Prior communications contradicted claims in cybersquatting dispute.
A Finnish textiles and interiors company has been found (pdf) to have engaged in reverse domain name hijacking over the domain name Vallila.com.
Oy Vallila Interior Ab of Helsinki, Finland filed the complaint and said that the only reason someone would be interested in this domain is to target its trademarks.
But Vallila is actually a suburb of Helsinki. The complainant failed to mention that, and also failed to submit its complete communication with the domain name owner in which it admits as much.
Instead, the complainant only submitted the communication showing that Linkz Internet Services (Frank Schilling) wanted $32,000 for the name.
It left this part of its inquiry out of its submission:
“I’m a private person and would be interested in buying the domain for the use of our flea market/circulation group active in Vallila (which is a city part in Helsinki, Finland). …”
That made it easy for the three-person World Intellectual Property Organization panel to find that the case was filed in bad faith.
The law firm Eversheds Ltd represented Oy Vallila Interior AB. For its sake, I hope that it wasn’t aware that it was submitting only part of the pre-dispute communications.
John Berryhill defended the domain name.
Berryhill commented to Domain Name Wire:
This is why it is important for domain registrants to save all of their sales inquiries and communications, and to review previous correspondence when a UDRP complaint is made. Frequently, they will find out that an agent of the complainant had previously inquired to buy the domain name, but the complaint will not include those communications. Or, as in this case, they will solicit a sales price, use that as the “offer to sell” for the UDRP, and leave out parts of the correspondence that undercut the trademark claim.
John Berryhill says
“For its sake, I hope that it wasn’t aware that it was submitting only part of the pre-dispute communications.”
It was the Eversheds attorney, using a gmail.com email address to avoid disclosing her professional affiliation, who submitted the initial inquiry along with the false claim to be working for flea market in Vallila.
Apparently, “lying” is part of the portfolio of services which Eversheds provides.
Andrew Allemann says
Yikes
Andrea Paladini says
Lawyers at Eversheds really cut a poor figure … 🙂
Mansour says
I believe it is time for ICANN to impose a penalty on a complainant where it is found that his complaint is considered to be domain name hijacking. The minimum would be attorney fees and any costs incurred by the respondent. Not only does the UDRP cost the respondent money, but also time and the devaluation of the domain name due to the complainant’s fraudulent action.
veezy says
Vallila interior furnishing company messed up big time.
.
To make matters even more laughable and sad is that the former CEO and current majority owner of Vallila furnishing company is Anne Berner who is currently the transport and communications minister in the government of Finland making her responsible for .fi domains and for Finland’s internet strategy, Finland’s cyber security and all things internet in Finland…
.
Anne Berner seems clueless and unfit to be a transport and communications minister and she seems to have no problem with the leadership of her Vallila company allowing a law firm representing them to lie and risk the reputation and brand of Vallila interior furnishing.
.
If Vallila and it’s owner the Berner family had any sense they would fire the current leadership of Vallila for allowing a law firm to lie and risk the brand and reputation of Vallila furnishing company for 32k.
I am sure the leader of Vallila who chose that law firm earns 32k a MONTH and the law firm probably billed Vallila 32k or more for their stupid and incompetent strategy based on lying and trying to scam John Berryhill and Frank Schilling by a frivolous and baseless UDRP complaint and using lying as a strategy.
.
Unbelievable incompetence from Vallila…