JeffB apparently doesn't like me having KINGSNAKES.COM...

Ok...Hypothetical

You have owned Rkreptiles.com for 5 years.
Your site specializes in Cb Ambanja Panthers.
The site is #1 for Ambanja Panthers on the www
You have worked your butt of to get it to that point
You earn an income and support your family based on the site

Now Johns Chameleons a new startup owns
www.johnschams.com and also sells ambanja
chameleons like you.

He buys Rkreptile.com and has it forwarded to
his site.

Now why do you think he did that?
According to people here you have to be knucklehead or have thumbs for fingers to mistype right? -So why is it?
Is it ethical?
Is it legal?

Answer to the last 2 qurestions...NO

You're not a knucklehead to MISTYPE IT you are a knucklehead to THINK YOU ARE AT YOUR DESTINATION.

This Christmas hubby and I are driving to Estes Park Colorado... 9000+ elevation. IF we end up at the ocean, we'll KNOW we made a wrong turn.

IF I type kingsnakes.com and don't get where I expected to go, I try again. We all know that typos happen. The silly thing is to think that you are at your destination when it looks all wrong. The other day I remembered purchasing some items from a website. Didn't remember the url. So I typed several in, they were all nearly the same url. Just slight differences. They ALL sold the same kinds of stuff. But I didn't stop typing in the URL's until I was sure I got to the site I was looking for. Didn't matter to me if sites A, B, and C sold reptile supplies all for the same amount of money. I had already bought from Site D, and so I kept going until I found what I know. Did I feel that the other sites were SNEAKY to have similar URL's? Nah. Some looked visually very similar, did I think THEY were sneaky? Nah. I didn't care how they looked, I went till I found my destination.

Now if Rich made a website that exactly imitated kingsnake.com down to the links and everything only led to different content that was perhaps harmful to KS's reputation and business, that would be unethical. (And copyright violation, and snuffed out in no time).

Larry,

I only ask because you seem to be very certain in your opinion concerning this issue . . . Are you an attorney?

I am certainly not, but it seems to me, knowing the animosity that exists between the protagonists here, that JeffB would have simply sued Rich if he thought he successfully could. Why go through this much less threatening step of arbitration, if a straightforward lawsuit were "winable?" I just don't understand that.

Also, internet law is hazy at best, because it is so new and untested. Why are you so adamant in your opinion? I am truly curious and mean no disrespect in my questioning.

TYIA

Larry,

If in your post case I had forgotten to renew my subscription to my site rkreptiles.com then it is open for ANYONE to purchase and use as they wish. Now would I be happy about it if I lost my domain? No! but that is the way the cookie crumbles. If Anyone wants a site that is close in name to theirs then they purchase it to ensure nothing happens except what you would like to happen with that Domain name. If you choose not to purchase the domain then so be it but don't come complaining about it down the road when someone else does purchase it. If Rich was running his site that cloned or even closely resembled Jeff's site I could see a problem but it does not even come close to appearing the same so I see absolutely no problem with it. What I do find weird is if Jeff actually though that he could win he would have filed suit for it instead of taking this route.

"Why go through this much less threatening step of arbitration, if a straightforward lawsuit were "winable?"

I would ask the opposite. Why sue someone when there is a mechanism in place to handle such complaints. Lawsuits are expensive. VERY expensive! And Im not just talking about attorney fees. There are fees for everything. Filing fees, response fees etc... Remember, this isnt a small claims matter where you pay $30 and represent yourself. Also, by Jeff complaining the way he did and asking for a hearing, he can always sue if the hearing doesnt go in his favor. Try doing that in reverse. If he sues, and loses he can surely ask for a hearing, but who is going to side in his favor when he has already lost in a court of law. I think Jeff is going about this correctly by reserving the right to sue later.

HOWEVER!!! If he were smart, he would have just bought it from Rich when it was offered to him. Now it is likely he will get nothing, but a stack of legal fees!

Odatria

Darin, no not an atty, but I do know it is not legal.

On the sue vs arbitration.

Thats actually easy. Lawsuits are very expensive and based on the ICANN rules arbitration seems to be the preferable route.
Besides Darin for almost no cost to KS the issue has been resolved. The redirect is gone and no litigation was necessary.

Rob, seems you avoided my direct questions.

So if this did happen exactly as I had described, you feel it would be ethical and legal all because you didnt reserve it?
You gotta be kidding right?

The sites both sell banner advertising, have classifieds and forums. Colors, fonts and profitability dont really matter here. The redirect was illegal like it or not. That is why the redirect was taken off so swiftly.

Why go through this much less threatening step of arbitration, if a straightforward lawsuit were "winable?" I just don't understand that.

I think the following will answer that question:

8. Transfers During a Dispute.

a. Transfers of a Domain Name to a New Holder. You may not transfer your domain name registration to another holder (i) during a pending administrative proceeding brought pursuant to Paragraph 4 or for a period of fifteen (15) business days (as observed in the location of our principal place of business) after such proceeding is concluded; or (ii) during a pending court proceeding or arbitration commenced regarding your domain name unless the party to whom the domain name registration is being transferred agrees, in writing, to be bound by the decision of the court or arbitrator. We reserve the right to cancel any transfer of a domain name registration to another holder that is made in violation of this subparagraph.

b. Changing Registrars. You may not transfer your domain name registration to another registrar during a pending administrative proceeding brought pursuant to Paragraph 4 or for a period of fifteen (15) business days (as observed in the location of our principal place of business) after such proceeding is concluded. You may transfer administration of your domain name registration to another registrar during a pending court action or arbitration, provided that the domain name you have registered with us shall continue to be subject to the proceedings commenced against you in accordance with the terms of this Policy. In the event that you transfer a domain name registration to us during the pendency of a court action or arbitration, such dispute shall remain subject to the domain name dispute policy of the registrar from which the domain name registration was transferred.

Funny how this complaint shows up just when I am trying to sell it, isn't it? Even if he doesn't win that arbitration dispute, which I truthfully doubt will happen, he has now tied up KINGSNAKES.COM so I cannot transfer ownership. Anyone interested in leasing that domain name from me and developing it? I will offer a monthly rate and you retain the rights to all coding on the site. Hosting on my server will be included in the price. When this is resolved in my favor, the lease amounts can be applied towards the purchase price. If somehow the decision goes against me, I will handle it however you request, including a full refund, if necessary.

It looks like JeffB has botched up my plans to get Connie her truck this year. Thanks Jeff. I will remember this. If you want to have it as JeffB verses the rest of the herp world, then so be it.

HOWEVER!!! If he were smart, he would have just bought it from Rich when it was offered to him. Now it is likely he will get nothing, but a stack of legal fees!

No, I never offered that domain name to JeffB. Actually I have had no correspondence with JeffB since that phone call when he demanded I delete that Adam Block thread. I have sent him a few emails since then, but none have ever been responded to. I'm not sure how he found out about the domain name transfer, but I know he did call John Organiscak to ask him about it about a day after the transfer was completed.

Besides Darin for almost no cost to KS the issue has been resolved. The redirect is gone and no litigation was necessary.

No, that apparently is not true. I have seen no indication that the arbitration process has been halted.

Larry,

I do think it is legal. If I were to close my doors completely and let the domain go then if someone wanted to purchase it and gain the traffic from my site them so be it. I see nothing illegal about it at all.

Also it appears that the only reason Jeff is trying this now is he wants the sale stopped. Maybe he is concerned about who will purchase it next and what "they" will do with it. To be honest if someone wants the site that much they must have a few ideas of what they want to utilize the domain for.

"...no not an atty, but I do know it is not legal."

I agree that one need not be an attorney to see that something is or is not legal, but I was wondering if you might cite some specific law that you think Rich has violated. Not a legal or ethical principle, mind you, but the actual infraction of an actual legal code, please.

Is it a federal law, a state law, or a local ordinance? Just please let me know which law it is that Rich is supposed to have broken. I would be interested in knowing what the penalties are for doing what you say he has done, and for me to do that sort of research, I would need some sort of referrence point.

Thank you again for your help, Larry.

Darin, this same issue has been litigated prior to this.
I'll have to do some research to determine if its in fact a Rule, Law or case law, but I do know it is not legal.
What he has done with the site now is within his rights.
The redirect was not!

Darin, has the webslave ever backed down to a threat or threat of lawsuit before? Im guessing no. If im correct why did he make the switch AFTER getting the arbitration notice. Just a coincidence? No

Rob, I said NOTHING about closing your doors. That is not the issue here. Please just answer the original question.

As stated before, if KS did not approach the issue prior to filing for arbitration, then that was a mistake, but thats just my opinion.
Im sure sure the long standing bad feelings between both parties had everything to do with it.