Comments on: State Fund Insurance Nailed for Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:55:17 +0000

Steven – “State Fund Insurance” the the company’s name in the arbitration documents. I’ve added an additional message that this refers to the workers’ comp company in Minnesota.

By: Steven Diclemente

Steven Diclemente — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:15:31 +0000

Good Afternoon,

Incorrect Company listed
“State Fund Insurance Nailed for Reverse Domain Name Hijacking ”

It seems you article is using our Trade Marked name in your heading:
State Fund Insurance
This is incorrect and causing problems for us
It should read:
State Fund Mutual Insurance of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and South Dakota

We are not connected nor affilates
Steven T. DiClemente
State Fund Insurance
Home Condo Renters Auto
President/CEO: North East and South East Regions 100 Summer St 16th Floor Boston Ma 02110
(617)956-9999 F(617)933-7686
Florida: 801 International Parkway 5th Floor Lake Mary FL 32746
National: (800)241-1151

By: David

David — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 09:18:03 +0000

So where’s the penalty?

That’s essentially one problem with UDRP. As the others have said, RDNH really carries no weight other than just a moral victory or a mere “blot” on the complainant’s record with the provider.

Sure wish ICANN would re-open comments or something on possibly improving UDRP, though I’m not really keeping my hopes up.

By: Frank

Frank — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 06:43:29 +0000

Although it might seem like a big deal to the domain industry community, “Reverse Domain Name Hijacking” ( RDNH? ) does not mean anything in the real world. If anyone has a high traffic domain, a TM application would be advisable.

By: David J Castello

David J Castello — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 02:21:02 +0000

“The Panel also finds that Complainant has engaged in abuse of the UDRP process by engaging in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.”

Great. So where’s the penalty?

By: M. Menius

M. Menius — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:03:35 +0000

The problem with Reverse Domain Hijacking is that those who attempt it have so little honor anyway that the “badge of shame” carries no weight. It’s like blatant cybersquatters who openly trade in TM’s. They ought to feel shame and embarrasment, but have no principles so shame doesn’t exist. A finding of Reverse Domain Hijacking carries no real penalty, financial or otherwise. At the very least, such a finding should result in that organization being forbidden to file a UDRP for 5 years, 10 years, etc.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:13:02 +0000

“That’s two reverse domain name hijacking wins for Mr. Goldberger in the span of a week.”

Mr. Goldberger,

If you are listening,

ReverseDomainNameHijackingKing.com

is available at reg fee.

I know it’s tooooo long so you’ll be pleased to know that,

RDNHKing.com

is also available at reg fee.

Patrick