TM
Morning Folks!!
Let me tell you about these PRICKS and then YOU decide! Destiny has brought you here! As you will read, I did not look for this mess. I was just goofing off, minding my own business until I was contacted by these FOOLS that are STILL clueless as they tried to take what was not theirs via the courts and lost. TWICE!!
This site is to make sure there is never a THIRD time by shining light on this practice of what I call 'Reverse Domain Hijacking'. That's when a big company competes with a small guy and loses in the market place of ideas. Then uses financial intimidation by using the court system to try and take what is not theirs. Most small guys can not afford to defend themselves and so they cave. I have spent thousands to defend MY property. My domain name, Goofoff.com. This gives me a platform to alert others. Don't cave! Fight! And if you don't have the $$$ to fight.....fight with whatever you have! Shine a BRIGHT light on whoever and let public opinion weigh in.
Updated 8AM July 27th.....'What Moron is responsible for this mess?'
After not hearing from these GOOFS about one of my domain names (GoofOff.com) for over a decade after they unsuccessfully tried to take it from me in 1999, I got an email on April 13th of this year stating Goof-Off.com (with the hyphen) would like to 'engage in a discussion' to acquire my domain name GoofOff.com (without the hyphen). My guess is because they know that a domain with a 'hyphen' in it leaks a shit load of traffic to the domain without the 'hyphen' in it. Just like a .NET domain leaks a shit load of traffic to a .COM domain name. Sorry, but if you own a .NET domain name, you have an 'Orphan' extension because the default is .COM. a HUGE percentage of people make the mistake. So do you blame all the owners of the .COM counterpart?? That's just BAD marketing in my book no matter who does it!
So not exactly my problem until they tried to pee on the electric fence. ME! Their 'Tactics' you will read below are horrendous and you may ask yourself how STUPID can a company be?? This must have gone up to the highest levels of whatever company owns and or advertises the product and they decided to try and intimidate me LEGALLY TWICE since 1999. They lost LEGALLY TWICE and That got them THIS!!
THEY initiated contact with me with the following:
'We would like to entertain a discussion about what it would take for both companies to come to an agreement on the Goofoff.com domain name moving to WM Barr as the registrant.'
I responded to the firm I figured was representing Lilly Industries (Tho I don't know who actually now owns the 'Goof Off' cleaner) about what happened in 1999 after originally registering the domain in May 1998 and stated 'For me to respond or even entertain a negotiation, I would have to have your assurance that this will not be used against me in any way, shape or form, EVER. I don't violate trademarks and not looking for a clever way to be entrapped.'
Their response after THEM contacting ME was an NAF case.
So that was a low blow W.M.Barr & Co. and I don't forget things like that. It just fuels me to fight hard and make W.M.Barr & Co. the poster company for Corporate Bullies and companies that engage in Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.
The image below was created for ourpress release in 1999. Feel free to copy. While I can afford to defend my domain name many mom and pop outfits can not. They just lay down and give in and many times unnecessarily. Destroying their family business. It cost me several thousand dollars to defend this domain. Many small businesses and startups would not be able to fight back and would lose something they were actually entitled to. It's bullying in the worst form. INDEFENSIBLE in my book.
Howard and I are now about to go on the offense. Once again they can defend their interference and their cyber bullying in a more public forum and their own customers/stockholders can learn of their heavy handedness. And the tactics they use to “Negotiate”.
To Howard’s credit he never even brought this email up in the NAF case! I am sure he will use that email forcefully the next time we joust and show the world what predatory nonsense I believe that W.M. Barr is engaging in when they continue to interfere with my business. Once again trying to overstep their trademark protection on multiple fronts. They are not entitled to my domain just because they are a large company and want what I own! That is just HORSE SHIT! These MORONS have not not addressed the FACT that I registered GoofOff.com two years before they obtained a registered trademark for the generic words GOOF OFF. Therefore, they could never prove the Goofoff.com was registered and used in bad faith and I am getting dammed pissed off every time they make that assertion and paint me as the predator when in FACT, it is the other way around!
This increases the value of the domain as I invest more and more $$ not only protecting me and goofoff.com but displaying to the world the value and the peril of a domain name and corporate cyberbullies that try and take what others rightfully own. As you might imagine, I don't have a very high regard for these folks after this. I won't even talk to them directly in the future. They will have to go thru Howard and he won't even negotiate until I am reimbursed my costs. These folks can take a subliminal message from my last post. A 6 word beauty!
Have a GREAT Day!
Rick Schwartz
July 27, 2010
Welcome to all the folks that typed in GoofOff.com. Now that I have control of my domain again I want to make sure GoofOff.com does not accidentally confuse anyone, contain any objectionable ads, whatsoever. I have decided to make this the new home of GoofOff to avoid any of this in the future.
Updates below as needed......
*Goofoff.com is in no way related to the folks that own, sell, or advertise 'Goof Off Miracle remover'TM
(Removes everything but us) We are here to freely express opinions, have a good time and just GOOFOFF.COM! Now post or SCRAM!W. M. Barr.....Leave me alone, stop interfering with my business or I will be free to tell folks what I REALLY think of you!! There is NO FUCKING CONFUSION HERE! We sell NOTHING. Have owned this domain in excess of 12 YEARS and.......I'll save the rest if and when I EVER hear from your Motherf*ckers again. You can start with an apology!
In 1999 this made news worldwide. Here is the article from theLondon Register from back then where I was quoted as saying 'These 'corporate bullies' intimidate small firms and individuals into relinquishing domains through the threat of litigation despite the fact that they have no legal rights to the domain,' I said. 'The only 'confusion' is in their minds -- just another example of a large company that decided they can force a small business to succumb to their demands,'
'According to Websters [dictionary], a 'Goof off' is a noun that means a person that wastes time or avoids work; a shirker. As such 'Goofoff.com' is being used quite appropriately,'
That was then. Now I think they are nothing but TOE JAM. Want what I OWN that bad that you can't live without it?? It's called CAPITALISM you slimy BASTARDS. If I were you I would fire the MORON that did not have the foresight to register it when it was THERE FOR THE TAKING!! You lived without it for 11 more years and one day what happened?? Figured you would take another bite of the apple?? Think you could become a bully again and everyone would forget? Well I am the prick in charge of reminding them and everyone else. You can explain the rest to whoever.
Did it cost you business by not owning this domain over the past years? Probably. But I would never to be stupid enough to have a product without the matching domain name. The way I view things that comes FIRST. I have devoted my last 15 years of life explaining to businesses about the importance of a domain name and the sense of urgency that it is attached to. I am on record since the days that I was laughed at and thought a fool with more money than brains by investing in domain names and what I could build on them.But to continue to accuse me and that 'I' did something wrong by registering a common term and do it TWO YEARS before their trademark, well, that is BULLSHIT and now everyone knows it!!! Maybe the customers and shareholders will comment below that they agree with my opinion that management just FAILED to do their job and now it is spilling all over the place. Stop blaming me for shortsightedness I had no control over. I guess they were just GOOFING OFF when they should have been focused on marketing. Maybe they just should have left me alone after 11 years cuz they stepped on a hornets nest for wasting my time and money. The value for Goofoff.com was pretty limited back in 1999 when few knew what a domain name meant and the worldwide marketing value was still in debate. Today there is an entire multi-billion dollar domain name industry that was not even born in 1999. Welcome to Manhattan!
I am going to be updating GoofOff.com from time to time after that to let the world know about companies that do what this one is doing. I will be adding a chat board here and let freedom ring when this becomes a stand alone site next month with this content and live interaction. My INK. MY SITE, MY DECISION. For the record, the ONLY direct or indirect contact I have ever had with these folks have been initiated by them. I never even knew they existed before 1999 and thought nothing of them again until I received that BULLSHIT email in April.
In case you missed it or still are confused or just plain stupid........*Goofoff.com is in no way related to the folks that own, sell, or advertise 'Goof Off Miracle remover' TM
Goofoff.com is owned by ME. Goof off the cleaner.......that is the only thing confusing to me. Who the hell actually owns that?? Lilly, Valspar or W.M. Barr?? Maybe they just wanted to keep one of the names out of this?? I sure as hell have no idea. I AM confused! Does Lilly Industries still own and operate and manufacture....the cleaner or does Valspar which was either a name change or acquisition back in 2000 or is it W.M. Barr??? Not that anyone cares, but I find it a bit confusingly interesting. How about you? Maybe after last time they did this and saw the publicity and stir it caused they wanted to keep the big guys name out of this?? I really don't know. Just curious what the real story is? Just questions. What do you think??? I think maybe the company just goofed and handled this horribly. 11 years and they still have not figured it out. Now that is SAD!If I were the CEO running their company I would be asking two or three questions....'What MORON is responsible for THIS MESS?? Which department allowed this to spin out of control??? And how the hell are we going to fix it now????!
TM
steve fox
I agree with W.M.Barr here. Howard is clearly at fault here. The domain should be handed over to me for safe keeping until this is settled.
Perchboy
Congratulations, Rick. The rest of us are taking notes on how it’s done.
Mike
Looks to me like parked.com nearly screwed you over, and you got lucky that the NAF was too lazy to bother with the case. Showing their ads on your parked page and getting away with it is hardly something to be proud of. Had parked.com not screwed up they probably would not have bothered you.
Would have been interesting to see what would happen between you and parked.com if you lost it because of them.
Stephen The Dude
@Mike
Why would it be”parked.com”‘s fault in this case?
Other than that, in 11 years, that tone in Rick’s voice hasn’t changed one bit! He is, if nothing, consistent.
I have no argument with Rick and Howard’s argument. I say to Rick and Howie,”show some .50 caliber chain guns” and cut em up (speaking hypothetically, of course).
Bruce Tedeschi
Bottom line, this is in the dictionary http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goof-off. Last I checked, you cannot sue for TM infringement if it is a generally accepted term in the dictionary and American Lexicon. I would seek out the earliest reference used in print for film where the term is used as it is in the dictionary. You will need these for reference. This is a weak case on the merits. If the parked page is referencing cleaning products etc. in the same market area, quite simply change the keyword to”humor” Good luck with it
Hawaiian Shirt Guy
Hey Rick,
Corporate bullies, hate them. I had blockbuster.tv long ago, until it was taken from me by force of $$$.
Blockbuster is a common use term to describe a movie that does very well on its opening night.
The term was in use long before the company.
While I feel bad for its employess, I can’t help but smirk a litte at every news release quoting Blockbuster-the-company’s impending demise….
BTW, Rick, you wear Hawaiian shirts, how come I have never heard from you?
Evie
Great Day Rick,
Positive thoughts for GoofOff.com and aren’t THEY stepping on YOUR toes when they list their site as”Welcome to GoofOff.com — Goof Off is the solution to irritating, embarrassing and potentially costly cleaning problems. Goof Off – the ultimate remover for the toughest messes. …”
They may produce a Product called Goof Off – but GoofOff.com is YOURS ?
Just a thought …
Evie
But they are NOT http://GoofOff.com
ScottM
Hi Rick:
Hope you and Howard tell the Goof Off people to Fuck Off! Matter of fact, consider maybe pointing the domain GoofOff.com here for awhile:
http://fuckoff.com/head-wall.gif
Goof off is a decades-old commonly used expression, anyone remember”Leave It To Beaver”, they said that all the time.
If you registered the domain before they applied/received the registered trademark then there would seem to be no bad faith element for a UDRP take-away. And if the domain is now registered offshore with a registrar the U.S. Federal Courts cannot order a foreign registrar
to hand over the domain.
Danny Pryor
I am surprised there are not a plethora of comments on this issue. Oh well; to the point: this is a case where you are lucky you have the resources to fight this kind of corporate B.S. For those of us joining the game late, or who are not just domainers, the ability to fight this kind of corporate bullying would wane quickly for lack of resources. I tremble at this and implore the domaining world to consider some kind of common representation for the industry that might intervene in cases like this, or help to establish laws that protect us. The ICA was supposed to do this, and it is defunct. What happens if they come after me? I’m dead.
Tom
I’ve often hoped that you or Frank or even groups like Sedo would begin to set a precedent by requiring some sort of indemnification as part of first contact if someone inquires about a domain. Perhaps something in an auto-reply like:
“Due to the high rate of misguided people and greedy corporations I can no longer respond to domain purchase requests unless at least the following criteria are included in your request:
1. You assert that you do not hold, have interest in or represent any person or entity who claims to have interest in copyright or trademark associated with this domain [domain.com].
2. You agree that from now until your death that you or any person or entity you represent will not attempt to bring a UDRP or court action for the purpose of acquiring this domain [domain.com].
3. Blah, blah, blah.
Howard would know what to write but you get my gist. If you heavy hitters make it a standard, the rest of us would be able to follow suit without coming across as overly paranoid.
rob
Rick under the law it may not be deemed cyber squatting
but in spirit it is
because the only people typing or searching for goof off are
the ones looking for the product or service
and your price would be many times as much as its worth
(as a stand alone domain) because it is the name
of someones business
Mike
@Stephen – If you read the NAF report, the domain was to show only travel and leisure ads, then parked.com apparently started showing ads for goof off and/or goof off type products, which went against a previous agreement they had from 1999, which is what brought them back to the NAF. So if parked dropped the ball and started showing ads it was not supposed to, and Rick lost the domain, then what? Could Rick go after parked.com? Did they have a written agreement? I doubt it.
jberryhill
“requiring some sort of indemnification as part of first contact if someone inquires about a domain”
Over the course of a decade, I have seen a zillion variations on this thing, as if there were some kind of”magic incantation”. Basically, you might as well put flashing text on your website saying”I’m a cybersquatter” if you are going to be that reflexively defensive.
My example is this. You walk out of the store and find that the hubcaps have been removed from your car. Across the street is”Bob’s hubcap sales”. Putting two and two together, you walk over to Bob’s. Bob greets you at the door with a”contract” that says,”If you want to look around my store and buy hubcaps, you have to promise not to bring a claim if I have your hubcaps in here.”
The fact that Bob is standing at the door with the form, pretty much reinforces the impression that your missing hubcaps have something to do with his store, since it seems that you weren’t the first one to come to his store looking for your hubcaps.
It’s just silly.
lick my paunch
i salute you Rick
well done!
clearly a generic phrase you regged long before their trademark
wmbarr are scumm. or rather their lawyers are, no doubr they talked them into this for an easy payday for themselves. irony is, as it drags on more, the lawyers get more and they cost their client more money and more shame
keep on trucking Rick
ScottM
Rick, this is now my all time favorite post of yours unless you manage somehow outdo yourself the next time one of these miserable, greedy fucknut lawyers messes with you and Howard! My partner and associates and I have all been through this same shit as you so we feel your pain and aggevation.
I may ramp it up myself along with others and see about now getting a U.S. Attorney involved in a criminal investigation of Verizon California, Inc. et.al. and their lawyers seizing of an entire domain registrar, Lead Networks, which contained 80,000 domains of innocent parties, of which only 229 or so were involved in cybersquatting of Verizon’s trademark. Talk about overreach. This is theft, conversion under California law, tresspass to chattel, interference with commerce, etc. etc. and involves several domains which were also registered trademarks of others and not belonging to Verizon. This has been going on since December now 8 months later none of us can modify DNS, transfer, change contact or sell any of our domains. Somebody is going to definitely pay for this debacle, if not also be criminally prosecuted and go to jail and get disbarred.
vibram
may ramp it up myself along with others and see about now getting a U.S. Attorney involved in a criminal investigation of Verizon California, Inc. et.al. and their lawyers seizing of an entire domain registrar, Lead Networks, which contained 80,000 domains of innocent parties, of which only 229 or so were involved in cybersquatting of Verizon’s trademark.
randy@mindspring.com
This is stil not live?