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

[Rob @ RK Reptiles]

To answer your question once again Larry No I do not think it is illegal or unethical If you have some proof that it is illegal then by all means show it as you are the only one I see that is saying it is illegal. Everyone else says it is not.

 

[WebSlave]

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

I guess some of the old timers here will remember when Joe Polanco filed suit against JeffB for something to do with a tree boa forum or something or another. I don't remember the details. But do you all remember what JeffB did at that time?

For you people who do not remember or it was before your time, JeffB simply put up copies of the suit letter in place of the forums. He shut down ALL the forums at that time on kingsnake.com. I didn't do anything nearly as drastic, but instead I removed the referral and posted copies of the complaint letter in like situation, for obvious reasons to people who remembered that prior event.

Earlier today I changed the KINGSNAKES.COM index.html page to point to the auction itself because some people on ReptiBid were under the mistaken impression that JeffB had already taken possession of the domain name, and HE was the one who posted those pages there to proclaim HIS ownership of that domain name.

Do you all understand the sequence of events now?

BTW, that referral to FAUNACLASSIFIEDS.COM is exactly how I set up ALL of my parked herp related domains. I have around 50 or so of them, most of which point to FAUNACLASSIFIEDS.COM, some to CORNSNAKES.COM, and I think a few to SERPENCO.COM. KINGSNAKES.COM was not treated in any special way or differently from all of those other domain names in my possession.

I have reviewed the ICANN materials on their website and am very confident that this will be resolved quickly and in my favor. There are three requiements that ALL must be met for a claim to be found in favor of the complainant (JeffB). I will list them here and a rough sketch response to them:

a. Applicable Disputes. You are required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding in the event that a third party (a "complainant") asserts to the applicable Provider, in compliance with the Rules of Procedure, that

(i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and

It is VERY common for one party to own the singular version of a domain name and another person the plural. A simple perusal of domain names will prove this to be absolutely true. This is so commonly done and is certainly not confusing to anyone, that most people simply go from one to the other to see what is on each site. As long as both sites are not confusingly similar in appearance, which certainly is NOT the case between KINGSNAKE.COM and KINGSNAKES.COM, no one is even remotely going to mistake one site for the other. To date, there has been no proof offered that even a single solitary person became confused between the two sites. The one instance that is mentioned of a Steve Schindler neglected to point out the Mr. Schindler PURPOSELY typed in KINGSNAKES.COM into his web browser to see what was on that domain name. He was NOT confused about what he was doing.

(ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

Yes, I have every right to have a domain name that is a very identifiable and popular group of animals well populated within the people who are interested in this field of interest. MANY people keep and breed kingsnakes in the herpetological field. Having a domain name of such animals is VERY desirable and logical to procure if possible. My interests were to have this name for possible future development, or to sell as an investment, if the opportunity were to arise. This is EXTREMELY common concerning domain name registrations, which I am certain you are fully aware of.

(iii) your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

It is not being used in bad faith, nor was it transferred to me for such use. However, if humor of a situation is considered as bad faith, then yes, I guess I am guilty of that one. Once I took over ownership, I had no immediate plans for it, so all I did was to set it up with a referral link to one of my own active domains. I have done he exact same thing for approximately 50 parked domains in my name. This one was not treated any differently or in any manner exceptional from my usual actions.

In the administrative proceeding, the complainant must prove that each of these three elements are present.

 

[WebSlave]

Oh as far as legallity is concerned, the only thing I can think of that would possibly apply is the CYBERSQUATTING law. I think a keyword search in AltaVista should be able to bring up links to that text for you. Please post anything you feel is relevant here for others to read and consider.

Thanks.

 

[Adam Block]

Larry, RKreptiles.com and kingsnake are not even close to the same thing. If you owned RKreptile.com and your name was Rob King it would be a strong copyright. If somebody got RKreptile.com and their name was Randy Kandy then you'd have no case. Even that could be a tough fight.

Stop whining about people getting your plural domain names or spend the money to hord them all. I don't own any of mine cause frankly I don't care if people want them.

You could go get:

serpenco.biz
serpenco.info
serpenco.net
serpenco.org
serpencos.biz
serpencos.com
serpencos.info
serpencos.net
serpencos.org
faunaclassifieds.biz
faunaclassifieds.info
faunaclassifieds.org
faunaclassified.biz
faunaclassified.info
faunaclassified.net
faunaclassified.org

right now if you wanted them. It's clear Rich isn't going to go acting like a child if you do but at the same time he's not going to spend $130 a year to keep you from having them. I bet all of those 16 sites don't get more then 5 hits a year from people typing in the wrong domain.

Think ahead, either have a strong copyright or register EVERYTHING you don't want people to have along with the names you want.

 

[C. Reynolds]

I just had a wonderful Idea!

I like that you redirected the domain to the auction, that in itself was genious...however, what about having it forward itself to a forum about kingsnakes on this site? That way you are using the name to direct someone to species information and not your site in general.

Unless that was the way it was originally setup to begin with...

 

[Adam Block]

Cybersquatting means registering, selling or using a domain name with the intent of profiting from the goodwill of someone else's trademark. It generally refers to the practice of buying up domain names that use the names of existing businesses with the intent to sell the names for a profit to those businesses.

Rich you're NUTS, kingsnake isn't a trademark it's a snake!

Larry, I don't want to get in trouble for calling you an idiot so I'm not going to but please look into the laws before you prove that famous quote of Pres. Lincoln to be true!

I mentioned it might be wise to redirect to something that would better make use of the huge amount of traffic Jeff is going to bring to kingsnakes.com. There's nothing Rich is doing that is against the law, even if it were forwarded to fauna there's no legal issue. However, when everybody knows how to get here what's the point in sending all that traffic here when it can go to Jeff's whining and show what a child he is of the auction and get Rich's wife a much nicer truck.

Rich, I think your wife might end up having to thank Jeff for the extra money he's going to get you for that truck. This kind of advertising is only free when you get some goof ball to act up and have a fit.

 

[C. Reynolds]

I might be interested in leasing the name, should it come to that.

 

[C. Reynolds]

I guess you can't edit a post in here?

 

[Larry67]

Interesting

Webslave- after the arbitration notice you switched the redirect.
Why? It wasnt a coincidence was it?

If you wanna prove your point put back the redirect to this site and let the arbitration board review the complaint as it stands.

Without the redirect in place, I suspect you will prevail.
Since im the one person on the web that thinks it is illegal then put it back. You wanted to get at Jeff. Leaving the redirect AND winning at arbitration would truley be a huge victory.

The rules you quoted are often litigated which creates case law.
Rules, Laws, Policies are often ambiguous which is why you get case law to clarify an issue.

This can go on forever. If I do run across a specific ruling/policy i will return and post the link.

I look forward to the arbitration outcome.
Hopefully favorable so you can sell the name, move on and
buy your wife that car.

Good Luck

 

[WebSlave]

If you wanna prove your point put back the redirect to this site and let the arbitration board review the complaint as it stands.

Well, according to the ICANN arbitration text I read, whatever I do after the complaint is filed has no bearing whatsoever. I assume you read my post about the sequence of events, so you can either take that at face value or not, your choice. This whole arbitration complaint is nothing more than a nuisance tactic. When I recieve the official complaint form and need to file a response, it will be VERY detailed and plainly paint the picture of what this is really all about. I DO have all my ducks lined up for this.

After the auction is over, I'm not sure if I will leave it pointing to the auction or move it back to point to FaunaClassifieds.com. Depends on the outcome, I suppose. If the bidding goes to a substantial $$ amount, then I may just leave it pointing to the auction as excellent advertising to what people felt the domain name is worth paying for. Even as it stands now at $7,700 is not a bad showing for it, I suppose. I think that would be the most logical and reasonable thing to do, based on the fact that the primary reason for the auction in the first place was to get attention to it, get people excited about possibly owning that name, and make it even more valuable to whoever might possibly win the auction.

When I got that domain name, it was treated no differently than any other of the domain names I set up as parked domains. Why should I have treated it as anything special? Heck it was just a chuckle factor event for me, but beyond that, it meant nothing. I can PROVE that very easily. JeffB has helped me out with that with his banning of those domain names because they were all linked, along with KINGSNAKES.COM, to FaunaClassifieds.com. This is all documented in a thread on this site.

Anyway, I already have a substantial offer for the domain name, no matter what the results of the auction, so I don't really care either way. And if I should have to keep it myself, well heck, domain names don't eat much and for $15 per year, I think I can bear up under the financial strain of owning it.

You know, John Organsicak did tell me that he still has kingsnakes.net to his name. Actually, there are a LOT of kingsnake (the snake, not the website) enthusiasts in the world that may be looking for a relevant domain name in the future. Maybe I should register a few more that are still available as investments.

 

[Roger Jolly]

No, if Jeffie could have sued he would have sued. His panties are wadded up into such a tight knot right now that I bet he squeaks when he talks. Lawsuits trigger countersuits, and from what I have seen, webslave could wind up owning kingsnake.com as well as kingsnakes.com when the dust settles. There is a definite pattern of activity that any judge will take into consideration and many people who would serve as character witnesses. Jeffie, you don't have many real friends in this business, only people that are putting up with you for what you have that they want. When the chips are down, and it looks like you are on the way out, when you are becoming irrelevant to them, watch how many of them stand beside you.

That is the real reason you try to keep your users as mushrooms. Because honest and open debate would bring down your house of cards. Even on your own site. As it is you have no other choice but to ban those people, or listen to them and admit what they are saying is true.

 

[Adam Block]

Rodger, GOOD POINT!!!

Jeff has found himself in a spot when his hand is forced.. Everybody would walk out on him if they could afford to.

Must suck to know the only reason people smile at you is because they're scared you're going to cancel their account.

At least Rich knows we're all here and will stick up for him because we like/respect him and think he's a good person.

 

[Khaman]

I would like to point out that the World Wrestling Federation before it changed its name held WWF.com and the World Wildlife Fund could not touch it. Though People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals until recently could not get PETA.com because someone snagged it and called his site People Eating Tasty Animals. He recently lost it in a court battle but the ICANN board time and time again said it was his.

Scott Petty

 

[Roger Jolly]

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.

Well this statement got my thinking cap to smoking real bad. This whole thing is nuts.

If this arbitration process is not binding to the complainant and they can ignore the ruling and file suit anyway, then what good is it? Certainly the person the complaint is filed against cannot be held bound by the arbitration ruling either, and he can sue if the abritration goes against him. So if this arbitration is not binding on both parties, why even bother with it?

If the arbitration goes against webslave, all he has to do is to sue the arbitrator for an illegal taking of his personal property. Since this is not going to be a legally binding due process, then he can most certainly do that. Both OnlineHobbyist and the arbitration panel could be named in the lawsuit equally.

How many threatened lawsuits are taking place on this site now??? Anyone keeping a scoreboard???

 

[longissima]

Since im the one person on the web that thinks it is illegal then put it back.

If I do run across a specific ruling/policy i will return and post the link.

I'm not a alwyer, I just play one on the world wide web. My extensive legal training has told me that opinions do NOT equal fact. Anyone else concur? If not, the defense rests.

Hey Larry, what the %#@! are you talking about? And why does Rich have to prove anything to you? Just wondering.....

 

[KNOBTAIL]

This is about who is going

to have the longest pockets, and how much is this going to cost and is this worth persuing. That is what I assume Jeff has in the back of his mind. I dont know how far Rich wants to go with this ball, nor do I know if Jeff will be successful with arbitration, but I do know that he can persue it, and he may do just that .......regardless of the cost. Money is always the final arbitrator ! JERRY TRESSER

 

[Max Peterson]

The banner ad's still up, but the auction itself shows an error message.
What's up with that?

 

[WebSlave]

The auction ended at 9pm EST. That's probably what you are seeing. I just didn't have a chance to remove the banner ad from the rotation.

 

[JungleHabitats]

did it sell ?

inquirying minds wanna know lol

 

[WebSlave]

No. That arbitration action filed by JeffB effectively ruined the auction and chased away prospective buyers, in my opinion.