico )
Result: Coca-Cola Femsa found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Chevez Ruiz Zamarripa represented Coca-Cola Femsa, of Mexico City, Mexico, in that company’s attempt to use the UDRP process to grab KOF.com. A three-member panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization found RDNH on October 18, 2022.
Read More...Client: Rohit Sur ( Australia )
Result: Rohit Sur found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Dentons Canada LLP represented ProjectPay Pty Ltd, of Australia, in their effort to use the UDRP process to transfer the domain projectpay.com. A three-member panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization handed up a ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking on October 17, 2022.
Read More...Client: Revista Emprendedores S.L. ( Spain )
Result: Revista Emprendedores S.L. found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
ECIJA, Spain represented Revista Emprendedores S.L. in its attempt to use a UDRP to hijack the domain emprendedores.com. A panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization handed up its ruling on October 3, 2022.
Read More...Client: Gibson Brands Inc. ( Nashville, Tennessee, USA )
Result: Gibson Brands Inc. found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Bates & Bates LLC represented Gibson Brands, maker of Gibson guitars, in the company’s effort to take the domain tobias.com from AssuredPartners Inc., an insurance firm. A single-member panelist of the World Intellectual Property Organization found Reverse Domain Name Hijacking on September 29, 2022.
Read More...Client: United Services Automobile Association ( San Antonio, Texas, United States )
Result: United Services Automobile Association found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Caitlin Costello represented the United Services Automobile Association (USAA) in their effort to use the UDRP process to hijack the domain usaainsuranceclaimsadjusting.com from an insurance adjuster. The ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking was handed up by the National Arbitration Forum on September 27, 2022.
Read More...