Faraday Future's Latest Lawsuit Involves Its Domain Name

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Faraday Future’s preeminence in bad publicity has been unsurpassed as of late. It has amassed legal disputes almost as fast as I can report them, so another lawsuit might seem par for the course — until you realize it’s for an almost trifling amount over a mismanaged squabble surrounding the company’s domain name.

A complaint was filed against the automotive startup in San Francisco County Superior Court on November 18th of last year by a business acting as a broker for obtaining the company’s current domain name. The document outlines a $210,000 claim against Faraday for neglecting to remunerate Domains Cable for services that resulted in the acquisition of FF.com.

Last month, Faraday Future formally refuted the claims against it in a document snagged by Jalopnik and requested the judge to dismiss the issue. However, the litigant’s attorney, John O’Connor, claims the matter is a simple case of nonpayment. “[Faraday] went around the broker, there’s nothing mysterious or elusive about it,” he told Jalopnik. “I don’t think it requires the kind of discovery that one would get in an antitrust suit or an intellectual property suit. This is a pretty straightforward case.”

The plaintiff’s lawyer also said he thought Faraday’s behavior was indicative of serious financial woes. “One would not expect this of an expanding firm,” he explained. “One would expect this behavior by a firm that is perhaps troubled.”

The complaint alleges that FF’s former head of corporate communications, Marcus Nelson, recruited his longtime acquaintance, Suraj Rajwani of Domains Cable, to assist in purchasing an appropriate domain name for the company. The two apparently entered into an oral agreement with Mr. Rajwani in early 2015. The complaint also references numerous text messages from that April where the two discuss potential domain names and the terms of their agreement.

A month later, the document maintains that Rajwani told Nelson that FF.com could be purchased for one million dollars. After some consideration and discussion with management, the complaint says Nelson authorized Rajwani in writing to make a $400,000 offer and asked “think you could make that happen?”

At the time, the domain was owned by Bank of America and Rajwani allegedly entered into negotiations to acquire it at a much higher price. Talks continued for months until mid-July, when the purchasing price was negotiated down from $2.5 million to $1.5 million. The following month, the complaint states:

In the midst of negotiating for the purchase of FF.com from Bank of America, and after Mr. Rajwani had been working on the transaction for months, Mr. Nelson suddenly informed Mr. Rajwani that he had gone around him and was negotiating for the sale of FF.com.

The domain changed ownership in September of 2015, Nelson left the company the following month, and Rajwani did not receive the commission he felt he was promised. According to the document filed with the court, Nelson claimed he finalized the deal himself because his “bosses were getting freaked out that things were taking too long.”

[Image: Faraday Future]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
 2 comments
  • ToolGuy I was challenged by Tim's incisive opinion, but thankfully Jeff's multiple vanilla truisms have set me straight. Or something. 😉
  • ChristianWimmer The body kit modifications ruined it for me.
  • ToolGuy "I have my stance -- I won't prejudice the commentariat by sharing it."• Like Tim, I have my opinion and it is perfect and above reproach (as long as I keep it to myself). I would hate to share it with the world and risk having someone critique it. LOL.
  • SCE to AUX Sure, give them everything they want, and more. Let them decide how long they keep their jobs and their plant, until both go away.
  • SCE to AUX Range only matters if you need more of it - just like towing capacity in trucks.I have a short-range EV and still manage to put 1000 miles/month on it, because the car is perfectly suited to my use case.There is no such thing as one-size-fits all with vehicles.
Next