Legal updates

Legal threats will be published here.

If Jagex, its counsel, or any representative sends a cease-and-desist letter, trademark demand, domain complaint, or other legal threat against this consumer commentary site, I will publish the correspondence on this page in full, together with my response. There will be no private settlement that requires deleting consumer criticism.

Why I publish legal threats

Legal pressure against noncommercial criticism depends on secrecy. I will not provide that secrecy. In my opinion, a company that prefers legal threats against a customer documenting poor treatment over fixing its own business practices has made its ethics clear — and other customers are entitled to see that in writing.

What I will do if this site is threatened

• Publish the letter. Full text, with personal residential addresses and personal phone numbers redacted.
• Publish my response. Direct and explicit, in my own words.
• Inform the public. I will share the update where customers already discuss Jagex support and enforcement.
• Refuse silence in exchange for the domain. I will not agree to delete negative reviews or consumer complaints about Jagex business ethics as the price of keeping this site.

This site is not cybersquatting

This site exists for consumer criticism: negative reviews, consumer complaints, and commentary on Jagex’s business practices. It is noncommercial. Nothing is sold. There is no advertising and no donation request. I have never offered this domain for sale, and I will not. I do not operate a lookalike Jagex login, store, or support page. Anyone claiming I hold this name to extract money from Jagex is misrepresenting what this site is. See About and the complaints for the public record.

Consumer criticism and U.S. federal court precedent

I am not a lawyer. I am a customer who researched whether a company can seize a noncommercial complaint site simply because it dislikes the criticism.

U.S. federal courts have protected consumers who used exact-match domain names solely for noncommercial criticism and negative reviews — with no store, no advertising, and no offer to sell the domain:

• In Bosley Medical Institute, Inc. v. Kremer (9th Cir. 2005), a consumer used BosleyMedical.com for negative reviews after a disputed experience. The court held that noncommercial consumer commentary of that kind is not trademark infringement or cybersquatting.
• In Northland Insurance Cos. v. Blaylock (D. Minn. 2000), a consumer used NorthlandInsurance.com to document a poor customer experience and criticize the company’s ethics. The court refused to transfer the domain, finding noncommercial commentary and no bad-faith intent to profit under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act.

That is the category this site occupies: criticism of Jagex, redacted consumer complaints, and no commercial use of the name. If Jagex contests that, I will defend the site as noncommercial consumer commentary protected by free-speech principles in U.S. federal court — not as a commercial impersonation of Jagex.