discuss Defend HeidiPowell.com against a Bullying Celebrity Thief!

[Slanted]

Hi domainers,

Please take a moment to help defend domain owner rights. The grandmother who owns HeidiPowell.com needs our help. You don't need to spend a penny. Just stand up and say, "This is unacceptable." It will take public pressure outside NamePros. But there are a lot of us; so hopefully we can join forces and spread the word.

Scroll down. There are a few specific things we can do to help. It's urgent.

Some of you know the story already. A grandmother has owned HeidiPowell.com for many years, but a minor TV celebrity has decided that she is the only Heidi Powell in the world who matters. And this arrogant celeb has dragged the original Mrs. Powell through a UDRP and even into bankruptcy court, attempting to take not just her domain but her own NAME from her by force. Truly, it's one of the most reprehensible cases I've ever come across. If we don't defend her, nobody will defend us when we ourselves are targeted.

Background:

Mrs. Powell has been Heidi Powell since her marriage in 1979. Back in 2005, 12 years ago, her husband presented her with the domain HeidiPowell.com as an anniversary gift. It's a developed website where she offers web design services. But it's more than just a site whose name can be changed. To this day, Heidi uses HeidiPowell.com for her email address, which is tied to all her online accounts. So if she loses this domain, it's akin to identity theft.

Then along comes another Heidi Powell – a celebrity fitness trainer who had a short-lived TV show on ABC. ("Celebrity", so they say. I'd never heard of her.) She became Heidi Powell after a 2010 marriage – long after HeidiPowell.com was registered by the rightful owners, Mr. and Mrs. Powell.

Greed and megalomania – it's the usual tale of a spoiled narcissistic brat who feels entitled to confiscate whatever she wants, no matter the damage to us "little people". First came the UDRP. Fortunately, David Weslow – a well respected attorney – stepped forward to defend Heidi pro bono (i.e. free of charge). I think there's a very good chance justice will prevail in the UDRP case, thanks to his efforts.

But Mrs. Powell and her husband are still suffering, and her domain remains in jeopardy. You see, this fitness trainer "star", this usurper, this would-be thief and her lawyers have found another way to attack the rightful Heidi Powell – even while the UDRP case is still in progress. Years ago, Mrs. Powell and her husband experienced some misfortunes and had to file for bankruptcy. Life can be like that. Now, this covetous celeb is arguing that the domain HeidiPowell.com ought to have been declared as a valuable asset during their bankruptcy case years ago. It's absurd, of course. The market value of HeidiPowell.com is negligible except for 1 greedy celebrity who came along later on. I personally prepared a 5-10 page document for David Weslow, citing verifiable data that proves this.

However, the celeb and her lawyers are bribing the trustee with a 5-figure sum to drag Mr. and Mrs. Powell back into bankruptcy court! And legal representation in this bankruptcy case is not provided by David Weslow; he's only handling the UDRP. Far from being free, this additional legal burden will cost Mr. and Mrs. Powell thousands – not to mention stress, time, and damage to their credit and reputation. Obviously, the celeb's strategy is to bleed this humble couple until they give up from exhaustion.

Press Coverage:

From time to time, we hear about domainers requesting financial help. Personally, I'm always very skeptical about those claims because it's easy to exploit people's sympathies. Heidi Powell is not a domainer. What she primarily needs our help with is public pressure. Giving that kind of help is 100% free.

Heidi's case has been written about extensively:

(1) USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/...andmother-heidi-powell-over-website/90916602/

(2) The Register

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/09/27/narcissist_heidi_powell_wants_her_dotcom/

(3) DomainNameWire.com

http://domainnamewire.com/2016/09/13/reverse-domain-name-hijacking-alleged-heidipowell-com-lawsuit/

and

http://domainnamewire.com/2016/07/19/heidi-powell-lawsuit/

(4) At NamesCon, David Weslow of Wiley Rein was given the first ever "Lonnie Borck Memorial Award" in recognition of his "exceptional efforts in championing the rights of domain name registrants". Those of us who are members of the ICA – the Internet Commerce Association, which advocates tirelessly for domain owner rights – voted for Mr. Weslow specifically because of this Heidi Powell case.

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2016/dailyposts/20161219.htm

I was hoping that Heidi's case would get some publicity at NamesCon when David Weslow received the award. However, I understand he wasn't able to attend due to illness.

TAKE ACTION!

Alright, guys. This is where we can make a difference. Get angry! Imagine it's your grandma being dragged into bankruptcy court! Imagine it's your domain being taken away unjustly! Imagine it's costing you thousands and thousands to defend yourself against an arrogant narcissist with deep pockets!

What we can do:

(1) Visit HeidiPowell.com. There's a button on grandma's site, allowing you to tweet directly at this thieving celebrity. Tell her what you think of her. Please no threats. Please no profanity. Remember, we want domain owner rights to be respected and honored. Making threats or using profanity would only give people an excuse to dismiss us. Be professional. But be angry!

(2) Visit the celeb's website:

http://heidipowell.net/contact-me/

Tell her what you think. Again, be polite but firm.

(3) Grandma has a GoFundMe campaign:

https://www.gofundme.com/grandma-bullied-sued-for-her-name

Please leave a comment showing your support. I'm not asking anybody to contribute money. But if you can spare something small – even $1 – it might help show that Mrs. Powell is not alone ... that even total strangers are willing to back an underdog against a bully. If you don't want to donate, that's completely fine. Just leave a comment there. This thieving celeb needs to understand that her reputation is going to suffer if she persists in persecuting Mrs. Powell ... that she will be punching a cactus.

(4) Let's put pressure on ABC, since they created this monster. Maybe if they encounter some bad publicity themselves, they will in turn put pressure on the celebrity usurper to cease and desist:

https://twitter.com/ABCNetwork

Tell ABC what you think. Tell them they ought to be ashamed of themselves for letting Heidi Powell bully a grandmother and steal her property. Be sure to reference Heidi Powell specifically; otherwise ABC won't have a clue what we're talking about.

(5) We all have domainer acquaintances. Please send 3 people a link to this NamePros thread. There's strength in numbers.

(6) Once you've helped out, brag about it! Let other domainers here know that you give a damn. Post a reply in this thread so we can keep it visible. Positive peer pressure, folks! Let's show the world that domainers aren't parasitic cybersquatters. We stand up for property rights.

 

[jberryhill]

Bottom line, This is not a case for domainers to rally around. If it was the normal UDRP then ok.

Ummm... it's a lot worse than the "normal UDRP".

The fitness trainer started this fight by suing the grandmother in the first place.

Once she found out the grandmother could fight back, she tried to run away. Then, she proposed a "settlement" in which she would relinquish her claim to the domain name, while concocting a scheme to get at it by dredging up a years-old bankruptcy proceeding.

To be clear - the fitness trainer Heidi Powell is an obnoxious, narcissistic, anorexic, self-obsessed asshole of a bully, and like all bullies richly deserves a thorough beat down, and not the opportunity to escape unharmed.

 

[Slanted]

To be clear - the fitness trainer Heidi Powell is an obnoxious, narcissistic, anorexic, self-obsessed a*hole of a bully, and like all bullies richly deserves a thorough beat down, and not the opportunity to escape unharmed.

Hear hear! The very Berryhill!

 

[Shimmy]

To be clear - the fitness trainer Heidi Powell is an obnoxious, narcissistic, anorexic, self-obsessed a*hole of a bully, and like all bullies richly deserves a thorough beat down, and not the opportunity to escape unharmed.

Now that's the bottom line

 

[Internet.Domains]

This bullying from the fitness trainer is absolutely uncalled for. For her to meddle in a bankruptcy filing is beyond repulsive. I have one other suggestion.

1. Reply with a comment on every blog post she puts on her website HeidiPowell.net. Deleting comments will clearly get in the way of her squats.

I noticed there is already one comment on her newest post....

 

[ison]

I accept that you may suffer from a mental disorder (attention deficit disorder), but please focus on the purpose of this discussion.

Go start a new thread if you want to discuss linguistics, idiomatic nuances, or differing perspectives on word usage in an informal context. This is not a legal document. It's a forum post. Ease up on your literals, bro.

I see an outrageous claim not backed by evidence, and I see fudging of facts. which subsequent posts by jberryhill seem to make even clearer. I see an attempt to lobby public support using this forum. Should we accept everything given to us even if there are gaping holes in the story? This isn't rocket science nor is this "a linguistics or idiomatic" discussion. My sense of morality compelled me to call them out. Your sense of morality, meanwhile, compelled you to accuse me of suffering from a mental disorder. I understand his agenda for his aggression towards me, but what's yours?

The bankruptcy proceeding is in Washington. The fitness trainer did not offer to pay the bankruptcy trustee for the name. The fitness trainer has claimed that the domain name was neither listed nor expressly excluded from the assets in bankruptcy. It is the trustee's legal duty to secure all assets on behalf of the creditors. It was a cheap stunt, but "bribery" has a specific meaning, and you know that words have meanings, Joseph, since you are otherwise a careful writer. Your use of the word suggests some kind of impropriety on the part of the bankruptcy trustee, who hasn't done anything wrong.

 

[Addison]

I understand his agenda for his aggression towards me, but what's yours?

Subjective discussions distract from important updates and facts, like those provided by Mr. Berryhill. I merely wish for this discussion to stay focused, but I respect your response.

 

[Hootsifer]

This is terrible I hate greed.

 

[doc24]

Twitter - Done
Heidi Moron - Done
ABC - Done

In addition
Added to my twitter and my FB pages, all 4 - 2 on domains

 

[carob]

Who owns Heidi-Powell.com ?

Creation Date: 2016-10-09 at Godaddy with Privacy, takes you to standard Godaddy this-domain-is-registered page.

HeidiPowellSucks.com is free, probably also .sucks and .xxx and .wtf and .horse and...

 

[DU]

Given this information [which I presume to be correct]

HOWEVER, on December 30, the bankruptcy trustee withdrew the motion to sell the domain name for $10,000 subject to the claimed bankruptcy exemption, and has agreed to sell the non-exempt portion of the domain name back to the grandmother for $2047. It is worth quoting from the trustee's December 30 motion on this point:

"It is unclear whether the domain name is an asset of the bankruptcy estate. It is unclear whether Debtors property claimed the exemption in the domain name. Under the circumstances, given that it's possible the estate might end up with no funds at all, and given that the estate would not receive more than $2047.00 if the exemption was allowed by the Court and the sale to the other Heidi Powell was allowed by the Court, Trustee has chosen to sell the non-exempt portion of the domain name back to Debtors."

So the celebrity, literally, cannot "stop this" even if she wanted to, since the grandmother has pending monetary claims against the celebrity.

What's the point of this thread at this point?

There is ongoing legal action and I'm about 100% certain that the legal proceedings will remain unaltered by Tweets or comments of some domain investors and forum users. David Weslow, given his status as best attorney ever (present company excepted) filed the RDNH and they are seeking $100,000 + whatever + attorney's fees.

All I'm getting is that there is an attempt to get forum members to get revenge on the "fitness trainer" in addition to this legal motion. It seems the the goal is to tweet and comment and destroy the reputation of an "obnoxious, narcissistic, anorexic, self-obsessed a*hole of a bully" as I highly doubt a courtroom and judge are going to be looking into Twitter for public opinion.

Or are we trying to set the anti-domaining world to rights? Or make future wannabestars think about trying to "steal" a domain ?

Note:
I agree with earlier comments that OPs suggestion of it being developed are a b.s. sympathy line that wouldn't work in a UDRP and shouldn't work here...similarly the bribe statement.... it was needless embellishment and white lie because it doesn't materially change anything.

Note 2:
If you do want to ruin her reputation I would suggest reddit and 4chan are more useful in this regard

 

[Slanted]

What's the point of this thread at this point?

Mainly to push back against the 2nd lawsuit – the bankruptcy case – which is racking up legal fees for Grandma Powell. The first lawsuit, with pro bono representation by David Weslow, seems to have the fitness trainer on the run. But it's the second case putting the domain in jeopardy and running up bills for the grandmother and her husband, week after week.

If the fitness trainer sees no public support for the grandmother, then she will continue dragging Grandma Powell through the court system, draining her and husband financially in an attempt to exhaust them and steal the domain.

On the other hand, if we do show public support, then the celebrity may begin to understand how negative publicity – self-inflicted and richly deserved negative publicity – can harm her personal brand. It may finally dawn on the celeb that this bad PR will dog her career for years even if she does manage to confiscate the domain.

We can make sure the PR is a significant drawback, which may cause the fitness trainer to choose a different course of action. Hopefully she or her team will back off. Once they stop throwing money at the bankruptcy case, I imagine that 2nd lawsuit will evaporate. Mr. and Mrs. Powell would not be facing those expenses if the fitness trainer were not forcing the issue by dangling an offer of money.

the legal proceedings will remain unaltered by Tweets or comments of some domain investors and forum users.

The fitness trainer can stop supporting the bankruptcy case that she instigated. Negative publicity changes the balance of her decision to keep going.

All I'm getting is that there is an attempt to get forum members to get revenge on the "fitness trainer"

No, not revenge. Public pressure often changes the outcome. Lawsuits can be withdrawn. Settlements can be made. Protest isn't about revenge. It's about deflecting attacks.

 

[PoliticalVII]

Do not sit idle guys, they may come after you. I'am really scared my domain names are next, how do i protect myself incase these baddies come after my precious babies ?

 

[Slanted]

how do i protect myself incase these baddies come after my precious babies ?

1. Avoid trademark-infringing domains, obviously.

2. Support the ICA, which

- works toward UDRP reform
- monitors dangerous changes to ICANN registry agreements
- lobbies against domain price increases
- provides expertise and a domain investor perspective to government policy makers
- advocates for domain owner rights
- etc.

"Support" means knowing the ICA exists and cheering for the work they do. Eventually, if you begin to put down roots in the domain industry, it might be worth joining the ICA as a contributing member.

Sorry if that sounds like an advertisement. The ICA doesn't pay me. I donate to the ICA.

 

[Addison]

If you do want to ruin her reputation I would suggest reddit and 4chan are more useful in this regard

I forgot about 4chan!

Superb contribution!

 

[UmerK]

My sense of morality compelled me to call them out. Your sense of morality, meanwhile, compelled you to accuse me of suffering from a mental disorder. I understand his agenda for his aggression towards me, but what's yours?

That's simple enough, you being a Liverpool fan :D

 

[Silentptnr]

I noticed that MrsHeidiPowell.com is available. I tweeted to her that she should take that. It's available for hand reg.

 

[carob]

She could just change her name - any suggestions?

 

[jberryhill]

In any event, the docket for the Arizona lawsuit, including links to the filings is here:

http://ia601502.us.archive.org/8/items/gov.uscourts.azd.990566/gov.uscourts.azd.990566.docket.html

But it's the second case putting the domain in jeopardy and running up bills for the grandmother and her husband, week after week.

It's my understanding the trustee has withdrawn the motion to sell the domain name.

09/15/2016
(2 pgs) Motion to Reopen Chapter 7 Case to administer possible assets.. Filed by Martin L. Smith on behalf of United States Trustee (Smith, Martin) (Entered: 09/15/2016 at 16:59:12)

09/15/2016
(1 pg) Received UNSIGNED Order Forwarded to Chambers for Judge's Signature. Filed by Smith, Martin. Related document 18 (Entered: 09/15/2016 at 17:23:02)

09/19/2016 https://ecf.wawb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DisplayReceipt.pl?553610,76
(1 pg) ORDER REOPENED CASE. Granting Motion to Reopen Case (Related Doc # 18) Review Case on: 12/19/2016. . (SLA) (Entered: 09/19/2016 at 08:44:04)

09/19/2016
(1 pg) Submitted But Not Entered (Related document(s)16 Motion to Reopen Chapter 7 Case). (SLA) (Entered: 09/19/2016 at 08:47:05)

09/19/2016
(1 pg) Appointment of Trustee Dennis Lee Burman by the United States Trustee Filed by Martin L. Smith on behalf of United States Trustee. (Smith, Martin) (Entered: 09/19/2016 at 09:40:21)

09/19/2016
The duly appointed Chapter 7 Trustee, after reviewing the case docket and file and determining that no claims bar date has been fixed, hereby notifies the Clerk of the United States Bankruptcy Court that assets will be administered in the above captioned case. An appropriate notice should be given to creditors to file claims. Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 09/19/2016 at 12:27:42)

09/19/2016
(1 pg) Notice to File Proof of Claim Due to Recovery of Assets. CLAIMS BAR DATE (Related document(s) Trustee's Notice of Assets on Case and Request to Set Claims Bar Date). Proof of Claims due by 12/23/2016 (admin) (Entered: 09/19/2016 at 22:20:02)

09/22/2016
(2 pgs) BNC Certificate of Notice (Related document(s)23 Claims Bar Date). Notice Date 09/22/2016. (Admin.) (Entered: 09/22/2016 at 21:30:55)

10/31/2016
(2 pgs; 2 docs) Trustee's Motion to sell domain name Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. The Hearing date is set for 11/23/2016 at 10:00 AM at Marysville Municipal Court. Response due by 11/16/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order authorizing sale of domain name)(Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 10/31/2016 at 17:04:28)

10/31/2016
(2 pgs) Trustee or US Trustee's Notice of Hearing on motion to sell domain name (Related document(s)25 Ch 7 Tr Motion). Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 10/31/2016 at 17:05:13)

11/03/2016
(3 pgs) BNC Certificate of Notice (Related document(s)26 Trustee or UST Notice of Hearing mailed by BNC). Notice Date 11/03/2016. (Admin.) (Entered: 11/03/2016 at 21:32:41)

11/16/2016
(4 pgs) Response to Trustee's Motion to Sell Domain Name (Related document(s)25 Ch 7 Tr Motion)... Filed by Thomas E. Lester on behalf of Heidi Powell, Kent Douglas Powell. (Lester, Thomas) (Entered: 11/16/2016 at 13:51:21)

11/16/2016
(12 pgs) Declaration of Joseph Peterson in Response to Trustee's Motion to Sell Domain Name (Related document(s)25 Ch 7 Tr Motion)... Filed by Thomas E. Lester on behalf of Heidi Powell, Kent Douglas Powell. (Lester, Thomas) (Entered: 11/16/2016 at 13:55:11)

11/16/2016
(13 pgs) Amendment to Schedules B, C & G . Filed by Thomas E. Lester on behalf of Heidi Powell, Kent Douglas Powell. (Lester, Thomas) (Entered: 11/16/2016 at 13:56:28)

11/17/2016
Notice to Court of Intent to Argue. Date of Hearing: 11/23/2016. Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Related document(s)25 Ch 7 Tr Motion, 26 Trustee or UST Notice of Hearing mailed by BNC, 27 BNC Certificate of Notice, 28 Response, 29 Declaration, 30 Amendment). (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 11/17/2016 at 10:26:28)

11/18/2016
(3 pgs) Trustee's Reply to Debtors' Response to Trustee's Motion to Sell Domain Name (Related document(s)25 Ch 7 Tr Motion)... Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 11/18/2016 at 13:14:34)

11/20/2016
(4 pgs; 2 docs) Trustee's Objection to Exemptionsfor domain name Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. The Hearing date is set for 12/14/2016 at 10:00 AM at Marysville Municipal Court. Response due by 12/7/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order denying claim of exemption for domain name)(Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 11/20/2016 at 17:02:31)

11/21/2016
(10 pgs; 2 docs) Debtor's Reply Re: Motion to Sell Domain Name (Related document(s)25 Ch 7 Tr Motion, 31 Reply)... Filed by Thomas E. Lester on behalf of Heidi Powell, Kent Douglas Powell. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Heidi Powell) (Lester, Thomas) (Entered: 11/21/2016 at 15:56:09)

11/23/2016
Minutes. Hearing Held. Appearances: Dennis Lee Burman, trustee; Thomas Lester representing debtor. (related document(s): 25 Ch 7 Tr Motion to Sell Domain Name filed by Dennis Lee Burman. : Continued Hearing scheduled for 01/11/2017 at 10:00 AM at Marysville Municipal Court. Submissions by trustee are due by 12.30.16. Submissions by 1.6.17. (KEK ) (Entered: 11/28/2016 at 14:10:54)

12/05/2016
Audio CD Request. Hearing Date and Time: 11/23/16.. Contact: Sherri (360) 733-5774... . Filed by Thomas E. Lester on behalf of Heidi Powell, Kent Douglas Powell. (Lester, Thomas) (Entered: 12/05/2016 at 17:42:33)

12/06/2016
Receipt of filing fee for Audio CD Request(12-11140-MLB) [misc,1806] ( 31.00). Receipt number 23005274. Fee amount $ 31.00. (U.S. Treasury) (Entered: 12/06/2016 at 07:51:02)

12/06/2016
Notice to Court Requesting Continuance of Hearing on Motion - from: Date of Hearing: 12/14/16 @ 10:00 a.m.. to: 1/11/17 at 10:00 a.m.. Filed by Thomas E. Lester on behalf of Heidi Powell, Kent Douglas Powell. (Related document(s)32 Objection to Exemptions Trustee). (Lester, Thomas) (Entered: 12/06/2016 at 07:56:37)

12/06/2016
Notice to Court Requesting Continuance of Hearing on Motion - from: Date of Hearing: 12/14/2016 at 10:00 am. to: 1/11/2017 at 10:00 am. Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Related document(s)32 Objection to Exemptions Trustee, Notice to Court of Motion to be Continued). (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 12/06/2016 at 12:08:07)

12/14/2016 Minutes. (related document(s): 32 Objection to Exemptions Trustee filed by Dennis Lee Burman) Appearance : Dennis Lee Burman Continued Hearing scheduled for 01/11/2017 at 10:00 AM at Marysville Municipal Court. (KEK ) (Entered: 12/21/2016 at 14:38:28)

12/30/2016
Notice to Court Motion Withdrawn, Hearing Stricken on Date of Hearing: 1/11/2017. Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Related document(s)25 Ch 7 Tr Motion, 26 Trustee or UST Notice of Hearing mailed by BNC, Minutes Hearing Held). (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 12/30/2016 at 19:15:38)

12/30/2016
Notice to Court Requesting Continuance of Hearing on Motion - from: Date of Hearing: 1/11/2017 at 10:00 am. to: 1/25/2017 at 10:00 am. Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Related document(s)32 Objection to Exemptions Trustee, Notice to Court of Motion to be Continued, Notice to Court of Motion to be Continued, Minutes Hearing Held). (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 12/30/2016 at 19:20:47)

12/30/2016
(3 pgs; 2 docs) Trustee's Motion Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. The Hearing date is set for 1/25/2017 at 10:00 AM at Marysville Municipal Court. Response due by 1/18/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order approving sale of non-exempt equity in domain name back to debtors)(Burman, Dennis) Modified on 1/3/2017; no notice of motion filer; contacted filer (Brazil, Victoria). (Entered: 12/30/2016 at 19:58:57)

01/03/2017
(1 pg) Trustee or US Trustee's Notice of Hearing on motion to sell back to Debtors the non-exempt equity in domain name (Related document(s)34 Trustees Motion). Filed by Dennis Lee Burman on behalf of Dennis Lee Burman. (Burman, Dennis) (Entered: 01/03/2017 at 16:20:11)

01/04/2017
Minutes. (related document(s): 32 Objection to Exemptions Trustee filed by Dennis Lee Burman filed by Dennis Lee Burman.: Continued Hearing scheduled for 01/25/2017 at 10:00 AM at Marysville Municipal Court. (KEK ) (Entered: 01/04/2017 at 15:37:37)

01/04/2017
Minutes. Hearing Not Held. Matter has been withdrawn. (related document(s): 25 Ch 7 Tr Motion filed by Dennis Lee Burman) (KEK ) (Entered: 01/04/2017 at 15:38:16)

 

[martinrussell]

If I read this correctly, registration of https://twitter.com/heidipowell beat https://twitter.com/RealHeidiPowell by a month.

 

[DU]

Mainly to push back against the 2nd lawsuit – the bankruptcy case – which is racking up legal fees for Grandma Powell.

Is Mr Berryhill wrong on this item?

The first lawsuit, with pro bono representation by David Weslow, seems to have the fitness trainer on the run.

The first lawsuit doesn't have the fitness trainer on the run - it has the fitness trainer potentially in a huge financial hole and dragged through court (perhaps she should have consulted with Mr Berryhill/Weslow before initiating her suit). The only issue remaining on this one that I see is the settlement amount for the "grandmother" and attorney's fees for Mr Weslow.

There was, according to one filing, an agreement for dismissal [based on the "question of ownership" right enough]" which was refused by "the grandmother" and her lawyer. There are also statements made in the legal findings that contradict the wonderful "motherhood and apple-pie" provided back-story: "the grandmother" asked for $50K, the domain was parked (but setup for email, allegedly) and not developed etc. it's not just a domain it's a love story....

I will say that one lawyer clearly outmaneuvered another lawyer and is evidence why sometimes getting a good lawyer is a good idea. I don't know if there's an explanation for not dismissing the whole thing - perhaps Attorney's fees on the part of the pro-bono lawyer? Perhaps the ICA sending out a message? If that's the case the call should be to support the ICA body and not some no-name grandmother caught in the middle.

Maybe I'm naïve but it seems that there have been opportunities to end this mess already. The problem is that it's difficult to just blanket support a cause (for some) that has a very complicated legal backstory. I'm sure I could spin this to make Grandma Heidi Powell look like a money-grabbing domain squatter if I really had the inclination. If the law was easy and black and white then anyone could do it.

The lawsuit should never have been filed in the first place. The ".com" isn't worth it and the domain could only ever be used by another Heidi Powell anyway.

If the fitness trainer sees no public support for the grandmother, then she will continue dragging Grandma Powell through the court system

I would hope she's focused on settling the remaining monetary claims against herself at this point. It seems more that the Fitness trainer is being dragged through the court system at this point.

Anyway:
I'm glad that Grandma Heidi Powell has turned her life around and is now financially able to resist offers of cash for a valueless domain name after such a recent bankruptcy. I'm even happier that this lit a fire under her a$$ and she is now a web marketing expert who is using her anniversary domain of love to provide free services to the local community (and fight her case).

And I'm glad that Fitness Trainer Heidi Powell looks like the "obnoxious, narcissistic, anorexic, self-obsessed a*hole of a bully, and like all bullies richly deserves a thorough beat down, and not the opportunity to escape unharmed" she is.

 

[iwon24]

she should just get an alternative then its all good , instead of going after one that is not hers

 

[Kenny]

^^^^^ Two floors up ^^^^^

That's my boy, Cool Hand Luke.

lol

Peace,
Cyberian

 

[Addison]

If I read this correctly, registration of https://twitter.com/heidipowell beat https://twitter.com/RealHeidiPowell by a month.

Right, the grandmother is always one step ahead of the "real" Heidi. Go grandma!

– Old man,

 

[jberryhill]

"the grandmother" asked for $50K, the domain was parked (but setup for email, allegedly) and not developed etc.

There are a lot of ways one might look at the overall picture. Typically, those unfamiliar with domain names do take the route of "they aren't doing anything with it; I have a better use for it; and they want a lot of money" = "bad actor" viewpoint. But that can be said about a lot of things. I know people with really nice vacation homes that they only visit once in a while. I wouldn't mind living in one of them full time, but they want an outrageous amount of money for them. If being able to state one's price for something which is properly yours is "greedy", is probably more a function of which side of that situation one is on.

Maintenance of the Arizona suit was entirely voluntary on the grandmother's part, once the fitness trainer had filed a motion to withdraw. Also, there could be a decent payday at the end of it for all involved, particularly now that there are dueling motions for sanctions on top of the damages sought. But, the grandmother did not pick this fight either. Ending it with a bang, particularly given that a celebrity of sorts is involved, could have the beneficial effect of sending a message to others similarly situated that going into a court or UDRP on a flimsy trademark claim, and walking out with a domain name to which someone else is properly entitled, is not always as easy as it seems.

It really spins some folk's heads around when, during the course of a domain dispute the trademark claimant makes an offer, and gets a response to the effect of, "No, we're going to sue you for more than that and KEEP the domain name." Opposing counsel didn't used to take those sorts of statements seriously until a handful of domain registrants began seeking, and obtaining, damage awards for RDNH. Those sorts of decisions have made it easier to deter frivolous claims, and I imagine that this one will add to the impact of counter-threats in domain disputes. That's a good thing.

It's that aspect of the case - a toothy, physically fit blonde woman - which, I guess, is the hook for drawing attention to these sorts of frivolous claims.

Are there facts one can spin into a counter-narrative? Of course there are. There always are. We don't live in a world of cardboard cut-out characters which fit neatly into some morality play. I always get a kick out of some folks who make Uzi Nissan out to be some kind of saint. Is his name Nissan? Yep. Was he entitled to register and use the domain name? Yep. Did he get to keep the domain name? Yep.

But, really, when you look at the token "computer business" going on at Nissan.com in relation to the overwhelming content of the site devoted to vilifying Nissan Motor Company over the bad bet he made on what they'd settle for, you have to wonder whether winning the case and having them walk away was really the best of all possible outcomes for him. How many copies of Windows-7 do you think he's selling for $149? C'mon.

 

[DU]

Maintenance of the Arizona suit was entirely voluntary on the grandmother's part, once the fitness trainer had filed a motion to withdraw. Also, there could be a decent payday at the end of it for all involved, particularly now that there are dueling motions for sanctions on top of the damages sought. But, the grandmother did not pick this fight either.

Note: Italics for emphasis mine.

Ending it with a bang, particularly given that a celebrity of sorts is involved, could have the beneficial effect of sending a message to others similarly situated that going into a court or UDRP on a flimsy trademark claim

Which begs the question:

Who picked this fight?
Is Grandmama Powell still a victim or a tool at this point or genuinely looking for fair compensation?

I know people with really nice vacation homes that they only visit once in a while. I wouldn't mind living in one of them full time

Off topic-ish [got to love the groups initialism]:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/world/anal-squatters-evicted-expensive-mansion-video