news Epik helps patterns.com owner recover domain in UDRP

[bhartzer]

The domain name Patterns(.com) was stolen from Network Solutions in 2020. DNProtect was approached by the owner of the domain name to help recover their stolen domain name.

BizCN registrar refused to cooperate and return the domain name to the owner. Therefore, DNProtect turned to domain name attorney Daniel Prince to file a UDRP. The decision of the UDRP was to return the domain, as the domain was acquired by the respondent via "fraudulent means".

https://domainnamewire.com/2022/03/01/epik-helps-patterns-com-owner-recover-domain-in-udrp/

 

[LoveCatchyDomains]

Great work! It's wonderful to see a large company standing up for integrity and justice!

 

[jberryhill]

Great work! It's wonderful to see a large company standing up for integrity and justice!

Not so fast. The person for whom it was recovered is now claiming that DNProtect/Epik is ripping him off over this domain name.

Looks like all it did was land into the hands of another crook.

The only thing that happened is that the domain name was stolen from him by DNProtect/Epik under the guise of "helping" him.

 

[Future Sensors]

The only thing that happened is that the domain name was stolen from him by DNProtect/Epik under the guise of "helping" him.

Just wow.

 

[bhartzer]

Not so fast. The person for whom it was recovered is now claiming that DNProtect/Epik is ripping him off over this domain name.

Looks like all it did was land into the hands of another crook.

The only thing that happened is that the domain name was stolen from him by DNProtect/Epik under the guise of "helping" him.

I'd like to clarify what happened here, to set the record straight.

There were several domain names stolen from Network Solutions in August 2020. This included Perl, Piracy, and Patterns. I personally contacted the owner of Patterns and the owner paid DNProtect for stolen domain recovery services. We recovered the domain. RM made a "deal" with the owner, as the owner wanted to sell the domain. RM would take a percentage of the sale of the domain if/when we recovered the domain and it was sold. We recovered the domain via UDRP.

Fast forward to RM being "out of the picture" and not involved in the daily operations of Epik. Epik (without RM) seemingly randomly decides that Patterns is THEIR domain name and the original owner has no rights to the domain. This is the classic definition of domain theft, as the current registrant of the domain name (Epik Inc) did not acquire the domain name buy purchasing the domain name from the original registrant.

The stolen domain name Patterns was recovered via UDRP and it should have been transferred to the original registrant, the true owner of the domain name.

The right thing to do here is for Epik Inc to immediately transfer ownership of Patterns to the original registrant, the one who won the UDRP.

I just recently (yesterday) learned that even though there is an agreement in place to split the proceeds of the sale of the domain name, Epik has decided that the domain name is theirs (apparently) and the original registrant has no rights to the domain name. To put it mildly, I am furious that Epik is doing this. There are SO many things wrong with this.

 

[bmugford]

Not so fast. The person for whom it was recovered is now claiming that DNProtect/Epik is ripping him off over this domain name.

Looks like all it did was land into the hands of another crook.

The only thing that happened is that the domain name was stolen from him by DNProtect/Epik under the guise of "helping" him.

This stuff going on with Epik is absolute insanity at this point.

Now they are just taking other people's domains for themselves?
That sure sounds like theft.

Brad

 

[jberryhill]

Epik has decided that the domain name is theirs (apparently) and the original registrant has no rights to the domain name.

That has happened a lot at Epik over the years.

It pretty much seems to be one of the issues in the Vocl .com litigation. It was the underlying issue in Rob's bizarrely self-righteous crusade to keep BC30 .com out of the hands of his own customer who originally owned it, along with his habit of interposing himself to attempt to "settle" UDRP disputes after his customers decided to default or offer to transfer names in UDRP proceedings.

Things in Rob's orbit that belong to other people - domain names, sales proceeds, employment bonuses, and at least one wife - have long had a curious habit of becoming his. If his neighbor had an ox, his covetousness would be bang on the Biblical money.

These have not been unknown components of his character for a very long time.

 

[Future Sensors]

So the industry ombudsman and advocate for domain investors has cheated things quite a bit.

This is a sad day for our industry.

 

[bmugford]

That has happened a lot at Epik over the years.

It pretty much seems to be one of the issues in the Vocl .com litigation. It was the underlying issue in Rob's bizarrely self-righteous crusade to keep BC30 .com out of the hands of his own customer who originally owned it, along with his habit of interposing himself to attempt to "settle" UDRP disputes after his customers decided to default or offer to transfer names in UDRP proceedings.

Things in Rob's orbit that belong to other people - domain names, sales proceeds, employment bonuses, and at least one wife - have long had a curious habit of becoming his. If his neighbor had an ox, his covetousness would be bang on the Biblical money.

These have not been unknown components of his character for a very long time.


Show attachment 230105
Show attachment 230106

Yeah, I mentioned this in the other thread.

It is unclear who even "owns" Epik at this point. Rob is still the only listed governor.

Just because someone has physical access to cut off someone else's access doesn't mean they magically own the company.

When(if) they do file their annual report, I want to see who is listed as the governor(s) as well as what is in the section regarding controlling interest.

Brad

 

[Kingslayer]

This needs a new thread

This thread is almost a year old and stays buried, the only way people see it is if someone new replies to it (doesn't get bumped).

 

[bhartzer]

This needs a new thread

This thread is almost a year old and stays buried, the only way people see it is if someone new replies to it (doesn't get bumped).

I would keep it as-is. It's the same domain name, and it "tells a story" and includes the much-need background on this domain name.

 

[Derek Peterson]

I would keep it as-is. It's the same domain name, and it "tells a story" and includes the much-need background on this domain name.

Has Brian given any kind of statement on this domain fiasco?

Did you ever find out who and why dnprotect was cut off? Were you still generating income from that?

 

[bmugford]

I would keep it as-is. It's the same domain name, and it "tells a story" and includes the much-need background on this domain name.

Does Brian Royce even understand how domains work? I mean this is a legit question.
He seems to have absolutely no experience in the field.

Does he not understand that just because a domain is at the registrar Epik that is not Epik's property?
Or does he understand, but doesn't mind just taking what he pleases?

Brad

 

[bhartzer]

Has Brian given any kind of statement on this domain fiasco?

Did you ever find out who and why dnprotect was cut off? Were you still generating income from that?

DNProtect was still profitable when it was shut down, as far as I know.

I don't know who or why it was shut down.

 

[Future Sensors]

DNProtect was still profitable when it was shut down, as far as I know.

I don't know who or why it was shut down.

You mentioned elsewhere that it was Epik that shut down DNProtect, not Rob. Is Rob currently furious about this too, or just you?

 

[Derek Peterson]

DNProtect was still profitable when it was shut down, as far as I know.

I don't know who or why it was shut down.

You are part owner, right? Wouldn't you know if it was profitable? Were you making money from it?

 

[bhartzer]

You mentioned elsewhere that it was Epik that shut down DNProtect, not Rob. Is Rob currently furious about this too, or just you?

I have not spoken with RM.

 

[bhartzer]

You are part owner, right? Wouldn't you know if it was profitable? Were you making money from it?

Yes, DNProtect was a joint project started by me and RM.

DNProtect was profitable when it was taken offline.

 

[Acroplex]

This is a remarkable twist to the Patterns(.com) saga.

For the record, I covered the theft of Piracy(.com) and Patterns(.com) warning potential buyers in December 2020. In that post there is a comment left by the owner, David Cochrane, in November 2021.

In March 2022, the domain Patterns(.com) was "recovered" using the UDRP process. I put the word in quotes because presumably when an attorney gets involved in a UDRP they aren't then receiving the domain in their account - it goes back to the original registrant's account.

Therefore, what followed the successful "recovery" of the domain via the UDRP process is fascinating to find out. Was it given to Epik instead of the previous registrant and would that be a violation of the UDRP process?

 

[Ostrados]

This is wicked sickness
Stay 1000 miles away from Epik

 

[bhartzer]

This is a remarkable twist to the Patterns(.com) saga.

For the record, I covered the theft of Piracy(.com) and Patterns(.com) warning potential buyers in December 2020. In that post there is a comment left by the owner, David Cochrane, in November 2021.

In March 2022, the domain Patterns(.com) was "recovered" using the UDRP process. I put the word in quotes because presumably when an attorney gets involved in a UDRP they aren't then receiving the domain in their account - it goes back to the original registrant's account.

Therefore, what followed the successful "recovery" of the domain via the UDRP process is fascinating to find out. Was it given to Epik instead of the previous registrant and would that be a violation of the UDRP process?

Based on the whois history, the domain went from the domain thief's registrar (BizCN) around 4/11/22, to Epik Registrar around 5/11/22. The domain has been under privacy, so there is no way to tell if the domain ever made it back to Mr. Cochrane or not.

 

[bmugford]

Based on the whois history, the domain went from the domain thief's registrar (BizCN) around 4/11/22, to Epik Registrar around 5/11/22. The domain has been under privacy, so there is no way to tell if the domain ever made it back to Mr. Cochrane or not.

It is extremely hard to unravel who really owns a domain when you have whois privacy.

Combining that with a registrar you can't trust is a recipe for disaster.

Brad

 

[Derek Peterson]

Yes, DNProtect was a joint project started by me and RM.

DNProtect was profitable when it was taken offline.

You seem a little too chill. If someone just took my business offline without any notice or explanation I would be finding out what's up. Why aren't you finding out what's up? Were you guys involved in some sketchy stuff and you want to remove yourself? Something seems off. Please explain.

 

[bmugford]

You seem a little too chill. If someone just took my business offline without any notice or explanation I would be finding out what's up. Why aren't you finding out what's up?

Yeah, I would certainly be a bit more heated in the same situation if my business was wrongly yanked out from under me.

Brad

 

[Derek Peterson]

Yeah, I would certainly be a bit more heated in the same situation if my business was wrongly yanked out from under me.

Brad

Yep, something fishy going on. I wish Hartzer would just tell us what's up. Anticipating, new default landing page for dnprotect and epik.