That’s a bit sleazy of you. Traverse has a fine reputation, Mr. Schaefer is widely respected. I follow domain name cases religiously, and I am unaware of a single case that he has brought which would call his judgment into question.

In fact, sullying himself by getting into an argument with an anonymous, no class troll is the only questionable thing he has ever done, as far as I am aware.

Note: I compete with him for business. It is in my economic interest to simply let you tear him down.

The bottom line is you have an affinity for obvious reverse domain hijacking cases.

Call me blind and stupid, but I don’t see this UDRP being some obvious reverse domain hijacking case. Where’s the beef?

If one has a beef towards another party, that’s what lawyers, courts and mediation panels are for.

You have about as much credibility as a mosquito in a blood bank.

The bottom line is you have an affinity for obvious reverse domain hijacking cases.

Cases that anyone with integrity would have turned down.

Everyone has your #

But I notice you Jack have copyright protected content on your web site posted without permission of the copyright holder in order to increase traffic. So I would guess that what you are really saying is that you disagree with the federal trademark and copyright law. If you have a specific example of reverse domain name hijacking, I would be interested to hear it. Otherwise, you should know that in the above case, we represented the registrant/respondent whose domain was attempting to be transferred by a complainant asserting trademark rights to the word “all” registered in a foreign trademark office with no examination process.

John
http://unplain.com