Schwartz’s Responds To UDRP On; Asks For Reverse Hijacking & Blasts The Complaint

Rick Schwartz’s company, has just filed its response to the UDRP on the domain name, filed by the owners of

The full response is posted on Ricks site

The response was written by Howard Neu, Esq, who blasts the complainant and asks for a finding of reverse hijacking.

Here are some of the more interesting parts of the response:

“”It is difficult to know where to begin to respond to the Complainant’s improbable and improper claims that have required Respondent to expend funds to defend.”

“The Complainant has no Trademark; while the Respondent registered the domain name in 1996, which could not have been in “Bad Faith” pursuant to the Rules, the Complainant did not even exist until 2010 and registered the domain name in 2010 and is attempting to use the UDRP Process to hijack the bigger and better domain name  on the spurious pretext of “unlawful and exploitive actions” of the Respondent.”

“It is really a shame that the UDRP Reverse Hijacking Rules do not have more serious consequences for those, such as counsel for the Complainant, who know that they have no UDRP Action, but bring it anyway on the hopes of stealing a domain name from the rightful owner.”

“Complainant either ingenuously or more likely, knowingly, states “It is undeniable the confusion caused by Respondent’s domain to complainant’s customers, since the disputed domain is a simple typographic error to complainant’s domains.”  We are not sure how to respond to this ridiculous statement as it is so outrageous as to defy response.  15 years after Respondent registered, Complainant registered, using the country code TLD to divert traffic from Respondent’s domain.  How can that possibly be a typographic error by either party?”

“The only “bad faith” that can be absolutely proven in this case is that of the Complainant.”

“At the time that Complainant registered, it did so in bad faith, knowing that Respondent had been using in one way or another for over 15 years; had developed substantial traffic to the site; and Complainant wanted to steal that traffic for its own use, just like it now wants to steal the domain name for its own use.”

“Complainant makes a number of libelous statements concerning alleged unethical and illegal conduct of Mr. Rick Schwartz, who is not a party to this action, but is a principal in Respondent corporation.  None of these allegations are proper in a UDRP Action and will not be responded to here.  Suffice it to say that a separate libel action against the complainant is being seriously considered.”

“A definitive discussion and ruling on what comprises Reverse Domain Hijacking was provided by the panel in Prime Pictures LLC v. L.P., Case No. D2010-1877.”

“Reverse Domain Name Hijacking is defined in paragraph 1 of the Rules as “using the Policy in bad faith to attempt to deprive a registered domain-name holder of a domain name.”

“In the present case, the Complaint correctly identified that the Domain Name was registered in 1998. Given that the earliest date of any registration or use of the mark relied upon in the Complaint was in 2005, the registration of the Domain Name could not have been in bad faith on any interpretation of the facts and cases cited in the Complaint.:

“Here, the attorney for the Complainant knew that the domain could not have been registered in bad faith, that the Complainant has no trademark, that no proof of common law trademark has been presented that would give rise to secondary meaning, and that because the Complainant’s offer to purchase the domain name for $50,000.00 was rejected by the Respondent, Complainant decided that it would try to get the domain name at a substantially lower cost by filing this UDRP Action. ”

“This is a classic case of Reverse Domain Hijacking”

We agree

We will let you know when the decision is handed down.


  1. says

    We should all thank Rick (and Howard) for his time and efforts here.

    Who knows how many Complainants WILL NOT file a URDP claim because of the exposure Rick is giving this case.

  2. says

    @Rob – I totally agree. Rick and Howard are going out of their way to fight attempted thievery like this. I for one thank them for helping all of us by doing it.

  3. BrianWick says’s (on their own) are worthless, useless and nonbrandable – albeit is does not stop them from being bought and sold – or developed for that matter as in this case.

    These clowns would have been better off with or if they likely the term so much.

  4. says


    Not only should Rick Schwartz win this case hands down, he should also be given a large monetary award for reverse hijacking.

    This would send a powerful message that UDRP filers should carefully consider their claims before filing bogus UDRPs.


  5. Smell the Glove says

    @Brian……are you saying a domain like is worthless, useless and non-brandable ?

    Howard, in one quote says the domain was regged in 1996, later, in another quote, he says 1998.

  6. Smell the Glove says

    How much says the panel does not find reverse domain hijacking (RDNH) , an does not even address the issue ????

  7. Bernard says

    I predict this case will be known as THE textbook case for Reverse Domain Hi-jacking for years to come. Howard came out with his guns blazing, great job.

  8. says

    Smell the Glove permalink

    @Brian……are you saying a domain like is worthless, useless and non-brandable ?

    Yea…it is BS

    dot com is KING

  9. BrianWick says

    @Smell the Glove –
    When I type in it takes me to a URL – that says it all – and says why the thugs are trying to bully Rick.

    Unless you put quotes around them and millions ino promoting and marketing them – they are worthless.

    As far as – and .xxx’s in general are the adult brand – all the other non.coms are just knock-offs – or hacks and some call them.

  10. Mr.T says

    BrianWick – maybe you should tell that to the NBA and their multi-million dollar brand NBA.TV. I could list another 10 brands that make GREAT use of .TV if you want.

    Or tell the guys over at Meet.Me that their $450k investment was a waste of money. 10 years ago I wouldn’t have hesitated to build a brand around a .com. Today, in 2012, being a online brand can be so much more than .com.

    What about Eurovision.TV? Nba.TV? TNT.TV? JustIn.TV, uStream.TV? Expect more and more “hacks” as you call them in the years to come.

    .com’s are going to be less and less in demand (especially outside the US) as more and more great alternative extensions see the day of light. If you’re going to build a global brand you still need the .com to have all bases covered (for now), but that may change in the future.

    You don’t need a multi-million dollar budget to run great non-com sites. What always amazes me is that the same category of people claim .com is king and everything else is worthless.

    They mostly (not all):

    1) in the US.
    2) ..are heavy .com investors.
    3) ..they have limited knowledge about ccTLD development and branding in the rest of the world, especially Europe.

    I’m not saying .com isn’t great, because it is. BUT, don’t you think it’s a little bit ignorant to call everything else but .com straight out worthless, useless and nonbrandable?

    On a little side note, have you ready this article covering the Q1 sales of 2012 ->

    To sum it up -> .com sales have been declining, ccTLD sales are rising. According to your statement it should be the other way around because everything but .com is worthless, right?

    I’m glad we all have different views and ideas of what extensions are brandable and where the trends are heading :)

    Btw, all kudos to Rick for his hard work!!!

  11. No One Can Fuck With Rick! says

    fuck off

    your fucking with the wrong dude little man and I hope Rick bankrupts your business with a big lawsuit after your stunt you fuck!

    Rick-The domain community we thank you and this is going be huge. This will be a milestone and for all of us! Thanks

  12. Michael H. Berkens says


    Honestly I have been so busy with Right of the Dot, plus managing our own portfolio and the blog I haven’t update the site in many many months.

    Not sure when I will get time to start updating that again

  13. BrianWick says

    Micheal –
    A few thousand’s in every tld, like, for example, would be lovely complements to if they are sold to the right sucker. my point is the brand (.com) is all I can afford.

    So spending 200K of some shareholders money for questionable reasons is not the business I am in – Dough is dough – yes – but my opinion is the Brand – that is all.

    Why else would these losers in Brazil be trying to step on Rick’s dick – i.e. the .com is the only one on the shelf ?

  14. Michael H. Berkens says


    They are taking a shot for $5K to take a domain away that they couldn’t buy for $100K

  15. BrianWick says

    Michael –
    The 10K, 50K or 100K or whatever offer the Brazilian Thugs tried to buy the domain for is irrelevant – the fact that they cannot deal with a is my point – that being and proving a is not appropriate to opperate a growing business –

  16. SF says

    I’m trying to remember what the fines or punishments are for Reverse Domain Hijacking.

    Surely, they must be quite substantial.

    I just can’t seem to recall the list.

  17. BFitz says

    “Not true look at all the VC money pouring into businesses built around .me domains”

    We are using a .me for emails and print ads for a new restaurant. Response is off the hook. We did build site on a .com and forward the .me, but the banners look cool and everyone comments on the email when they are handed a business card, “Cool email address.”

    Very memorable and not confusing plus it looks great for PPC.

  18. BrianWick says

    Michael – “Not true look at all the VC money pouring into businesses built around .me domains”

    That (especially VC money) has nothing to do with the direction of the Internet and TLDs, all that has to do with is Stroke.Me into feeling like I am part of the new Internet or whatever nre extension – nosense without a solid .com behind it.

    I do not make the rules – I simply play by them ,.

    – So we disagree ?

  19. Mr.T says

    BFitz, I´m happy to see more “openminded” people like yourself make good use of the new extensions. A lot of the upcoming companies/individuals move away from overpriced and outdated .com´s into new, more “trendy/modern” extensions.

    It is important to emphasize that far from all words fit every ccTLD, but there are a lot of options out there.

    Claiming that any brandable ccTLD is nonsense without a solid .com behind is just plain ignorant and shows a complete lack of knowledge.

    Food for thought – people playing by the rules are the followers. Breaking barriers and expanding the horizon is what it´s all about.

  20. BrianWick says

    @Mr T –
    “A lot of the upcoming companies/individuals move away from overpriced and outdated .com´s into new, more “trendy/modern” extensions.”

    I think your use of the word “trendy” says it all.
    How did the “Trendy” work out for the thugs taking on Rick ?

  21. Mr.T says

    BrianWick – let me say this right away. I think what the owners of did is a complete disgrace and I hope Rick teaches them a BIG lesson.

    When I’m talking about trendy ccTLD’s or gTLD’s I mean the .ME’s the .TV’s, the .US or any other TLD that has a great “ring” to it. These popular extensions get more and more attention from end users.

    .ME domains that call for action are great brandable domains, like Meet.ME or Love.ME or Date.ME.

    Other great brand examples could be:

    Watch.TV, Online.TV, Help.Us, Adore.Us, Visit.It, Love.It, Drink.It

    .Me, .TV and .US are definitely the top 3 “brandable” ccTLD’s. The sales have increased a lot over the last two years, and this is only the beginning of a new way companies choose to brand their products. NBA.TV is one of the best examples. They didn’t choose or, they went for NBA.TV because it’s easier to remember and a real brand.

    Domain hacks are a completely different story. They are less brandable and more confusing because the extension is part of the word/domain, ie

    I am sure .com will always be around, but mark my words when I tell you that .COM won’t be the primary extension forever and always, especially outside the .US where big changes are happening on a daily basis.

  22. BrianWick says

    “but mark my words when I tell you that .COM won’t be the primary extension forever”

    You cannot let your frustration get the better part of you – best of luck.

  23. Mr.T says

    BrianWick – there is no frustration at all :)

    I bet you´ve heard the news that Verisign applied for 14 new top level domain names including 12 transliterations of .com and .net?

    Like I said earlier, time will tell where .com is heading.

    Have a great weekend.

  24. BrianWick says

    Mr T –
    Verisign or any other individual or group cannot change what ACPA and UDRP opinions, lawyers and other entities have programmed into the consumer for 15+ years – i.e. .com is the brand of the Internet – that is what the thugs desparately realize and what anybody that buys a .CO, .ME, .TV or whatever will eventually realize.

  25. TheOne says


    “is this DomainKing” ? … looks like Domain KID.

    What a child-like response was that. Is Rick Schwartz 16year old kid ?
    1.) to hijack the BIGGER and better domain name
    -> What is BIGGER domain ?

    2.) nowing that Respondent had been using in one way or another for over 15 years; had developed substantial traffic to the site;
    -> “one way or another” … lol …

    3.) Even if the Complainant had a mark (which it does not),
    -> LOL, you still have not found Brasilian TM-Database

    With such response you publish it ?

    You are not businessman, nor domainer, nor domain king.
    Just one who had some luck in past.

Comment Policy: welcomes reader comments. Please follow these simple rules:

  • Stay on topic
  • Refrain from personal attacks
  • Avoid profanity
  • Links should be related to the topic of the post
  • No spamming. Listing domains, products, or services will get the comment deleted

We reserve the right to remove comments if we deem it necessary.

Join the Discussion