The actions of ChainWire.org’s CEO, Mr. Nadav, have raised serious questions regarding fairness, business ethics, and competition. Recently, he made claims that he holds exclusive rights to operate using the domain name “ChainWire” and, consequently, has the right to demand that competitors shut down if they use a similar name or keyword. This claim, however, is fundamentally flawed and goes against the very principles of fair competition.
The Reality of Domain Names and Copyrights
Mr. Nadav seems to believe that owning the domain name “ChainWire” gives him some kind of monopoly over the entire crypto press release market. However, this is far from true. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of domain names available for purchase across domain registrants. Anyone with the necessary resources can buy a domain, set up a website, and start a business in the same space—whether it’s PR, crypto services, or any other industry.
The concept of copyright is meant to protect original creative works, not business names or domain names. Unless a business has a registered trademark that proves it has exclusive rights to a certain name or term, anyone can use a similar name for their business, provided they are not infringing upon an existing trademark.
Interestingly, as per my research, “ChainWire” is not copyrighted yet. So, when Mr. Nadav tries to claim exclusive rights over the word in domain names and demands competitors shut down, he is not just mistaken—he is potentially trying to defraud others.
Clearly speaking, unless he holds a trademark for “ChainWire” (which he doesn’t), he has no right to claim ownership over this word or its use by others. Not sure what the legal consequences of this might be, but what’s clear is that he is behaving recklessly and failing miserably at understanding the market. He’s trying to be clever, but he’s failing.
Furthermore, according to the official domain registration information, ChainWire has not been registered for the term or domain name in the United States or Israel. In the U.S., there is no official registration for “ChainWire” as a trademark or domain name.
This is further proof that Mr. Nadav’s claim of having exclusive rights is baseless. I have attached screenshots confirming this lack of registration.
Screenshot 1: U.S. Copyright Public Records System (CPRS)
Screenshot 2: U.S. Publicrecords Copyright Status
Additionally, even in Israel, where ChainWire.org is based, the term “ChainWire” has not been registered. You can verify this for yourself by checking the relevant databaseson Israel Patents Portal.
Nothing all there in the name of ChainWire.org or it’s parent company.
See, Simply owning a domain name does not grant any individual or company the right to silence competitors. In fact, business competition is healthy and fundamental to a free market.
It’s about offering better services, innovating, and finding unique ways to stand out. Mr. Nadav’s attempt to control the market by claiming exclusive rights over a domain name and trying to force competitors out based on that claim is a serious overreach.
The Same Motive Behind Freezing Funds
This distorted view of ownership and competition is not only limited to domain names. It’s also the same flawed reasoning behind ChainWire.org’s decision to freeze my funds.
After I ran a PR campaign for one of client, our website—owned by my previous employer—was getting noticed in the crypto PR space.
The CEO of ChainWire.org apparently saw this as a threat, even though there was no real competition at play. Still, Mr. Nadav decided to freeze my funds without proper explanation.
He has now openly cleared the motive behind freezing the funds was his own personal interest and using the same misguided logic of “exclusive rights” over a domain name.
This behavior reflects a deeper issue of insecurity and a lack of understanding of healthy competition. Rather than working to grow ChainWire.org through innovation or improved services, Mr. Nadav is using tactics that undermine the basic principles of business ethics.
What Mr. Nadav Fails to Understand
The real issue here is that Mr. Nadav is mistaking control for competition. He seems to believe that owning a domain name equates to owning the entire industry.
However, it is the customers, users, and the overall market that determine success—not one individual’s claim over a domain name.
What ChainWire.org needs is a focus on growth, quality service, and fair competition. Healthy competition drives innovation, and businesses that thrive do so by offering superior value, not by stifling others who are simply trying to carve out their space in the market.
Conclusion: The Flawed Logic of ChainWire’s CEO
Mr. Nadav’s actions reflect a deeper misunderstanding of business ethics and competition. Instead of focusing on building and improving his company, he is expending energy on trying to suppress others in the industry.
Owning a domain name does not provide the right to claim ownership of a market or to freeze funds based on perceived threats.
The free market is built on competition, and as long as no one is violating copyrights or trademarks, every business has the right to enter the market, offer services, and compete fairly.
By trying to control the market in this way, Mr. Nadav is not only damaging his own reputation but also potentially undermining the entire ethos of the industry.
The focus should be on growth, improvement, and respecting the rights of others in the market. Only then will businesses like ChainWire.Org truly thrive and remain relevant in the long term.
Maybe I’m wrong for some people but let’s discuss and write in comment box with the fact and prove me wrong.
~Written By Noah Carter based on personal experience.
Reach me:
Telegram: @noahao
Email: noah@chainwire.online
Leave a Reply