Cybersquatting Cases On The Rise, And Will Only Get Worse
from the get-with-the-system dept
2008 saw the UN's World Intellectual Property Organization handle more cybersquatting cases than ever before -- 2,329. Michael Geist makes the case that things aren't as bad on this front as they might seem, but the head of WIPO says the issue will only get worse as ICANN prepares to throw open the top-level domain system, which will undoubtedly lead to even more disputes. For instance, something like ".apple" will certainly be a magnet for disputes. Who should get to claim it? Apple Computer, Apple Corps, a trade group of apple farmers, or somebody else with a legitimate tie to the word apple? ICANN's plans to throw things open on the TLD front could be better than it getting to determine which TLDs people can use, but it certainly looks like it's going to come at the cost of a ridiculous amount of arguments over who gets to own specific TLDs. It's easy to say that ICANN and WIPO should try to get out ahead of the issue, and for what it's worth, the WIPO exec says they're working to create "pre- and post-delegation procedures". But it's hard to imagine that they're going to be able to really do much to limit the number of disputes when the new TLDs open up, given how many parties could have legitimate claims to the same ones.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cybersquatting, trademark, wipo
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And the sole reason there are laws against "cybersquatting" is to make it easier for the big guys to take valuable URLs away from the little guy. Why should the rich pay a fair market value when they can simply have laws created that will force the initial investor to turn over his investment without receiving a dime?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In addition, this is also the "I'm grabbing every deal I can regardless of whether I can actually use the thing myself, simply because I know there are others (just behind me in line) who want it too".
This is closer to the problems of the Patent System (a regulated monopoly first-to-file-papers system) rather than a Free Market system (everyone can compete).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
brand theft
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: brand theft
Buying up a domain for the sole purpose of marking up its price and reselling doesn't seem like a huge problem on its face ("free market"). But real cybersquatters are sitting on tens-of- or hundreds-of-thousands of domains. They make it impossible for anyone to get access to a domain at the price established by those placed in charge of giving out those names.
It would be like the government selling everyones drivers licenses to scalpers. People would have a problem with that, wouldn't they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do we really need domain names?
I cannot understand why companies pay so much money to buy their favorite domain names. Waste of money if you ask me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do we really need domain names?
I know a number of "older" folks in my circles who simply type what they want into "that box" on their homepage, whether it be Google, MSN, Yahoo, their ISP, whatever. When I explain about the address bar, they ask if there's a way to turn it off because they never use it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Parking != Unethical
People expect www.walmart.com to point to the Walmart site. If it doesn't, they get upset as they now have to take another step to find the official site.
Those who park domains are looking at an investment. I know some will scream unethical, but it's not. Most large companies have, of course, purchased all viable domains.
But a small company (having a unique name) has two options:
1) They can buy the parked domain, marked up of course.
2) They can innovate, and create their own.
So, Biggie, this shouldn't stop innovation at all. If a business chooses to cave and pay the ransom, their fault. Nothing stops them from innovating a new name.
As for these new TLDs, screw them. All it's going to do is cause huge mess for both business and stupid internet users.
Businesses shouldn't have to pay for these TLDs to protect their business from scam artists looking to take advantage of these stupid people.
Seriously, how many emails do people get a day requesting your secure information because the site was recently updated?
If Berners-Lee was just recently scammed, imagine the open door these new TLDs will present.
Such idiocy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a little off-topic, but...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
everyone knows that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Economical with the truth
But even with this increase, WIPO's numbers relative to the total number of domain names are going down, and they have been going down since the UDRP was invented.
For complete numbers, see my blog post at http://www.mindsandmachines.com/2009/03/wipo-cybersquatting-report-ignores-real-udrp-trends/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
are these "laws" global
Do these "laws" and ICANN "rulings" or US State whims, apply globally and to all domain extensions ?
Are subjects of European countries potentially at risk of the US big stick ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]