Ryanair Complaint Site Gets To Keep Domain

from the good-for-them dept

Thu, Dec 28th 2006 10:02am — Mike Masnick

We mentioned recently just how random the process is by which panels determine if you need to give up the domain name you own to some big company -- and it gets even more confusing when you get to complaint sites or "sucks sites." Sometimes a court will rule that it's clearly not domain squatting or trademark infringement to put up a complaint site using the name of whoever or whatever you're complaining about. But, not always. Just last year, someone was forced to hand over AirFranceSucks.com to Air France after an arbitration panel worried that people might not know what "sucks" means, and would therefore assume that AirFranceSucks.com was actually endorsed by the airline (no, seriously). With that kind of ruling, you would think that a more generic name like RyanairCampaign.org would also lose in one of these battles, but randomness strikes again. A panel is letting the owner of the site keep it running as a site critical of the airline Ryanair, noting that he's not doing anything in "bad faith" against the airline.

13 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

John Duncan Yoyo, 28 Dec 2006 @ 10:26am

The problem was that people knew what sucks meant while campaign is ambigious.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike (profile), 28 Dec 2006 @ 10:31am

Re:
The problem was that people knew what sucks meant while campaign is ambigious.

Hmm? That's the exact opposite of what the article says. The panel did NOT allow the "sucks" site, saying people might not know what it means, but they did allow the "campaign" site, saying that it was fine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous coward, 28 Dec 2006 @ 10:36am

Complaint Site
Of course, if you pay for a domain, you should get to keep it, period. Just because a company is too stupid to buy domains with their name in it should not be a reason to force you to give it up. I know that will never change, but I feel better writing it anyway...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matthew, 28 Dec 2006 @ 10:38am

Re: Re:
Hmm? That's the exact opposite of what the article says. The panel did NOT allow the "sucks" site, saying people might not know what it means, but they did allow the "campaign" site, saying that it was fine.

Classic reverse psychology and governmental double-speak.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Witty Nickname, 28 Dec 2006 @ 10:42am

People understand 'campaign' is a critical term. We associate the word with politicians.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ConfusedINBtown, 28 Dec 2006 @ 11:11am

Ryanair Complaint Site Gets To Keep Domain
WTF??? not one constructive comment.

I think courts are ruling against it because a non-satisfied customer is trying to make a point. Freedom of speach is taken away little by little each day.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Solo, 28 Dec 2006 @ 11:18am

I dont know how more explicit the name should be made. AirFranceIsShit.com, BoycottAirFrance.com, AirFranceEatsBabies.com, AirFranceWillKillYou.com that kind of thing.

The guidelines are poor, especially when the battle is international. Remember that domain names are leased, not owned, and sometimes it is difficult to arbitrate between parties (not in this case though)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2006 @ 2:04pm

The French
This is just an attempt to protect a national airline from bad press. Believe me, the French know they suck.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
bunny, 28 Dec 2006 @ 2:40pm

techdirtsortasucksometimesbutnotalwaysometimesitprettydamngood.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AC, 28 Dec 2006 @ 2:55pm

Amazingly all those sites are taken as well. In fact i sold AirFranceWillKillYou.com last year to Air France - Apparently WillKillYou roughly translates to We love you! Who would have thought?

/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Duncan Yoyo, 28 Dec 2006 @ 3:05pm

Re: Re:
Glad to see you understood.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David McLaughlin, 9 Jan 2007 @ 6:57am

Ryanair intransigence
After trying to book a London-Trieste flight for 16 March 2007 the computer produced a ondon -Oslo flight! Reservations would not accept their mistake even when I was later downloaded a document concerning a couple who might have supposed that their travel details were confidential. My options seem to be to forfeit my payment of £32 or accept a penalty in order to restore my original reservation. Is there really no redress to which I can have access?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
J, 5 Sep 2007 @ 8:30pm

Re: Complaint Site
What a retarded thing to believe.
[ link to this | view in thread ]