« Not quite Quixtar | Main | I've been asking for numbers for quite a while »
February 17, 2004
Letter from Ron Mitchell
By QBlog in
My wife and I are no longer Quixtar IBOs. During the month of September, 2003, we began receiving emails urging us to renew with Quixtar before our IBO status expired. Since neither of us wanted to continue as IBOs, we chose not to renew (though my status as an IBO is another story - check the blog archives). We finally received communication in December that if we did not renew (pay the fee and fill out some form) by the end of the month then we would be "out" of Quixtar (my word, not theirs). We never paid any money, never filled out any forms and so on January 1, 2004, we were officially "ex-IBOs" or "former IBOs" or whatever.
Confusion
Imagine my surprise when I received a letter from Ron Mitchell, Supervisor of Quixtar Business Conduct and Rules. The letter is similar to traditional C&D letters with a few notable exceptions. Mitchell's letter was addressed to my wife and me as Quixtar IBOs. It is dated January 22, 2004, which is 22 days after our IBO status expired. Because neither of us have had any sort of affiliation with Quixtar since December 31, 2003, I thought it was curious that the letter accused us of violating Rule 9 of the Rules of Conduct.
The letter is basically telling me that the domain quixtarblog.com (which I own) is in violation of Quixtar rules and causes "confusion in the market place." It asks that I "relinquish this domain name by not renewing it in the future." That's another variation from the traditional C&D letters that I've found in my research.
I should point out that Rule 6 (Preservation of the Line of Sponsorship) discusses what's known as the "Six-Month Inactivity" Rule (page 60 of the Quixtar Business Compendium - pdf).
6.4. Six Month Inactivity:Some have suggested to me that it's this rule (and sub-rules) that possibly kept my name in the Quixtar "books" as an active IBO and ultimately led to Mr. Mitchell's confusion about our status. However, as I read the rule, failure to renew is "considered" termination even though (according to Rule 6.4) my wife and I are still in a sort of "limbo" whereas we can (should we choose to do so) sign up under a new IBO after six months of inactivity.
An IBO who wishes to TERMINATE (by resignation or failure to renew) his or her IB under his or her present Sponsor and who thereafter becomes inactive for a period of six or more consecutive months shall cease to be an authorized IBO and may, following the lapse of said inactive period, register as a new IBO under a new Sponsor. The date on which the Corporation receives the letter of resignation begins the inactivity period. A letter of confirmation is sent by the Corporation to the IBO and his or her Line of Sponsorship acknowledging the start of the inactivity period. A person who has not renewed and has not submitted a letter of resignation will be considered to have submitted his or her intent on the date his or her IB expired and must remain inactive six months from that date. Applicants may not apply under this Rule to become a partner in an already existing IB.
The "comply" statement
The letter ends with the "or else" sentence which spells out the type of action that will be taken if my wife and I fail to comply.
"Failure to comply with our request could result in action being taken against your business, without benefit of your input, up to and including termination."That sentence specifically address our Quixtar business as IBOs, the business that we are no longer part of, the same business that we allowed to expire more than three weeks prior to the writing of the letter. Needless to say, I did not respond to this letter. I'm not an IBO and I don't see how I can have something terminated if it does not exist. Maybe I'm missing something here?
An analogy
To put this into perspective, I concocted a little analogy. It's not the greatest but I think it gets the point across. Let's say I have a job that requires me to wear a suit and tie all day. Then one day I walk up to my boss and tell him that I've found something else and that I quit (or, I put in my two weeks and then quit). After my final day as an employee, I shake everyone's hand and go along on my merry way.
Three weeks later I see my old boss at a restaurant eating lunch. It's my day off at my new job so I'm dressed casually. Jeans, polo shirt and sneakers. My old boss asks me why I'm not wearing a suit and tie and tells me that I should not go around in casual dress. He then threatens to fire me on the spot if I refuse to go home and change. That seems a little strange to me. And that's what that letter sort of seems like, in a way.
Domain Names
For those wondering about the domain name issue I did a little bit of research to discover my rights in this matter. The first thing I should tell you is that I also own:
Next I went looking for other "criticism" (or "watch") and "fan" sites that have a trademarked name in the domain and found these as well as others:
I also found a few court cases that seem to indicate that using trademarks in the domains of "fan" or "criticism" (or "watch") sites like mine are protected as Free Speech. Check these out:
Anyway, I thought this whole thing was quite interesting. I'm learning a lot about the Web as a result of this and that's pretty cool. The more I learn the more I realize that the Web is the most awesome thing since Gutenberg invented the printing press.
Qblog,
I too received an email saying they noticed I did not renew my account I had before my ex and I got married. I had signed up under him and had my own IBO number. When we married I relinquished that account with their paperwork and signed up as his partner under his number as required when married. I am still on our joint account so I did not understand why they sent me the email. I want nothing to do with it so I did not respond.
Posted by: Lisa | February 17, 2004 4:43 PM