Meg Whitman, the woman who played a major role in both Mitt Romney and John McCain’s failed presidential campaigns, appears to have identified her next target.  Less than six months after orchestrating Senator John McCain’s historically inept bid to become the head of the American Government, Whitman’s appetite for destruction has led her in to a head-on clash with the domain industry.

Meg Whitman sues man over domain name registrations

Unlike her undoing of the Massachusetts Governor and Arizona Senator, for whom she served (and I use that term loosely) as campaign finance chairman and national co-chairman respectively, she has no official ties to the domain name business, nor does she work for Thomas Hall, the man whose forehead she is now targeting in her cross-hairs.

Allow me to backtrack for a moment.  In an act of brilliant foresight that would have made Ebay’s customer disservice reps proud; just a few days after resigning as CEO of perhaps the world’s most arrogant firm, Whitman publicly fueled speculation that she may considering a run for governor of California in 2010.  Unfortunately for Whitman, it never occurred to her to register whatever domain names she thought may be of use to her in her efforts to become California’s chief executive.

Thomas Hall, a Santa Monica-based writer and media consultant quickly seized upon the mistake, registering at least five domain names containing Whitman’s name within roughly three days of the time media reports began to surface indicating Whitman was contemplating a run for office.

According to reports, the domains registered by Hall included megwhitmanforgovernor.com. whitmanforgovernor.com, whitman2010.com, meg2010.com and megwhitman2010.com.  Hall has said he registered the domain names for less than $10 each.

Here’s where the two parties’ stories start to go in different directions.  According to Hall, he had no plans to actually use the names and registered them because he, “thought it was kind of funny.”

He claims Whitman never contacted him to ask him to release the domains to her, and never once offered him money for them.  Instead, Hall has said that he first learned that Whitman had interest in the domains when he received a letter from her Washington D.C.-based attorneys that, among other things, referred to him as a “cybersquatter” and came complete with threats to sue him for more than $100,000 if he refused to surrender the domains.

The 50-year old Santa Monica resident even said he likely would have given her the domains had she simply asked nicely for them.

Whitman’s legal team disputes the above claim by Hall, and has countered that he has not returned phone calls and has been unwilling to even discuss the matter.

“You would think she’d be smart enough to buy the domain before she tells everyone she’s thinking about running for governor,” Hall noted.

In any case, what is puzzling is the overwhelming probability that had she chosen to pursue such course, Whitman could have purchased all five domain names for a mere fraction of the amount she’ll end up paying in legal fees by the time this is all said and done.  A reporter for another website covering this story estimated that figure to be somewhere between $50,000 – $200,000.  I’m not sure if that estimate is of money already spent pursuing the case or a projection of what her bill will be by the time the appeals process draws to a close.

Worth noting is the fact that Whitman does own the domain MegWhitman.com.

Hall won the first round of the still ongoing legal prizefight when attorneys for Whitman failed to convince the World Intellectual Property Organization during an arbitration hearing that Whitman’s name is famous enough as to constitute a unique brand.  The ruling from the WIPO decision can be viewed here.

On December 31, 2008, Whitman filed suit in U.S. District Court in San Jose alleging that Hall’s actions are in violation of federal anti-cybersquatting laws, as well as the California Political Cyberfraud Abatement Act.  The case remains unsettled as of the time of this writing.

In the humble opinion of this author, the central theme of this case involves Whitman becoming so drunk with power that a non-confrontational approach never even occurred to her to be an alternative.  Granted, I don’t know her personally, nor do I know what’s really going on inside her head.  That said, it seems baffling to me why she would resort to legal bullying maneuvers without first trying to resolve the dispute amicably.  The only motive that to me explains Whitman’s course of actions would be if her oversized ego simply wouldn’t allow her to act in any way that might be construed (even misconstrued) as submissive and in a position of weakness.

I can relate to this case on a somewhat personal level.  You see, I have registered politicians’ names as domain names on s couple of occasions in the past, including more than a dozen domains involving the name of her former employer, Sen. John McCain (which coincidentally all expired recently and were not renewed).  I still have some of these domains, although as of about a week ago, none involving Senator McCain.

While I can’t speak for the defendant’s true reasoning, I can attest that my own rationale for registering such domain names was exactly what Thomas Hall claimed his motives to be.  I too, would be far more likely to simply surrender the names than spend money I don’t have on an attorney to defend the registrations were it to come to that.

I’d be damned, however, if I were to give up the rights to the names AFTER receiving a threatening and intimidating letter from a lawyer as the first contact between the respective parties.  In fact, the only scenario in which I could envision myself in court in such a situation is if I felt I had been personally insulted, transforming the issue from a minor monetary inconvenience not worth the trouble of fighting over into a personal spat with a bully whereby I too would find myself compelled to stand-up and defend myself on the basis of principle.

Granted, mine is a very biased opinion on this issue, but a large body of circumstantial evidence exists suggesting that Whitman is no stranger to superiority complexes, and her behavioral patterns showing a complete and utter disregard for other people’s time and money are not a new phenomenon.  The proof is out there, as anyone who’s ever been subjected to three hours on hold being transferred from person-to-person by Ebay’s customer disservice department can attest.