Cybersquatter fails to squeeze $55 million out of Mexican billionaire

[Sir Regalot]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-ap-un-un-cybersquatting-carlos-slim,0,7017504.story

 

[BitcoinDK]

Another idiot! like the guy who regged that indian tribe name.

Here is the direct link to the decision made by WIPO:
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2008/d2008-1767.html

I could'nt stop laugh when I read this:

B. Respondent
The Respondent claims to operate the “removed web site providing “domain name that needed by many people in the world” and helping “people to get the domain name and selects whoever who deserved a domain name [sic]”.

The Respondent emphasizes that “the secure action happened when it was still 22 years old, or 750 days ago, or about 18.000 hours ago, or actually on September 22, 2006. The vision and mission is clear, to help MR. CARLOS SLIM HELU get this domain name [sic]”.

The Respondent claims to respect trademarks rights and contends to have therefore “saved” the Domain Name. The Respondent also asserts to have demonstrated its good faith by contacting the Mr. Carlos Slim Helu, the chairman of the board of directors of the Complainant and underlined that, notwithstanding these patient efforts the Complainant did not provide feedback on the requests submitted.

The Respondent stated that “the value of USD 50,000.000, USD 55,000,000, and USD 10,000,000” indicated in the mails were “only basic parameter” but no reply was received “to discuss that number”.

The Respondent also highlighted that he “feel un-appreciated to this condition” and “the Respondent feel un-respected either[sic]” and also the redirection to a pornographic site was just a way another “method” to attract the Complainant’s attention.

According to the Respondent, in light of the addition of the word “Helu”, the Domain Name is not similar to the CARLOS SLIM trademark and “the confusions will not happen”.

The Respondent underlines that the Domain Name has never been used “in connection with goods or services marketing”. Commenting the redirection to the adult web site, the Respondent stated that “the RedTube.com has nothing valuable thing. The Claimant should consider this good-faith [sic].”

With reference to the circumstances evidencing bad faith, the Respondent reiterates that many emails were sent to the Complainant who never replied.

-------------
OH MY GOD! WOW.... :lol:

 

[bmugford]

What a moron.

Another idiot! like the guy who regged that indian tribe name.

Here is the direct link to the decision made by WIPO:
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2008/d2008-1767.html

I could'nt stop laugh when I read this:

B. Respondent
The Respondent claims to operate the “removed web site providing “domain name that needed by many people in the world” and helping “people to get the domain name and selects whoever who deserved a domain name [sic]”.

The Respondent emphasizes that “the secure action happened when it was still 22 years old, or 750 days ago, or about 18.000 hours ago, or actually on September 22, 2006. The vision and mission is clear, to help MR. CARLOS SLIM HELU get this domain name [sic]”.

The Respondent claims to respect trademarks rights and contends to have therefore “saved” the Domain Name. The Respondent also asserts to have demonstrated its good faith by contacting the Mr. Carlos Slim Helu, the chairman of the board of directors of the Complainant and underlined that, notwithstanding these patient efforts the Complainant did not provide feedback on the requests submitted.

The Respondent stated that “the value of USD 50,000.000, USD 55,000,000, and USD 10,000,000” indicated in the mails were “only basic parameter” but no reply was received “to discuss that number”.

The Respondent also highlighted that he “feel un-appreciated to this condition” and “the Respondent feel un-respected either[sic]” and also the redirection to a pornographic site was just a way another “method” to attract the Complainant’s attention.

According to the Respondent, in light of the addition of the word “Helu”, the Domain Name is not similar to the CARLOS SLIM trademark and “the confusions will not happen”.

The Respondent underlines that the Domain Name has never been used “in connection with goods or services marketing”. Commenting the redirection to the adult web site, the Respondent stated that “the RedTube.com has nothing valuable thing. The Claimant should consider this good-faith [sic].”

With reference to the circumstances evidencing bad faith, the Respondent reiterates that many emails were sent to the Complainant who never replied.

-------------
OH MY GOD! WOW.... :lol:

 

[Dave_Z]

Hmm, seems like a no-brainer. As if the domain's registrant knew what the TM
holder "should" do.

 

[Carlton]

What a total low life jack*ass. That's the kind of greed that disgusts legitimate domainers and the business world in general. All of us, everyone involved in a respectable domain name business, should be disgusted with this type of behavior.

These are the same kinds of people that will do anything for a buck. No integrity, no loyalty. And ultimately, these are the people who get the most press for "the domain industry". What a shame.

I want the everyday person to know who we are, what we do and to understand that people like Ahmad Rusli do NOT represent domainers. He's just another dimestore thief. Sorry for all the indignance. He's not much different from Bernie Madoff. Willing to exploit the elderly, children, and sell their mother for a nickel. This is going to stop one way or another.

Many, many people on this forum have had, or will have to suffer losses, unwarranted criticism and skepticism because of cybersquatters.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. :kickass:

 

[StoneRoses]

What a total low life jack*ass. That's the kind of greed that disgusts legitimate domainers and the business world in general. All of us, everyone involved in a respectable domain name business, should be disgusted with this type of behavior.

These are the same kinds of people that will do anything for a buck. No integrity, no loyalty. And ultimately, these are the people who get the most press for "the domain industry". What a shame.

I want the everyday person to know who we are, what we do and to understand that people like Ahmad Rusli do NOT represent domainers. He's just another dimestore thief. Sorry for all the indignance. He's not much different from Bernie Madoff. Willing to exploit the elderly, children, and sell their mother for a nickel. This is going to stop one way or another.

Many, many people on this forum have had, or will have to suffer losses, unwarranted criticism and skepticism because of cybersquatters.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. :kickass:

Couldn't agree anymore or say any more than this! :bingo: :kickass:

 

[xrvel]

Another dumb. :bah: I read the news on local forum.

 

[Fka200]

This was posted on here? Can't believe I missed it! Discovered it yesterday while aimlessly surfing the net and blogged about it.

Hilarious case... $55 mill?! LOL!

 

[domba]

My jack ass neighborhood

 

[wussadotcom]

what a case Made me smile.

 

[Jeffrey]

That cybersquatter probably has not visited Namepros nor read the helpful posts of our few wise domainers here.

 

[Domainate.com]

What a total low life jack*ass. That's the kind of greed that disgusts legitimate domainers and the business world in general. All of us, everyone involved in a respectable domain name business, should be disgusted with this type of behavior.

These are the same kinds of people that will do anything for a buck. No integrity, no loyalty. And ultimately, these are the people who get the most press for "the domain industry". What a shame.

I want the everyday person to know who we are, what we do and to understand that people like Ahmad Rusli do NOT represent domainers. He's just another dimestore thief. Sorry for all the indignance. He's not much different from Bernie Madoff. Willing to exploit the elderly, children, and sell their mother for a nickel. This is going to stop one way or another.

Many, many people on this forum have had, or will have to suffer losses, unwarranted criticism and skepticism because of cybersquatters.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. :kickass:

Agreed fully...honestly I hate hearing about people like this in ANY business or industry and every industry has its bad eggs (*coughMADOFFcough*) but it's doubly bad when it's someone that the mainstream uses as an excuse to cast a shadow on domaining as a whole. Only because the domain industry hasn't been legitimized yet in the mainstream do idiots like this end up prolonging everyone calling all of us cybersquatters.

 

[Charley]

What a moron.

I can't pick out another word to describe him :D

 

[Dave_Z]

I can't pick out another word to describe him :D

How about jerk? That's one letter less. :D

 

[metronome]

wow, this ahmad rusli want $55mil for that name? haha.
even sex.com doesnt sell that much last year:P

 

[dezinerite]

That cybersquatter probably has not visited Namepros nor read the helpful posts of our few wise domainers here.

Or maybe the person's a member of Namepros (newbie)? That would be really funny. :D

 

[henrysim]

He is a Shame, too bad he has the same country as mine.

By the way i once come across his website, if i remember correctly he has few hundreds of famous people name for sale at his website. Including alot of Indonesian political figures.

This is his "Clarification" regarding his Act

http://www.kaskus.us/showthread.php?t=1352990

I will try to translate it later if possible

 

[wussadotcom]

Or maybe the person's a member of Namepros (newbie)? That would be really funny. :D

He did try his best then :sold: