Below is our current list of those inducted into the Hall of Shame or found guilty of trying to Reverse Hijack a Domain Name in which they had no legal rights. In other words they tried to bully the rightful owners into relinquishing their property and forcing these innocent parties to spend thousands to defend what they already own. Since there is no Legal Penalty, we are determined to Shame these companies along with their attorneys that represent them. What can you do? Tweet, Like, Circulate! Help me, Help you!
Case Number: D2022-2208
Represented by: Mandour & Associates
The animation studio Titmouse, Inc. has drawn a ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking after using the UDRP process to transfer the domain titmouse.com from its original registrant, who bought the domain in 1998. A sole panelist at the World Intellectual Property Organization made the ruling when facts in the case revealed the company was […]
Read More...Case Number: D2022-2222
Represented by: Wild Schnyder AG
A Swiss textile concern, Boller, Winkler AG, has been found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking after using the UDRP process to transfer the personal domain schlossberg.com from its owner, Craig Schlossberg, who resides in the United States. Panelist John Swinson of the World Intellectual Property Organization found the UDRP a “clear case of RDNH”, […]
Read More...Case Number: D2022-2162
Represented by: Suciu & Asociații
Fly Go Voyager SRL, a Romanian company provides travel services, including flights, has been found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking for attempting to grab the domain flygo.com, which is owned by a resident of the United Kingdom. The domain was registered in 1999, and is still held by its original registrant. Fly Go Voyager […]
Read More...Case Number: D2022-1610
Represented by: Selarl Marchais & Associés
International pharmaceutical company Sanofi, based in France, has been found guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking for attempting to use a UDRP to grab the domain initiv.com. Specifically, panelist Adam Taylor, the sole panelist writing the decision, determined Sanofi attempted to deliberately mislead the World Intellectual Property Organization in its filing. The company was handed […]
Read More...Case Number: 1998214
Represented by: David J. Simonelli
A California company operating under the moniker of “The Handy Guy” has been nailed with a ruling of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking by a panel of the National Arbitration Forum. Handy Guy Inc. was handed the ruling by a three-member NAF panel on July 20, 2022. The domain owner, Merlin Kauffman, bought the domain from […]
Read More...My hope is this is the last RDNH case I will ever have to write about and circulate. The reality is I will write every company and their representation every single time there is a case of RDNH. To fight back we had to create HallofShame.com to get the message across to Main Street and Main Stream. Now maybe some value based companies will think twice before flirting with this tactic and come to the bargaining table in good faith instead of being labeled forever on Hall of Shame. The net is written in ink! And now a monument has been built at a common crossroads that many more folks will see. Just like being in Times Square.
