Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
strange - they have a different website on junkyard.com and www.junkyard.com
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:41853806.C97DCC67@***.net...
> JunkYard.com ?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > 1. Dennis sued D-C, not the other way around.
> >
> > 2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't
reflect
> > the facts.
> >
> > Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he just
has
> > some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement. Although
> > having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because
that's
> > how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter
that
> > he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an trademark
in
> > his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's
to
> > D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
> > cybersquatting.
> >
> > I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter
infringing
> > on my business's name this past summer.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:41853806.C97DCC67@***.net...
> JunkYard.com ?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > 1. Dennis sued D-C, not the other way around.
> >
> > 2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't
reflect
> > the facts.
> >
> > Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he just
has
> > some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement. Although
> > having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because
that's
> > how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter
that
> > he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an trademark
in
> > his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's
to
> > D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
> > cybersquatting.
> >
> > I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter
infringing
> > on my business's name this past summer.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
JB no one is asking you to "debate it", I just asked a question about
Dennis' settlement. Read the question again, for the third time.
As a matter of fact, my question had nothing to do with girls "------ing
themselves to show the pink" as you call it, I think you brought that up. Oh
yeah, you did.
--James
(Maybe I'll catch your reply next week, I am off to SEMA in Vegas.)
"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:Hc_gd.71029$bk1.69576@fed1read05...
> James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> "RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
> news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
>> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>>
>> "So Jerry,
>>
>> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
>> have
>> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
>> That is interesting.
>>
>> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> --James
>>
>> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>>
>> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>>
>> Now answer the question.
>>
>> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
>> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how
>> Nathan isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option
>> two then Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his
>> opinion of you.
>>
>>
>> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>> --
>>> Jerry Bransford
>>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>>
>>
>
>
Dennis' settlement. Read the question again, for the third time.
As a matter of fact, my question had nothing to do with girls "------ing
themselves to show the pink" as you call it, I think you brought that up. Oh
yeah, you did.
--James
(Maybe I'll catch your reply next week, I am off to SEMA in Vegas.)
"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:Hc_gd.71029$bk1.69576@fed1read05...
> James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> "RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
> news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
>> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>>
>> "So Jerry,
>>
>> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
>> have
>> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
>> That is interesting.
>>
>> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> --James
>>
>> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>>
>> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>>
>> Now answer the question.
>>
>> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
>> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how
>> Nathan isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option
>> two then Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his
>> opinion of you.
>>
>>
>> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>> --
>>> Jerry Bransford
>>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>>
>>
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
JB no one is asking you to "debate it", I just asked a question about
Dennis' settlement. Read the question again, for the third time.
As a matter of fact, my question had nothing to do with girls "------ing
themselves to show the pink" as you call it, I think you brought that up. Oh
yeah, you did.
--James
(Maybe I'll catch your reply next week, I am off to SEMA in Vegas.)
"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:Hc_gd.71029$bk1.69576@fed1read05...
> James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> "RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
> news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
>> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>>
>> "So Jerry,
>>
>> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
>> have
>> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
>> That is interesting.
>>
>> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> --James
>>
>> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>>
>> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>>
>> Now answer the question.
>>
>> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
>> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how
>> Nathan isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option
>> two then Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his
>> opinion of you.
>>
>>
>> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>> --
>>> Jerry Bransford
>>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>>
>>
>
>
Dennis' settlement. Read the question again, for the third time.
As a matter of fact, my question had nothing to do with girls "------ing
themselves to show the pink" as you call it, I think you brought that up. Oh
yeah, you did.
--James
(Maybe I'll catch your reply next week, I am off to SEMA in Vegas.)
"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:Hc_gd.71029$bk1.69576@fed1read05...
> James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> "RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
> news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
>> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>>
>> "So Jerry,
>>
>> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
>> have
>> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
>> That is interesting.
>>
>> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> --James
>>
>> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>>
>> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>>
>> Now answer the question.
>>
>> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
>> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how
>> Nathan isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option
>> two then Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his
>> opinion of you.
>>
>>
>> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>> --
>>> Jerry Bransford
>>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>>
>>
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
JB no one is asking you to "debate it", I just asked a question about
Dennis' settlement. Read the question again, for the third time.
As a matter of fact, my question had nothing to do with girls "------ing
themselves to show the pink" as you call it, I think you brought that up. Oh
yeah, you did.
--James
(Maybe I'll catch your reply next week, I am off to SEMA in Vegas.)
"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:Hc_gd.71029$bk1.69576@fed1read05...
> James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> "RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
> news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
>> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>>
>> "So Jerry,
>>
>> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
>> have
>> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
>> That is interesting.
>>
>> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> --James
>>
>> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>>
>> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>>
>> Now answer the question.
>>
>> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
>> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how
>> Nathan isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option
>> two then Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his
>> opinion of you.
>>
>>
>> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>> --
>>> Jerry Bransford
>>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>>
>>
>
>
Dennis' settlement. Read the question again, for the third time.
As a matter of fact, my question had nothing to do with girls "------ing
themselves to show the pink" as you call it, I think you brought that up. Oh
yeah, you did.
--James
(Maybe I'll catch your reply next week, I am off to SEMA in Vegas.)
"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:Hc_gd.71029$bk1.69576@fed1read05...
> James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> "RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
> news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
>> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>>
>> "So Jerry,
>>
>> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
>> have
>> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
>> That is interesting.
>>
>> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> --James
>>
>> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>>
>> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>>
>> Now answer the question.
>>
>> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
>> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how
>> Nathan isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option
>> two then Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his
>> opinion of you.
>>
>>
>> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
>> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>> --
>>> Jerry Bransford
>>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>>
>>
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
thank God Parker got stamped on after the complaints and isn't annoying us
anymore ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"MontanaJeeper" <montanajeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041031133044.17863.00001701@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
> >From: SpecialOps4x4@webtv.net (Special Ops)
>
> >I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
> >because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
> >Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
> >old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
> >being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
> >and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
>
> thanks dennis. some will never accept this due to various reasons having
> nothing to do with the case itself, but having personally dealt with these
> people i _know_ that what you say is right.
>
anymore ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"MontanaJeeper" <montanajeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041031133044.17863.00001701@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
> >From: SpecialOps4x4@webtv.net (Special Ops)
>
> >I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
> >because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
> >Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
> >old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
> >being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
> >and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
>
> thanks dennis. some will never accept this due to various reasons having
> nothing to do with the case itself, but having personally dealt with these
> people i _know_ that what you say is right.
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
thank God Parker got stamped on after the complaints and isn't annoying us
anymore ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"MontanaJeeper" <montanajeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041031133044.17863.00001701@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
> >From: SpecialOps4x4@webtv.net (Special Ops)
>
> >I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
> >because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
> >Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
> >old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
> >being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
> >and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
>
> thanks dennis. some will never accept this due to various reasons having
> nothing to do with the case itself, but having personally dealt with these
> people i _know_ that what you say is right.
>
anymore ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"MontanaJeeper" <montanajeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041031133044.17863.00001701@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
> >From: SpecialOps4x4@webtv.net (Special Ops)
>
> >I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
> >because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
> >Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
> >old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
> >being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
> >and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
>
> thanks dennis. some will never accept this due to various reasons having
> nothing to do with the case itself, but having personally dealt with these
> people i _know_ that what you say is right.
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
thank God Parker got stamped on after the complaints and isn't annoying us
anymore ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"MontanaJeeper" <montanajeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041031133044.17863.00001701@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
> >From: SpecialOps4x4@webtv.net (Special Ops)
>
> >I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
> >because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
> >Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
> >old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
> >being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
> >and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
>
> thanks dennis. some will never accept this due to various reasons having
> nothing to do with the case itself, but having personally dealt with these
> people i _know_ that what you say is right.
>
anymore ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"MontanaJeeper" <montanajeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041031133044.17863.00001701@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
> >From: SpecialOps4x4@webtv.net (Special Ops)
>
> >I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
> >because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
> >Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
> >old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
> >being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
> >and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
>
> thanks dennis. some will never accept this due to various reasons having
> nothing to do with the case itself, but having personally dealt with these
> people i _know_ that what you say is right.
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
That's funny, and appropriate...
"Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
news:H5bhd.3446$up1.1847@text.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
> strange - they have a different website on junkyard.com and
www.junkyard.com
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41853806.C97DCC67@***.net...
> > JunkYard.com ?
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. Dennis sued D-C, not the other way around.
> > >
> > > 2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't
> reflect
> > > the facts.
> > >
> > > Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he
just
> has
> > > some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement.
Although
> > > having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because
> that's
> > > how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter
> that
> > > he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an
trademark
> in
> > > his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's
> to
> > > D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
> > > cybersquatting.
> > >
> > > I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter
> infringing
> > > on my business's name this past summer.
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
That's funny, and appropriate...
"Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
news:H5bhd.3446$up1.1847@text.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
> strange - they have a different website on junkyard.com and
www.junkyard.com
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41853806.C97DCC67@***.net...
> > JunkYard.com ?
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. Dennis sued D-C, not the other way around.
> > >
> > > 2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't
> reflect
> > > the facts.
> > >
> > > Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he
just
> has
> > > some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement.
Although
> > > having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because
> that's
> > > how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter
> that
> > > he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an
trademark
> in
> > > his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's
> to
> > > D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
> > > cybersquatting.
> > >
> > > I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter
> infringing
> > > on my business's name this past summer.
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
That's funny, and appropriate...
"Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
news:H5bhd.3446$up1.1847@text.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
> strange - they have a different website on junkyard.com and
www.junkyard.com
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41853806.C97DCC67@***.net...
> > JunkYard.com ?
> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> > mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. Dennis sued D-C, not the other way around.
> > >
> > > 2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't
> reflect
> > > the facts.
> > >
> > > Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he
just
> has
> > > some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement.
Although
> > > having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because
> that's
> > > how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter
> that
> > > he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an
trademark
> in
> > > his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's
> to
> > > D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
> > > cybersquatting.
> > >
> > > I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter
> infringing
> > > on my business's name this past summer.
>
>
