Precedent setting ruling READ THIS

[AdsenseGuy]

Today I spent the day in court, As I have told you all previously I where I work. This gives me an advantage to an extent in information that may or not come to fruition, due to some contract restraints there is some information i can use to my advantage and some I cant. On that note please read on.

About a year ago i regged a domain googleemail.com and google caught wind of it and promptly issued me a UDRP, Guess what They won big surprise. While under the rules of NAF i was entitled to file court action to keep my domain, and the domain was to remain mine until the courts decided. My registrar ENOM was supposed to keep this domain locked and in my account until the court proceedings where finished. They did not do this what they actually did was let google's registrar have this domain and they placed it into googles account.

Well as of today and todays PRECEDENT setting ruling I have been granted by the courts I am the rightful owner of this domain as well as the courts have indicated that they see no trademark infringement, The order goes somewhat like this I am the owner of this domain and Enom should never have transfered this domain while it was under the courts juridiction, It is so ordered that the domain be transferred back into my name it is also ordered that I am given the right to sue Enom if they cannot get my domain back. I was also granted exclusive use and ownership of this domain. The judge also indicated that by google now being in posession of my legally owned domain that I may sue them for damages resulting if they refuse to hand it back over to me. I was also awarded damages in cash from this lawsuit.

My question to you all is as follows. I will not have a copy of the judgement transcript until Friday at the earliest. Once I have these documents I want them to hit the internet like wildfire can anyone here help me get these documents into the right hands. I will be sending ENOM and Google a copy of the transcript but I want this to be as public as possible. Google DIDNT win one for a change. The judge clearly and decisively covered all aspects concerning this ruling even more so than I expected. They have had my domain for 3 months now and I want it back to be able to do with it as I want. But I need your help fellow NPers I want the world to know what I have had to deal with and what ENOM did to me as the judge did not place any restrictions on publicity....OH isnt the IPO coming out soon.....

Please if you can help me I will remember your helpfulness Also Namepros was brought up in court and researched by the presiding judge for information.

Please post links or emails of media outlets that you think may be interested in recieving this information. I will attach the actual judgment transcript Friday afternoon

 

[Dave_Z]

Jberryhill and wlspro came into this forum to harm one of its members
with charges that have now proven to be false. I believe
that they should be banned from this forum.

Sorry, dna. Believe all you want, but that's for this forum's
moderators to decide if they should be banned or not.

So far, the moderators haven't banned them. Tough luck.

BTW, the facts are already laid out, yet you seem to have
trouble accepting them. What gives? :D

Oops, I forgot that Sir Francis Bacon once said something
like the human mind only chooses facts that supports its
belief & disregards those that don't so that its belief
remains inviolate...

 

[jberryhill]

Jberryhill and wlspro came into this forum to harm one of its members
with charges that have now proven to be false.

I'm completely mystified. Did you read that .pdf?

This was a small claims court proceeding over a claim of $610. Google didn't bother to show up, because there is no way on earth that this court had jurisdiction over the matter, which was filed (a) in the wrong place under the rules of the UDRP, and (b) was not even the kind of action allowed under Section 4(k) of the UDRP - i.e. it was not even addressed to the underlying trademark issue, because small claims courts don't rule on trademark claims. The extent of this deputy judge's knowledge of the UDRP can be inferred from the repeated reference to the "Universal Domain Resolution Panel" instead of the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute Resolution Policy.

And if you are still resistant to understanding anything in the previous paragraph, then simply quote where anyone is directed to return the domain name to Mr. Alek. The only thing the judge orders is reimbursement of $610 Mr. Alek claims to have lost.

However, I would like to point out the lawsuit
that you said didn’t exist, does exist. The Googly Bear does
exist.

Where did I say a lawsuit didn't exist?

May I jog your memory a bit:

If this was a provincial court in Canada, then the part about Google not showing up, and you being the only one there, does indeed make a bit more sense.

It appears nobody showed up at your proceeding, if any, in Canada, since you have to send a transcript to the only other parties who appear to be involved.

In ex parte proceedings of any kind, including for example default court proceedings, it is possible for people to get away with all sorts of shenanigans, because there is no one there to call you on it.

Trademark lawsuits, even in Canada, do not operate like traffic court.

Small claims courts, however, do operate much like traffic courts. And, yes, my most charitable assumption was that this was a default proceeding in a totally irrelevant court.

Yes, if you too want a judgment against Google, then you can wander into a small claims court in Djibouti and get one.

So, you believe "The Googly Bear does exist".

You'll note that the judge states that all of the plaintiff's allegations are taken as fact, since there was nobody else there. We can also see that the judge refers to a bear of some sort in the movie Shrek with a name that is a variant of some form of "Googlee".

Lying to a court is a very serious matter, even if nobody else is there.

So I ask, once more with feeling, where in the movie Shrek is this bear?

And, again to jog your memory DNA, I was the first person in this thread to point out the reference to "Googly bear" as a nickname in Monsters Inc. You will further note that in the context of that reference in Monsters Inc. there was no bear character whatsoever.

Finally, you can check out the posting histories of the various people who Davezan brought here from another place. I do not know wlspro, and I don't see where he said he was a lawyer.

Now that we know the identity of the deputy judge, and since Adsenseguy has previously informed us that the judge has made himself and his staff available for inquiries, then we know where to direct our inquiries.

 

[Dave_Z]

Now that we know the identity of the deputy judge, and since Adsenseguy has previously informed us that the judge has made himself and his staff available for inquiries, then we know where to direct our inquiries.

Just wondering if anyone has done this, though I doubt it if anyone
is willing to waste time & resources for a venture w/o gain...

 

[dna]

Posted by Wlspro in Domain State:

"Davezan, there is no case, no document details to be posted,
and no need for Google to appeal. Are you related to this
AdsenseGuy trying to promote his scam?"

 

[Dave_Z]

Posted by Wlspro in Domain State:

"Davezan, there is no case, no document details to be posted,
and no need for Google to appeal. Are you related to this
AdsenseGuy trying to promote his scam?"

Your point? I already replied both here and there. :bah:

 

[wlspro]

Dna, there was “nothing” newsworthy here, nothing of relevance or importance whatsoever.

Reminds me of this guy who was standing on the Canadian side of the Niagara Falls, pi$$ing down next to it. He was so impressed with the splash he was making he wanted the news media to cover it.

Guess what, it was not covered by anyone because it was not newsworthy and of no importance to anyone. I would argue it was nothing, you seem to think it was a great feat.

This whole matter “reported” by AG is a non-issue. Google thinks it is “nothing”, eNom thinks it is “nothing”, the industry thinks it is “nothing”, the news media think it is “nothing” - only you and AG seem to think it is something.

Google keeps the domain name as its ownership was never put to question, even by the Deputy Judge (who is not even mentioned on the Canadian list approved judges).

There is “nothing” to appeal. Google will not appeal because this court case means “nothing”.

AG gets “nothing” except for a decision he can proudly frame next to the picture of the other guy from Niagara Falls mentioned above. At best it might be therapeutic for AG - making a big splash next to the other Niagara Falls guy.

 

[dna]

Wlspro, the only issue that I care about is the behavier of you and
J Berryhill in this forum.

 

[jberryhill]

Wlspro, the only issue that I care about is the behavier of you and
J Berryhill in this forum.

Well that is unfortunate. I, for one, came here to learn of a precedent setting legal decision, and all we have here is a default small claims proceeding for $610, obtained on the basis of an outright fabrication concerning a non-existent character in the movie Shrek.

 

[-SMH-]

Wlspro, the only issue that I care about is the behavier of you and
J Berryhill in this forum.

They are the 2 people that have made the most sense in this thread. IMO

 

[dna]

J Berryhill,

Do you feel that if you say something that isn't true with
sarcasism, that it isn't a lie. Let me tell you that it is.
You ask "where did I say a lawsuit didn't exist?"
Anyone can look at your first post and grasp that that
is what you are saying and that it is the basis of your attack
on AdsenseGuy. Wlspro said directly that there was no case.

You should have admitted that you were wrong
about there being a lawsuit, but you think that your sarcasms
somehow protect you. They don't. Anyone can read
your first post who wants to know the truth.

And your sarcasm really isn't very clever.

 

[Dave_Z]

Can we close this now? This thing's :zzz:

 

[Grrilla]

This one doesn't recquire a tape measure. Now that the lense has been cleared of the errant spray, it is easier to see what stream landed the farthest away. I wonder how the guy at Niagara Falls would fare?

Nevertheless, this has been one rollicking good thread.

 

[dna]

Wow, Grrilla has 1,399 posts.
I hope the others were better than this.

 

[Grrilla]

Wow, Grrilla has 1,399 posts.
I hope the others were better than this.

A little bitter, there, huh, DNA? Now you are resorting to making indiscriminate personal attacks on anyone that posts here, regardless of the content of the post, which in this case, was a light hearted approach to suggesting that everyone lighten up, and perhaps give a chuckle to someone.. Anyone with a modicum of sense, can already see what has gone on here.

I won't be drawn into the mental loop that you have created for yourself- your matrix. I have no need or desire to defend my posts or to reply to your personal attack. Your own posts shed more than enough light on what you are about, and anything I could add would only detract from what you have already reflected upon yourself and your character..

PS Make that 1400

 

[dna]

I'm not sure that should be concidered a personal attack.
I just think if you have nothing to say, you should say nothing.
You are the one making the personal attack.

 

[Grrilla]

It looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, so it must be a rhinoceros. Whatever. Good luck and no ill feelings here. DNA.

 

[lotsofissues]

DNA,

You have questioned others motives. Now I want to know:

Why do you have a so much more than casual interest in defending adsense guy?

 

[dna]

I don't know AdsenseGuy. But, I concider these trademark
lawyers to be a threat. Apparently even years are now being trademarked.
Is someone supposed to go to court to fight for a domain name worth only
a few hundred dollars? Companies are using these trademarks to steal
domain names they have no right to. And every trademark gives companies
the right to challenge the ownership of thousands of similiar names.
One of the reasons these lawyers were calling AdsenseGuy a snake oil
salesman was just for owning domain names that were similiar to
trademark names. This does not make you a snake oil salesman. There are companies
that use trademarks defensively and don't bother anyone who violates them
and I think that is fine. But what the olympic committee and Google do
is not right. I think you should question why two lawyers are spending so
much energy attacking AdsenseGuy. Lawyers don't work for nothing.

All of my domain names are very generic and no one has ever accused me
of violating a trademark.

 

[Sharpy]

DNA, theres nothing sinister here. Let it go. This is a case of someone wanting to be a big shot and in the end, looking foolish. The more you post in support, the more you are cast in that same light. Let it go.

 

[dna]

Tell these two lawyers to "let it go."

 

[armstrong]

I concider these trademark lawyers to be a threat.

Such lawyers work for both sides. Domainers sometimes need TM lawyers. If you are ever in need of professional help, JB would be a great choice, as he has been known to work for domainers fighting TM overreach in the past.

 

[Badger]

Armstrong, can you tell me (and probably a good deal many others), when do we 'live happily ever after' with regards this thread??

Can anything else be said??

 

[armstrong]

While everyone's probably formed their own conclusions by this time with regards to this particular topic, I don't see a need to close this thread. Do you? Perhaps if we let AG or DNA have the last word (if they are so inclined), then we can all 'let it go' at that.

 

[NameTower]

I just want to add my 2 cents here

How can you support:

Someone who is *obviously* abusing a company's trademark

And then, he comes and posts it as a victory like he's done good.

I don't know this adsense guy but there is no way in the world he registered it for some googlee bear as there is no such thing!

If the bear is called googly then he should have gotten GooglyMail.com

This is just ridiculous and it's very sad to see a member of namepros act in this fashion.

Not to mention the companies that registered the TM gmail when they knew google was going to use it as their name..

But.. Whatever

 

[P10n33R]

I just want to add my 2 cents here

How can you support:

Someone who is *obviously* abusing a company's trademark

And then, he comes and posts it as a victory like he's done good.

I don't know this adsense guy but there is no way in the world he registered it for some googlee bear as there is no such thing!

If the bear is called googly then he should have gotten GooglyMail.com

This is just ridiculous and it's very sad to see a member of namepros act in this fashion.

Not to mention the companies that registered the TM gmail when they knew google was going to use it as their name..

But.. Whatever

Because no one ever abuses trademarks.