Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Links

How Can Cybersquatters Be Evicted, Cheaply? 97

Posted by Cliff from the if-you-ain't-using-the-domain-give-it-to-someone-who-will dept.
wmshub asks: "Slashdot has covered stories where big mean companies threw poor little people off of web sites with names too close to that of the company. But what about when you are the company and the cybersquatter isn't even using the name? I have a small (ok, basically just me) company. The web site that exactly matches my company name has been registered since 2001, which is before I legally registered my company name but after I started doing business. Despite being registered for 4 years, the site is still nothing but a pile of banner ads - not even a hint as to why they want that particular name for their site. I contacted the owner, but they are not interested in selling (at any price, they said). If I read the ICANN guidelines correctly, domain name owners who have 'no legitimate claim for the name' can be evicted by people who do, so I think I should be able to demand they hand the name over. Has anybody ever tried this, or heard of a case where somebody with very limited funds (ie, not enough money to hire a lawyer) has been able to evict a squatter? Or do you always have to hire a lawyer and pay thousands in court fees to make this happen?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How Can Cybersquatters Be Evicted, Cheaply? More

How Can Cybersquatters Be Evicted, Cheaply?

Comments Filter:

  • Domain name doesn't always equal web site (Score:3)

    by josecanuc ( 91 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:16PM (#13689413) Homepage Journal
    Remember also that a domain name doesn't always mean a web site.

    It's just a mapping of text to a number and there are many services that can run on the computer identified by that number.
    • True, what if all his friends know him as John@companyname.com?
      You'd like to ruin that for him?

      This is like eminent domain for web sites, what you want.
      • Not really ... that would be if a government came in and took the domain away from a private individual or organization and used it for a public work. This is a matter of saying "you have something I want and I think you should just give it to me and if you don't I'm going to make you." Maybe that's right in this case, or maybe not ... but they got there first and hey, timing is everything.
    • No kidding ... one might argue that Port 80 is of less consequence than all the other services that most people never even know they're using. This misperception that the Internet is nothing more than a way to ship email and HTML around is no less wrong for being common.

  • There is more to the net than the web (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Matt Perry ( 793115 ) <perry DOT matt54 AT yahoo DOT com> on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:34PM (#13689565)
    There are more services than web sites. They may use their domain name for other services such as mail, DNS, Jabber, IRC, FTP, and so on. They probably decided to put up banner ads to get some revenue from people who hit the page. I have one such domain which handles some mailing lists and nothing more. The server that it is on has a web server for some other domains so I have a page appear with a joke on it when the domain is accessed.

    Also, if the domain owner was willing to talk to you and told you that he didn't want to sell, as opposed to asking for a huge amount of money, then I don't see what reason you have to say that they are squating. They have it and want to hold on to it. I really think that if you didn't register the domain name before hand you might just be out of luck.

    • I understand your argument, but do you REALLY believe what you're saying? ;)

      He's been squatted, plain and simple. He would be able to help us out if he'd just do a dump of all of the DNS entries for that zone. I'm willing to bet it goes something like this:

      A zone.tld
      CNAME www.zone.tld.

      I'd be stunned if there's anything beyond that, other than an MX record with a virtusertable entry like this:

      @zone.tld slimyscumbag@cybersquatterzrus.tld
      • So what's your definition of squatting? Buying a domain name? If he isn't interested in selling the name, then what's his motive? Your businness is small, you say, so obviously he's not getting lots of traffic as a result, or is he? What the OP wants to due is not cool. People should just think of original names, trademark them, and they would have no worries.

      • Re:There is more to the net than the web (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        He's been squatted, plain and simple.

        Ummmm... he says they had the domain BEFORE he started using the name for himself. To me that makes the submitter the squatter, not the other way around.

        "Hey, you have this domain. Well, now I've started using the name, so you should give me the domain or else I'll sic my army of slashdotters on you".

        submitter sounds like a whiny scumbag.

      • Re:There is more to the net than the web (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Matt Perry ( 793115 ) <perry DOT matt54 AT yahoo DOT com> on Friday September 30, 2005 @07:51PM (#13690247)
        I understand your argument, but do you REALLY believe what you're saying?
        Yep, 100%. Remember the domain name I was talking about in my original post? I get several offers a year to buy it. I tell people the same thing: "It's in use and it's not for sale." It's not my problem if they think it looks like it's not being used.
        He's been squatted, plain and simple.
        Yet he's unwilling to sell at any price, according to the submitter. There's no profit motive. Why "squat" on the domain? Maybe he's using it. D'ya think?!
        He would be able to help us out if he'd just do a dump of all of the DNS entries for that zone.
        You mean provide you with security information for no reason? There's a reason why you can restrict who can initiate zone transfers. When you make that request why not ask him to enable fingerd and provide a list of usernames from /etc/passwd as well.

        Bottom line is that he has nothing to prove. He doesn't want to sell. It's his domain. He's doing nothing wrong. He registered the domain before the submitter. End of story.

        The real lesson to be learned here is that if you are going to start a company then in addition to investigating company names with the Secretary of State you should also think about a web presence and investigate what domain names are available. A person reading Slashdot should have known that much back in 2001. It's the submitters fault for not getting the domain name he wanted. If he's unhappy about that then he might want to talk to a lawyer that specializes in this type of law rather than submit a question to Slashdot. A lawyer can tell him if he thinks he has a case and let him know how much it would cost to retain him for the job.

        Next Ask Slashdot, please.

        • And the converse .... (Score:5, Informative)

          by khasim ( 1285 ) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Friday September 30, 2005 @09:16PM (#13690777)
          Dear Ask Slashdot,

          I have a website that I've owned for years. Now some guy is trying to take it away from me by claiming it is his business name (non-trademarked).

          How can I cheaply defend myself from his actions and keep my domain name?

          • How can I cheaply defend myself from his actions and keep my domain name?

            When contacted, all you have to do is show the reason why you own the domain name. Other factors to watch for, if a company registers their business name after you registered the domain name they are SOL. The rules are fair for the most part.

        • Bottom line is that he has nothing to prove. He doesn't want to sell. It's his domain. He's doing nothing wrong. He registered the domain before the submitter. End of story.

          What of the other side of the story? Some corporate overlord company goes out and registers all open available domain names, using a different employee name on each one, which match anything remotely in the dictionary and then holds on to them just to piss people off? The employees are told, if anyone asks about the domain name, jus

          • There are legitimate cases where some knob bought the domain name just because they wanted to feel better about themselves, and aren't really doing anything with it.

            I bought a new flat panel monitor about a year ago. My old CRT monitor is sitting in my closet, on the floor, and hasn't been plugged in in over a year. Is it the right of you, or anyone else, to come into my home and tell me that since I am not putting my property to the use that others have deemed it should be that I must relinquish owners

            • You're right. I would never suggest that this would go to a committee. Your case with the flat panel monitor isn't really in line, though, because you're not preventing anyone else from buying a flat panel monitor.

              I never said there was any right involved. I only suggested that it would be nice if someone being a useless lump of banner ads on the web would give up a domain name to someone who wants to make a legitimate use of it. Which would you rather have in your neighborhood? Homes covered with graf
              • You seem to have misunderstood my example of the displays... My intention was to state that since I'm not using the old one, should I be forced to give it up even though it's mine?

                That misunderstanding aside, your explanation that I'm not preventing anyone else from buying a flat panel display frames my point exactly: the OP can go buy a domain name, he just can't have that domain name. My hypothetical monitor-thief can go buy a monitor, he just can't have mine. The reason he can't have mine is because I
                • Your daughter would have an attachment to that $1000 wedding dress.

                  If someone has an attachment to a $10 domain name that they're using for a couple generic banner ads, they need to have their head checked.
                  • You overlooked a crucial part of what I said:

                    Her reasons for keeping it may be inscrutable, but she doesn't need to explain that to strangers on the street. It's not for sale.

                    Not for sale. And as a whole lot of other posters have pointed out, just because the web site only has banner ads doesn't mean the DNS entry is used only for that purpose. You're endorsing exactly the role of that committee: we'll decide whether or not you're properly using what you paid for.

                    Maybe you're being purposely obtuse

                    • Maybe I'm more morally in tune than you are. If I were sitting on a domain name which I used for a time server and an ftpd, and filled the httpd with a couple banner ads, I would be more than happy to migrate to something else if someone came along and politely let me know that they had a legitimate business that they would want to set up on the domain name. Provided I agree with the businees.

                      Yes. You do have a right to be a dick. I hope it makes you happy and keeps you warm at night. Everyone needs so

                    • You sound exactly like the big companies that count on people not having the resources to fight back. Moral my ass, you condone thievery and bullying

                      No one's condoning bullying. If they want to keep the domain name they are fully within their right to do it. No one's going to force them off.

                      What I said (I know, you're an AC troll, so you're not required to actually respond to what I said) was that if _I_ owned a domain and was doing nothing with it aside from hosting a few banner ads that _I_ would hap

                    • You're a fucking retard, you don't even understand what you wrote, let alone anything anyone else here wrote. Dumbass.
                      What's sad is that, even with this impressive display of intellectual eloquence, it's very likely that you make more money per year than I do. No wonder the world functions like a group of brain-damaged zombies.

          • > There are legitimate cases where some knob bought the domain name just because they wanted to feel better about themselves, and aren't really doing anything with it.

            That the page currently has banner ads on it doesn't talk about the structure of the site and whether older content can still be linked to. A site I once worked on has done a similar sort of thing - the root page simply punts you to the owning entity's main page while all the old functionality remains underneath to satisfy the terms-of-ser

    • They may use their domain name for other services such as mail, DNS, Jabber, IRC, FTP, and so on.

      Exactly. This is extremely important with a BNC service, I'll tell ya. You know, because it's really important for your whois to come up like, for instance...

      *** parasonic is n=para@ i.own.natalie.portman.and.am.cooler.than.cmdrtaco . net (*Unknown*)
      *** on irc via server brown.freenode.net (Madison, WI, US)
      *** parasonic has been idle 4 seconds

      A totally legitimate claim to cmdrtaco.net

  • Where do you draw the line? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:36PM (#13689579) Homepage
    So at what point is it a squatter versus a "legitimate" website? If you produce a definition, squatters will simply modify their design to meet the definition, perhaps adding or copying a minimum of information to become "legit". Face it, they've had the domain for longer than you've had your registered name or trademark. You're stuck, so live with it or change your own name.
    • So at what point is it a squatter versus a "legitimate" website?

      So instead of trying to come up with a definition I say make it so all domains go up for auction every year and the proceeds get distributed to charity or something. That would quickly filter out the squatters (i.e. not serious) users of domain names from the legitimate users. I'd bid $50 on microsoft.com, think I'd get it?

  • I'd like to... (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    sue you to take back the wasted part of my life reading this.

  • Trademark your name (Score:5, Informative)

    by HotNeedleOfInquiry ( 598897 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:37PM (#13689584)
    Disclaimer - I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advise.

    If you trademark the name (nolo books for help) then you have a legitimate claim to the name and you should be able to get it through the ICANN expedited resolution service.
    • But you don't have a right as two different people can "own" a name for two different industry so what happens for the internet and ICCAN, well it is a mess.

      This is why there are at least three deltas in the world. One for airlines, one for faucets, and one for electronics

      Now which one gets delta.com, well the person who registered the name first, in this case Delta airlines.

      So maybe the person who register the domain name has the same registered name as the person asking does.
      • The only legitimate claim you might have is if you have a federal trademark.

        Here's what you have to do:
        You file for a federal trademark registration and you better get it quietly.
        Don't let anyone know you have it.
        Wait 5 years, renew it.
        After 5 years it becomes "incontestable".
        No one can do anything about you then. If the domain owner finds out you have filed for a federal trademark registration they can contest it during that 5 year period. After that they are enjoined from doing so.

        There
    • Of course, trademarks are EXPENSIVE.

      I have a website with a large community. I don't charge for the service I offer. I'm not legally a 501c3 or anything (haven't done the paperwork), but I don't sell anything or make any money and that isn't even the intent.

      Anyway, I have a problematic user who has done everything under the sun since I disabled their account several years ago to disrupt the site. They've spread rumors, lies, harassed my members, created dozens of false accounts and harassed people, called t
  • Use of poisoning techniques in the various serach engines are a cheap way to drive down a brand or name, but hey, it's also, basically, your brand too...so don't burn yourself out at the same time

    Filing a complaint - there should be a way for each netizen to do so - to the icaan if it's the only choice you have, or trying directly with their registrar ...

    Or you just send a nice cease-or-desist letter (don't know where you are so ymmv) and threaten to act this, and see whats happens...don't speak to the (pos

  • Taking candy from strangers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KingPrad ( 518495 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:51PM (#13689724)
    domain name owners who have 'no legitimate claim for the name' can be evicted by people who do

    And your legitimate claim is that you want it? That you want it really really bad? I know domain names are very important, but if you have no claim to it other than desire and the owner isn't cybersquatting (even if he is totally wasting it), why do you think you should get it?

    I can see good arguments for both sides of this, but using legal pressure to take things away from their owners is disgusting to me. I hate it when the government does it and when people or companies do it. Ownership is [should be] ownership, whether some stranger likes it or not. Taking it is theft, whether you take it physically or through legal manipulation.
    • My legitimate claim is that I have a company with that name, and people look for my company under that name on the web.

      My guess as to why he wants it is just that I get about 150,000 visits per month, totalling 5,000,000 hits, on my current, non-obvious URL. Not huge, but fairly busy. My guess is that a few tens of thousands of those people looking for my site went to his first, so he only wants the site to catch people looking for mine, and show them his banner ads.

      In other words, I'm guessing that he has
      • How do you know that's all he's using it for? What if there's a lively MUD going on on port 23?

  • CyberClaimJumper (Score:4, Insightful)

    by stonewolf ( 234392 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:53PM (#13689741) Homepage

    I wish I new what the name is. My guess is that you and the other guys both thought of the same name at two different times. They were probably trying to come up with names that were either "cool" or names that are likely to be typed into a browser. In either case they registered the name and loaded it up with adds so that if someone does type in that name they go to that site and look at the adds.

    Running web sites with cool names to get advertising revenue is a real business and is a valid use of a domain name. In other words, they have just as much of a right and are just as legitimate as you are. So, why call them cybersquaters? I could just as well, and just as validly, call you a cyberclaimjumper. As far as I can tell you are just trying to rob somebody of a source of income. The only way you could convince me otherwise is to prove that they knew about the name of your company and went and registered it.

    My advice is to change the name of your company. Spend some time researching names that are 1) not trademarked, and 2) available as domain names. Then, register the domain name. When you meet the requirements for registering the trademark, then register the trademark.

    Stonewolf

    • Re:CyberClaimJumper (Score:2, Informative)

      by J'raxis ( 248192 )

      The only way you could convince me otherwise is to prove that they knew about the name of your company and went and registered it.

      Right, and this what the UDRP calls a "bad-faith" registration, which is one the criteria for yanking someone's domain. A usual red-flag for bad-faith registrations is attempting to sell the domain to the person claiming legitimate ownership, usually at an inflated price -- something that this purported cybersquatter not only didn't do, but he didn't even agree to sell when appr

    • Running web sites with cool names to get advertising revenue is a real business and is a valid use of a domain name
      I hope we agree that, if the sole only purpose is to generate ad revenue, they should have a willingness to pass on the name to someone who has a more purposeful use.

      That's like using a bowl of clean water to wash your hands, then dumping it down the drain, when the guy next to you is dehydrating to death. Ad revenue.
      • Revenue is revenue. Why is ad revenue looked at poorly while selling services is not? Unless of course you're google, then ad revenue is okay.

        • Unless of course you're google, then ad revenue is okay.

          There's a tolerable tradeoff point in services vs. revenue. Look to the derision of Yahoo! from its once mighty alter. There's a reason why Google got everyone's attention.

          If someone registers $my_favorite_hobby\.com and fills it with completely unrelated junk, perhaps even some fringe group religious bunk, just for the purpose of ad revenue then I would hope they would be less hypocritical enough to cede $my_favorite_hobby\.com when I turn $my_fa

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:58PM (#13689788)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • I'm waiting for this to happen (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Solder Fumes ( 797270 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @07:11PM (#13689919)
    My domain name is based on my own name, but it also happens to be the exact same name as a Taiwanese company. They currently use the ".com.tw" variant. However, I often get emails to the company, even though my catchall address is blackholed. What's more, I have no visible index page...just a blank white emptiness. But I do use the domain heavily for my own email, my own file storage and web-based services for my family and others. If anyone tried to prove I was cybersquatting, I'm sure that I could prove otherwise. But it would suck to lose the email addresses that I promised to myself and my users would be there in perpetuity regardless of ISP changes.
  • Our of idle curiosity I went looking to find out what it would cost this guy (assuming he's in the US of A) to file a dipsute. It appears that he would do so through the National Arbitration Forum [arbforum.com]. The E-Z Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy instructions are here [arbforum.com]. Thankfully the National Arbitration Forum understands the needs of small business. In fact they describe them thus:

    High litigation costs and the time-consuming nature of lawsuits can be a deterrent to anyone needing to solve a legal

    • People go to binding arbitration because it tends to be cheaper and faster than civil court. I'd be surprised if it was cheaper to take a case like this to court.

      Of course, I learned this at the old age of 17 when I was working in a law office. Might be a bit facetious.

      --
      Phil

  • Squatted domains based on family names? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TMacPhail ( 519256 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @07:34PM (#13690114)
    What about domain names that are based on a last name? I believe there are provisions for claiming a domain based on your name when it is simply being squatted. Has anyone ever had luck with this?

    Yes, this is still dependent on defining what it means to simply be squatting and having no legitimate clame to a domain. Take my name for example: MacPhail.

    • macphail.net [macphail.net] appears to have no legitimate claim to the MacPhail name other than using the domain to host a page filled with links. I am sure there are many other sites owned by the owner of this domain that are the exact same thing. Unfortunately they hide who they are in the whois database by using a company called "Whois IDentity Shield" but the dns servers for the domain give a hint at the real purpose of it: ns1.hitfarm.com, ns2.hitfarm.com. And there is nothing to be found at www.hitfarm.com.
    • macphail.com [macphail.com] seems to have a use for the name in that it resells e-mail accounts under the domain so you can have your own @macphail.com e-mail. This hardly seems legitimate to me but would probably pass in court because they have made a business of it. This bothers me because they are potentially making a profit from thousands of last names they have no claim to other than having registered the domain first.

    Anyone ever been able to get their last name out of the grips of a company like these?

    • Oh, sure I have. The exchange is supposed to take place any day now.

      Yours,
      John Microsoft
    • I know (family) a writer for a major metropolitan newspaper..

      a pullitzer winner.

      His name is 'his trademark' and he got someone to drop the name by having the papers lawyer contact the squatter.. it was apparently picked up right after he won the award...

       
    • macphail.com seems to have a use for the name in that it resells e-mail accounts under the domain so you can have your own @macphail.com e-mail. This hardly seems legitimate to me but would probably pass in court because they have made a business of it. This bothers me because they are potentially making a profit from thousands of last names they have no claim to other than having registered the domain first.

      Anyone ever been able to get their last name out of the grips of a company like these?

      Whaddaya mean,
    • And if you had it, why would you be a more legitimate owner than some other Tom McPhail, Dick McPhail, Harry McPhail, or any of the many McPhails in the world? You have no more legitimate reason to own it than the current owners.

    • Names are massively non-unique. So claiming a .com for your surname is going to be very hard. Whoever manages it is bound to annoy other people of the same name later. Of the two sites you list the second one seems useful for those who want to be associated with their surname, but didn't think to register the domain themselves - presumably anybody can sign up and be linked with the domain?

      If you're interested in surnames specifically you might have a chance at using the .name TLD. That was advertised

  • I run a site for a non-profit organization whose .org name is taken by a cybersquatter (based on other sites the whois owner runs). The domain has been unused for more than two years, without a responding web server at the other end. Other variations of the name are awkward, so I've been trying for years to at least contact anyone connected with the domain and negotiate a price. Nothing. It's especially frustrating since they keep renewing it.

    It's up for renewal in 2 months -- maybe I'll get it this time :/

  • How do I steal a domain... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by EzInKy ( 115248 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @08:50PM (#13690652)
    ...would have been a much better title for this article.


    I contacted the owner, but they are not interested in selling (at any price, they said).


    The name is theirs and they want to keep it. Why do you think you should be able to take it away from them?

  • I registered patch.com in March of 1994 - before there was much (any?) awareness that domain names could have economic value. Over the years I've received offers from people expressing an interest in buying the name. They have their reasons for wanting the domain name.

    Mine is simple. It's my web home. I'm attached to it. I'm not holding out for some can't refuse financial offer or even one that's hefty enough to pop my eyes open. I'm hanging on to patch.com becuase it's the place on the web that I h

    • You seem to have a legit use. I'd view it differently if you just had a few banner ads on it and no other services which were even remotely specific to "patch.com".

      If you were running an ftp server, what do the clients care what they're connecting to? That can be moved.
      • Eh? How is that different from "If you were running a http server, what do the clients care what they're connecting to? That can be moved."? The web rules über alles?
        • FTP servers have only MINIMAL, and I mean MINIMAL, visual association with their name. A web site selling a tangible product has an enormous attachment to the name of the business front.

          It's why Toys'r'Us isn't called FarmEquipmentDepot. In terms of ftp mirrors I don't expect every place that I get a kernel to have the word "linux" in it, except in the path or filename.

          Do you really know nothing about marketing or are you trolling?

  • rights, ownership (Score:4, Insightful)

    by itzdandy ( 183397 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @09:50PM (#13690928) Homepage
    at what point did the right to own and keep what is yours get voided? if someone ownes something, and then you use the same name(i'm not implying bad intentions), what makes you think you deserve to have something they own? they did own that domain before you had the company name right? you thinking that you have a right or some claim is complete crap and an attempt to take it should be considered attempted theft. the domain is owned and the owner did not violate your trade name or copyright when purchased, that means they OWN THE DOMAIN and you are STUPID and part of the PROBLEM with the american way.

    go ahead, mod me down. good karma in the real world is worth bad karma on slashdot
    • ALL CAPS are stupid. Seriously, there is no need for that. I have a better question for you: At what point did running your mouth with no idea what you were talking about become ok? Some advice, read more type less. If you'd like to understand more about domain names you should out this [wikipedia.org]. Good luck with the learning and the anger issues.
      • maybe your the idiot that can't read? did you read the part where owning something should matter? and the idea of taking what is owned by others is wrong? the whole comment was about right and wrong, not what wikipedia says. and if you think my comment was 'running of the mouth with no idea' then what was yours?

        BTW wikipedia is in no way how the work 'IS'
        for instance 'No one in the world really "owns" a ....' is rarely accepted as 'law'

        and in turn, read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting [wikipedia.org] for an
        • Ok let me see if I can show you how to post a response without sounding like ill informed flaimbait. I gave you the Wikipedia link to explain to you the whole concept of Domain Names (which you still don't seem to). I don't disagree your the idea "idea of taking what is owned by others is wrong." I disagree with your premise that the author was trying to do that and additionaly I was explaining to you that you do not own domain names (hence the wikipedia link). Which came first really wouldn't apply to who

  • Here's the answer (Score:4, Informative)

    by InternetVoting ( 809563 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @09:52PM (#13690936) Homepage
    The World Intellectual Property Organization(WIPO [wipo.int]) will handle domain name domain name disputes and arbitration.

    Check out there Domain Name Dispute Resolution Service (DNDRS [wipo.int]).

    You should also consult ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy [icann.org], which is the guidline for WIPO's aritration.

    Here's an abbreviated of what you would need to qualify:
    • your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and
    • you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
    • your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
    Bad faith is:
    • circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain...(extortion)
    • you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
    • you have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
    • by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location.

    Now since the owner of the domain says he will not sell "at any price," and they probably aren't out to disrupt your business... it seems like your SOL. Hope this is helpful for anyone who has a legitimate dispute and need for arbitration.

    Oh, and I know a lot of people are going to say that the whole arbitration process might be out of date as most "squatters" have realized all you have to do is put up one of those "search" tool that serves soley for advertising, and then try to sell the domain for a ridiculous amount of money. Those people are right.

  • You're sunk, I'd guess (Score:3, Interesting)

    by focitrixilous P ( 690813 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @10:33PM (#13691116) Journal
    The web site that exactly matches my company name has been registered since 2001, which is before I legally registered my company

    IANAL, but that statement seems to say that you have lost. Because he got it first, before you legally registered your company name, you are probably out of luck.

  • Just because thw web site is nothign put a parked domain someplace full of banner ads does not mean that this is an unused domain. I own a domain name. I have no web site. Perhaps I should put one up, but it is not a high priority as I have used the name for years for email , not a web site. Perhaps this person is using the name for email, perhaps they just want a static name to hit when they telnet into a machine, that is just as legitimate a use as your company. Might want to find out what they are using

    • perhaps they just want a static name to hit when they telnet into a machine, that is just as legitimate a use as your company.

      In that case I'd ask,"What does the client care what's in the address? Give them a static IP. It won't matter." Someone else mentioned a MUD, and that could be attached to a name pretty easily. But if it's just an ftpd/sshd/gopherd/wais/whatever with no real attachment to the name, it'd be nice to see people cooperate in building a better net presence than a set of banner ads.

      • "What does the client care what's in the address? Give them a static IP. It won't matter."

        It seems to matter to you.

        • There's a vast difference between the address in a visually oriented Web page and the address in an ftp mirror. There's a reason why most business names and store fronts reflect their internal merchandise. In the case of ftp mirrors, however, the address is largely irrelevant.

          If you take a quote out of context just to harp for the opposite viewpoint that's just plain trolling. Consider yourself fed.
  • This doesn't sound like cybersquatting, in which one party registers a domain of a well-known brand or some other well-known term. If someone in Kansas registers "smartypants.com" because he likes the name, and you happen to "run a company" named SmartyPants, that doesn't make the person a cybersquatter. I see no reason why the person should be forced or even coerced into handing over the domain name in question. Why don't you just change the name of your company rather than try to make someone else's li
  • There's lots of free sites and services that make domain management and brand protection easier than ever. Services like Whois Source [whois.sc] and DomainsBot [domainsbot.com] make it easier than ever to know which domains are taken and available. You can search on names, keywords and phrases to see what's available across major top-level domains (.com, .net, .org, .biz. and .info) or use the "name spinner" options that suggest names that may be of interest.

    Domains are a business asset. You need to take the time to understand them -

  • The web site that exactly matches my company name...

    Since there is no TLD mentioned, I assume that the .com TLD is implied.

    I find it really sad that we are in a situation where the .com TLD gets all the attention. If you have a business and don't own the .com domain that matches your company name or a trademark you own, you're practically screwed. The .com TLD namespace has grown into a global business name registry, which effectively hinders companies that are not even on the same continent from havi

    • Re:No TLD mentioned... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Monoman ( 8745 )
      Which brings up the whole issue of missused TLDs. People register whatever they can across the TLDs. The TLD guidelines are not enforced and are a big part of the problem. IIRC the intended uses are

      * com - business
      * net - internet providers
      * org - not for profit (is Slashdot.org a non-profit?)
      * edu - education and enforced AFAIK
      * mil - military and enforced AFAIK

      I frequently look for resources on the edu domain and find it a joy. I can't think of any time finding a missuse. It just works.

      IMHO the TLDs uses
    • I hit that issue, for my site (linked in my profile) Bachman New Age Computing. BNAC for short. .com, .net, .org were all taken. So I started looking at the unique, other TLDs. Biz fit. So I registered it.

      Quite easy, bnac.biz. Easy to spell, and it fits.

      I'm quite content with my non-"mainstream" TLD.
  • i could have had joe.com but i was just barely too late. now i have joe.to instead and i actually prefer it, because people remember the somewhat interesting top-level domain.

    then you have other examples like del.icio.us where people really took advantage of their top-level domain.

    so maybe look around and forget .com and get something even better

  • Duh. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by geminidomino ( 614729 ) * on Saturday October 01, 2005 @03:47PM (#13694465) Journal
    You should have put the link in the summary. After a good slashdotting, the squatter would be BEGGING you to take it off his hands!
  • Well, tons of people here have posted this and that about the thread. I'd like to add mine for what it's worth. Oh, and I'd like to say "Hi!" to everyone here, too. First time aboard. :) If you really feel you deserve the domain more than its current registrant, then it's your burden to prove it. Granted it's not easy, especially for those with limited funds. Disputes happen every day. That's what courts and mediators are for.
  • I'm a little late on this one, but maybe better late than never... I think one of the small business' most hidden resources is already-registered domain names. It only costs $7 per year to register a domain name - that's why virtually all the good ones are registered. Browse our inventory to see tons of names for sale for less than $1,000. If you want to aquire a particular domain name, you should try sending an offer through a third party service like Afternic.com or Network Solutions' Certified Offer
  • 1. Choose a name that has no associated domain. 2. Register the domain. 3. Change your company name. 4. ??? 5. Profit.

Slashdot Top Deals

An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.

Close