Lawyers always win.

In the land of Right and Wrong-- whomever can afford the lawsuit will prevail. I learned a valuable lesson recently. I learned that lawsuits, no matter the case or evidence, the witnesses, or the cost, -- if you cannot afford to wage the battle, the decision goes to your enemy. About a year ago, I had an idea for a website. I had learned just enough about Search Engine Optimization to be dangerous, as well as read a few books about Online Reputation Management and transparency and media monitoring, and I decided that I would make a website. This would be a site that could attract the elite of Canadian business people, but appeal more to their vanity then to their interests. People invariably 'google' themselves, and my intention was to make sure that when a select group of business people from all across North America did so-- they arrived at my site.  As part of this strategy I registered several domain names that would drive traffic to my site.  Most were firstname-lastname.com type domains, and were the easiest to type and remember for this group of executives. The site was originally called 'Executives for Sale' and subsequently renamed 'Executives in the News' to give it a more positive feel. I would find images, and compile biographies for many of the sites 'stars' attempting where I could, to credit the newspaper or wikipedia or corporate site where the information was gleaned. I never claimed to write all the content, merely compile, massage, and spin it. The site was almost always positive for a consumer, learning about CEOs and Presidents, and how they were affecting the companies (and in some cases communities) for which they were responsible. As part of expanding my consulting business, I decided to reach out to many of the 'stars' of my website, offering to consult on the various topics about which I thought of myself as a knowledgeable source.    One of those discussions proved to go swimmingly.  My initial offer of consulting services was followed up promptly, and started with a few phone calls about my services before progressing to a meeting with a director-level Corporate Communications person.  This person was very polite, and showed significant interest in my plan.  In this case, the executive worked at a bank, and the plan I suggested revolved around protecting online reputation by being proactive, and putting content on the web that promoted his good deeds, the positive aspects of the company, etc.  The plan also revolved around the dot-com being the central hub for all of the social media content to tie back to.  An example would be a Youtube channel where this executive would feature his interviews, and commercials, and features about the bank, but all the while directing traffic back to the hub, the dot com.

One of the big concerns of the Corporate Communications person was that this executive not 'stand out' among his peers.  The bank was not one to promote in the media (according to this guy) one executive over another,if that person wasn't the head of the bank.  I thought this to be odd, when I recently saw an TV ad featuring another executive from the same bank, promoting a line of mortgages.  Clearly they use different executives for different things.  Regardless, I was very positive, and was looking forward to some more feedback, when the plan I had prepared was shared with some more people at the bank.  (Important to note: At this time, all of our discussions centered around consulting services and online reputation management).  I was asked if the timing (being a big bank) was ok to push off any decision making until the new year, and of course I agreed.  I figured they would want to circulate the plans, as well as give this guy a chance to catch up with a Digital Marketing Vice President who had to cancel, and so couldn't make our meeting.

A couple months went by, and after a follow up email I was told that the 'file' had been passed to the Digital Marketing person (who missed the first meeting) and that I would continue discussions with him.  After a brief phone call, the topic of our discussion split into two different topics.  A) Consulting services for the bank, as previously discussed, and B) A purchase of the domain that was driving the traffic for the bank.  In this case, the firstname-lastname.com of the bank executive.

I told the VP Digital that I hadn't considered selling the domain name, as we were discussing online consulting services, but that I was always open to proposals.  He asked me how much I would sell the domain for, and I told him I'd get back to him that day with a price.  We did not discuss the consulting services further.

Later that day, I sent an email with a fair price for the domain.  This was the name of a bank executive, but also a fairly common firstname-lastname. It wasn't a copyrighted or trademarked name, a brand, or any other intellectual property as the law interprets such.    I had done some research, and there were more than 3 other people with this name in the area. 

Important to note: Registering someones name is not illegal, and does not infringe any trademarks or copyrights (unless they are registered) and is not libellous (unless they contain libellous material  eg.  andrewkinnearsucks.com) .  A domain name can point to any website, be parked with ads, or simply be registered and have no DNS entry (and thus provide an error when visitors try to visit).

This is where the story starts to suck for me.  My next communication is from a lawyer, counsel for the bank and the executive, accusing me of infringing copyrights, misappropriation of personality, and breaking section

Section 9(1)(k) of the Canadian Trademarks Act.

Because some of the content of the site was controversial, the bank was taking a "Let's just sue" approach and wanted everything.  I was no longer in a negotiation on the price of the domain-- I had been lulled into a trap to lay the groundwork for a lawsuit.  Awesome.

The story ends on a happy note for all but my wallet.  No consulting work, no compensation for handing over the domain, but no lawsuit and no lawyers.

Because I felt I was right, my gut wanted to fight-- but that's the wrong idea.  It's not about whether you are right or wrong, guilty or innocent, or any other factor than this:  Can you

afford

to wage the battle?  A bank can use their retained lawyers for months or years as a cost of doing business, and then before a judge or jury even gets to decide who's right-- drop the case.  Not cool for the little guy and his wallet who can't afford to even GO to court.

What I've learned is that negotiation, salesmanship, consulting, and business development can all backfire.  What I should have done is just waited for the email from my domain registrar saying that there was either a complaint OR an offer to purchase.  Anonymity is more valuable than I thought.

They think they've won-- but I will

never

forget.  I will go through the rest of my life remembering this experience, the players involved, the names, the faces, the companies, the firms, etc.  I will follow their careers long after they have forgotten who I am and how they took advantage of me.  Revenge isn't productive but karma's a bitch.