Please assist! Massive end user deal

[Federer]

I am on the verge of completing a massive end user deal for a short domain - getting 58 times what I paid for it.

I have cash in Escrow OK but I am not trying to PUSH the domain to the new buyer through EuropeDomainsLLC. I have sent faxes and emails that are required for the change of ownership, signature etc. But they are taking ages...Is there anyone who can help me find a valid telephone number for these guys? If this takes too long, I am going to lose the deal.

If someone can help, I can return the favour (PM for details).

Fed.

 

[DomainTalker]

Therein lies the problem, how are you supposed to prove to the panelists that Luc wasn't acting on your behalf or in fact working for you?

I'm sure the onus of proof would be the other way round...

They (the complainant) would have to prove that Federer was, in fact, acting on behalf of the new owner, when he (Federer) approached them (thereby placing the new owner in a position of having acted in bad faith) - and, clearly, they could never prove that, because Federer wasn't doing so.....He was acting on his own behalf.


Y'see, I'm trying to distinguish between idiocy - and malice, or genuinely dangerous activity...


What I'm still seeing is idiocy by Federer, not really dangerous activity - because the risk was always there, for any bidder, without Federer's actions......But, I'm seeing a lot of almost visceral reaction to the person.

I'm testing whether emotion is running this - and, whether the facts really do deserve this amazing reaction.

.

 

[footodors]

If it were that simple, people would just email TM holders with a fake name, and if someone filed a complaint they would just say the contact wasn't authorized.

Exactly, so how much weight would his or anyone contacting the TM holders carry?

Need much more than an email to show bad faith.

 

[-REECE-]

I think what we're forgetting here is that even if you do win the UDRP, you're still out thousands of dollars in lawyer fees, not to mention stress. This kind of behaviour **would** increase the likelihood of being served a UDRP.

It doesn't even matter whether or not the companies solicited "apparently have" USA trademarks -- they may still be able to file UDRPs just the same (trademarks do not need to be registered with USPTO.gov to be enforced via UDRP) and will likely win if you don't file a defence, meaning you're out thousands either way courtesy of this unwarranted solicitation.

I'm sure the onus of proof would be the other way round...

They (the complainant) would have to prove that Federer was, in fact, acting on behalf of the new owner, when he (Federer) approached them (thereby placing the new owner in a position of having acted in bad faith) - and, clearly, they could never prove that, because Federer wasn't doing so.....He was acting on his own behalf.


Y'see, I'm trying to distinguish between idiocy - and malice, or genuinely dangerous activity...


What I'm still seeing is idiocy by Federer, not really dangerous activity - because the risk was always there, for any bidder, without Federer's actions......But, I'm seeing a lot of almost visceral reaction to the person.

I'm testing whether emotion is running this - and, whether the facts really do deserve this amazing reaction.

.

 

[Jingles]

Never once in my post did I say that what Luc did was ok, don't put words in my mouth. My point was that over the last few months that I've dealt with him he has always acted in a respectable manner and has never given me any indication to think that his intentions are bad.

The general feel of this thread is that the man is deceptive and fraudulant in everything he does, and I have just not found that to be the case in my own personal experience with him.

 

[ripley]

Let's move on folks. I think we've run this up the flagpole to the point where all can learn something, but it's beating a dead horse now. NP staff can and should take whatever action they deem appropriate, but I don't think we're adding anything valuable to the discussion anymore.

ripley.