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: Titmouse, Inc. ( Los Angeles, California, United States )
Result: Titmouse, Inc. found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Mandour & Associates, with offices in Los Angeles and San Diego, represented the animation studio Titmouse, Inc. in its effort to use the UDRP process to acquire the domain titmouse.com from its original registrant, who has owned the domain since 1998. A single-member panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization handed up a ruling of […]
Read More...Client: Boller Winkler AG ( Turbenthal, Zurich, Switzerland )
Result: Boller Winkler AG found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Wild Schnyder AG, based in Zurich, Switzerland, represented the textile firm of Boller, Winkler AG in its effort to hijack the domain schlossberg.com from an individual of the same name. A panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization handed up a ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking on August 9, 2022.
Read More...Client: Fly Go Voyager SRL ( Bucharest, Romania )
Result: Fly Go Voyager SRL found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Suciu & Asociații, a Romanian law firm, represented Fly Go Voyager SRL, of Bucharest, Romania, in the company’s attempt to take the domain flygo.com from its original registrant. The domains was registered six years prior to the incorporation of Fly Go Voyager, which earned the company a ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking from the […]
Read More...Client: Sanofi ( Paris, France )
Result: Sanofi found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
Selarl Marchais & Associés, based in Paris, France, represented Sanofi in the pharmaceutical company’s effort to take the domain initiv.com from its current owner. A single-member panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization handed up the ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking on July 23, 2022. In writing his decision, panelist Adam Taylor specifically singled-out […]
Read More...Client: Handy Guy, Inc. ( Temecula, California )
Result: Handy Guy, Inc. found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
David J. Simonelli, of Simonelli IP, a private attorney from Birmingham, Michigan, represented Handy Guy, Inc. of California in its effort to hijack the domain handyguy.com from its owner. A three-member panel of the National Arbitration Forum handed up a ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking on July 20, 2022.
Read More...