Eliot Spitzer Files UDRP to Take EliotSpitzer.Com

New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer appears to have begun legal proceedings to take the domain names eliotspitzer.com and eliotspitzer.org away from Eric Keller, a New Jersey online candy retailer who registered them in 2001.

A Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) arbitration began today regarding the domains at the National Arbitration Forum. Arbitrators will decide whether the domains were registered and used in bad faith, whether Keller has legitimate rights in the names, and whether Spitzer has used his name as a trademark in commerce. He must prevail on all three to take the domains.

The domains are parked today, but archived web pages from the Internet Wayback Machine indicate that eliotspitzer.com was used for several years to direct traffic to eBulkCandy.com LLC, a candy retailer based in Trenton, N.J.

eBulkCandy, which also operates stores at JordanAlmonds.Com and HometownCandy.Com, has been the subject of numerous consumer complaints with the Better Business Bureau and the complaint site Rip Off Report.

On Dec. 5, Keller was indicted by the Department of Justice on 10 counts of mail fraud for allegedly bilking UPS out of charges for candy shipments:

From September 22, 2001 through February 2005, Keller created a series of bogus UPS shipping accounts for the purpose of shipping candy to ebulkcandy customers, and failed to pay UPS for the shipping. The indictment alleges that at the time Keller opened the UPS accounts, he had no intention of paying UPS for shipping services. According to the charges, defendant Eric Keller defrauded UPS of approximately $154,581.

He faces up to 200 years imprisonment and a $2.5 million fine.

In 2003, Keller was sued in Illinois by Brach's Confections for cybersquatting and trademark infringement over nine domains that incorporated Brach's into their names: brach.us, brachcandy.com, brachs.net, brachs.org, brachscandies.com, brachscandy.net, brachsconfections.com, brachsoutlet.com and brachswholesale.com.

One filing related to the suit alleged that Keller dodged a process server:

... Keller repeatedly tried to avoid service, ranging from refusing mail service to refusing to accept service through a car window when confronted by a process server. In the last instance, the process server left the two sets of summons and complaint for Keller ... by the car containing the defendant on May 16, 2003. When the process server returned a short while later both Keller and the summonses and complaints had left the side of the car.


I wouldn't fuck with Elliot Spitzer if I were him

Keller is a small-time con artist whose karma caught up with him. Just one more two-bit player ambling down the pike.

Hey -- this is america and free rights... If he bought the names he owns them.. Let Spitzer buy them from him.

I have never seen in a domain name registration that if you are indicted or even convicted of something you can not keep your domain names...

Even so what took Spitzer 6 years to make a case...

My last name is Google. I wish I could steamroll my way over them.

I have never seen in a domain name registration that if you are indicted or even convicted of something you can not keep your domain names...

When you are the target of a UDRP arbitration or a cybersquatting lawsuit, the other side digs into your background in an attempt to prove that you registered a domain in a bad-faith attempt to profit in somebody else's trademark.

Every time you register or renew a domain name in .com, .net, .org and some country code namespaces, you agree to be subject to the UDRP, which is what lets a party like Spitzer attempt to take a domain name.

Good research. If he used the domain to write about his beliefs on Spitzer then he's win the dispute. But there's not chance the way he's used it.

Incidentally, domain registrar GoDaddy is currently profiting from this domain name's PPC traffic.

In light of the considerable spin orchestrated on this matter at my expense I am preparing a lengthy, documented written statement which I will post here and elsewhere if need be to set the record straight.

What do you make of this: www.halflife.com

Dear Mr. Keller...you are a low life squatter and trademark thief.

Yo Uncle Mickey, don't worry Eliot Spitzer is not paying you money for sex. He is paying some 19 year old high priced hooker about $4,000 per hour for sex. Dangerous sex. But why are you attacking Mr. Keller when Eliot Snoozer is so much more obviously the criminal:

Spitzer's Dilemma: "Eliot Snoozer" 11-02-2006
Lawyer Practicing in New York Admits Advising That Death Threats Are Legal;

Eliot Spitzer Snoozes According to bankruptcyMisconduct.com
NEW YORK, Nov 02, 2006 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- A lawyer admitted to practice in New York and Federal Courts conceded a transcript filed in court contained an accurate portrayal of a conversation in which the lawyer advised his client that it was perfectly fine to threaten to kill someone.

Eliot Spitzer was the elected Attorney General for the State of New York, with ultimate responsibility to enforce the law as well as to uphold the purported ethical standards for attorneys in New York State by following and supporting The Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility. Eliot Spitzer has managed an office which rattled the boardrooms of big business throughout the state as he delighted a skeptical citizenry with numerous assaults on corporate misdeeds. Countless industries have had their often secret business practices brought before the courts and thrust into the light of day; except of course, for perhaps the most secretive and lucrative "profession."

Powerful law firms continue to operate above the law and beyond scrutiny. Sadly, Mr. Spitzer's talent for appearing as a zealous foe of corruption and wrongdoing ceases where brethren of the bar are concerned. Apparently Mr. Spitzer believes every business is bad except his own.

Do voters want an Attorney General who protects his partners and associates while prosecuting only those unworthy of special protection? If elected, will Andrew Cuomo continue the Spitzer legacy of Law Firm Protectionism? What could voters expect from Mr. Spitzer as Governor?

This release was authored by bankruptcyMisconduct.com and was not sponsored, advised, or funded by any candidate for office. Statements herein other than fact are opinion and readers are urged to become fully informed of the issues. Documents evidencing factual elements of this press release are public record at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan SDNY 02-13533 docket numbers 17315, 17315A copies available at http://www.bankruptcymisconduct.com.

SOURCE bankruptcyMisconduct.com
= = =

We received some comment from the media questioning the accuracy of the above press release. While we agree that it seems unbelievable, it is true and fully verifiable. Immediately below is an excerpt of the hearing in front of U.S. Bankruptcy judge Arthur J. Gonzalez during which the attorney admits that the transcript which was filed was accurate, in fact the attorney surmises that the conversation was recorded. click here (www.bankruptcymisconduct.com) for a view of the hearing transcript from the Worldcom / MCI bankruptcy case.While admitting that the transcript of the conversation was accurate, the lawyer and the federal judge surmise that the conversation was recorded. The original motion was filed as docket number 17315 which you can get here, and docket number 17315A has the exhibits which you can get here. If you want only the coversation transcript, which was not originally made during an official proceeding but was conceeded as accurate by the lawyer, it was exhibit C to the motion which you can get here. Following is a highligted excerpt. The attorney's remarks certainly suggest a 3057 referral, unclear is whether the "I" highlighted in red below was a referrence by the attorney to another party who would be hired to perform the killing, or that other parties are threating a killing.

Add a Comment

All comments are moderated before publication. These HTML tags are permitted: <p>, <b>, <i>, <a>, and <blockquote>. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA (for which the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply).