In the next few weeks much more information and details will be forthcoming.

>>>>>>>>

To: David Goch, lawyer for PHCC-NA 

Just so you know I received your last message. Without getting into details right now until we meet with the PHCC-NA president here is a short note.

There was a large investment on money and time put into phcc.org, website and email on the behalf of the PHCC-NA over the years starting back in about 1994 and for a couple years thereafter. PHCC-NA was offered FREE of charge many things to do with phcc.org and they choose to have NOTHING to do with phcc.org or a website and years later in about 1996 they obtained naphcc.org and in the first year spent over $10,000.00 of its members money to do what was offered for FREE!!! This fact is in writing just look at PHCC-NA budget reports. 

I must assume that you and the current people at PHC-NA do not know the history behind all of what had taken place back then with phcc.org. I know the facts and because of this I can assure you from my point of view their request to just give up phcc.org is ludicrous. And to top it off by not contacting me directly and paying a lawyer to do so is just ridiculous. 

Below you talked about what the InterNIC's procedure is. I am very well aware of what Network Solutions policy governing trademark and domain name disputes are. You might want to read it yourself at http://www.domainmagistrate.com/dispute-policy.html 

It's late, more of this subject at a later time.

For those of you how don't know... Yes I am a PHCC-NA member. The registration date of phcc.org is April 11, 1995. And the trademark on the letters "PHCC" was registered April 18, 2000 by PHCC-NA.


Sincerely,

William J. Baumbach II William@Baumbach.com
9975 Pennsylvania Ave Manassas, Va. 20110
Ph: 1-800-280-2820 Fax: 703-691-0946

-----Original Message-----
From: David P. Goch [mailto: dgoch@WC-B.com ]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 3:26 PM
To: 'william@baumbach.com'
Subject: domain name 

Our firm represents the National Association of Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors (NAPHCC). Previously we corresponded
with you concerning issues which I believe, most, have been resolved. I am
now contacting you regarding one of those issues in hopes of resolving the matter in an amicable way.

In my previous letter, I indicated that your website currently utilizes the domain name address: www.phcc.org. < http://www.phcc.org .> As you are aware, NAPHCC possess a registration with the United States Patent
and Trademark Office for the "PHCC" word mark.

As previously requested, we again must ask that you turn over ownership to this registration to NAPHCC.

As explained previously, in order for NAPHCC to maintain its proprietary rights in its mark, and the "strength" of the mark, it must assure that all unauthorized uses cease. I am sure you can appreciate the need for this action. Furthermore, it appears that you are not currently using the site and, thus, there should be no inconvenience to you to turn it over.

I have attempted to contact you via phone four times without your returning my call. I hope that you are able to respond to this email on or before the 19th of January.

I look forward to speaking with you and a quick resolution to this matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to email me or you can call me directly at 202-785-9500.

David P. Goch

-----Original Message-----
From: David P. Goch [mailto: dgoch@WC-B.com ]
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 10:13 AM
To: ' William@Baumbach.com '
Subject: RE: phcc.org domain name

I appreciate your message. I did receive your phone message Wednesday evening. Until then, to my knowledge I had not received any calls nor messages from you.

Regarding the domain name, it is not a question of whether the owner wishes to turn over the name, the owner must. If he is unwilling to voluntarily turn it over, the Internic has a procedure whereby the mark will be cancelled and taken from the owner (all we must produce is a copy of our Trademark registration, which we are prepared to do). I would think that the "owner" would desire to avoid this step and cooperate in light of our unquestionably superior rights (what does the individual stand to gain by holding out?). Furthermore, this is not a matter of "lawyer" intervention and a lack of person contact by the association. The behavior of the party justifies, and in fact proves the need for, legal intervention due to the lack of deference to the law our client's lawful ownership rights. 

I will be in contact with our client and relay your message regarding a personal meeting. In the meantime, if you would be so kind as to forward my thoughts to the "owner", I would appreciate it. I imagine any future meeting that might occur could be better spent on substantive issues as opposed to discussing a matter that, in the eyes of the law, has already been decided.

I look forward to your response.

David Goch