The Acorn RSS popped this one up recently -
Will new top-level domains promote cybersquatting?
While most of that article is about the new TLDs, the salient point, for me, is that there is a proposal for ICANN to implement a fast takedown procedure for names that infringe Trademarks, and also "typosquatting" names.
Methinks this is "a bit malodorous", and it makes me wonder somewhat.
I recently found a thread on another forum which had been resurrected from the past by a bored member, then locked by the admin.
A bloke in HK had registered memberstripod .com , and was being asked to cease and desist. He gave in, and he hadn't done anything but register the name - no activity. That was several years ago.
So I thought I'd see what happened in the meantime.
members. tripod .com is on a 307 pointing to tripod .lycos .com.
memberstripod .com is currently owned by a Polish bloke, registered through a Ukrainian registrar.
After that "windows" debacle last month, should trademark holders be given the power to say "I don't like that", and have a site taken down sine die ?
I can't say I fancy the concept - too much power in the hands of the "big boys", to my mind.
If someone has malicious intent to gain from someone else's TM, that is one thing - and if it is evidently happening, then I think a site should be taken down. But I don't think there should be a procedure to circumvent the legal process at the whim of big business.
Will new top-level domains promote cybersquatting?
While most of that article is about the new TLDs, the salient point, for me, is that there is a proposal for ICANN to implement a fast takedown procedure for names that infringe Trademarks, and also "typosquatting" names.
Methinks this is "a bit malodorous", and it makes me wonder somewhat.
I recently found a thread on another forum which had been resurrected from the past by a bored member, then locked by the admin.
A bloke in HK had registered memberstripod .com , and was being asked to cease and desist. He gave in, and he hadn't done anything but register the name - no activity. That was several years ago.
So I thought I'd see what happened in the meantime.
members. tripod .com is on a 307 pointing to tripod .lycos .com.
memberstripod .com is currently owned by a Polish bloke, registered through a Ukrainian registrar.
After that "windows" debacle last month, should trademark holders be given the power to say "I don't like that", and have a site taken down sine die ?
I can't say I fancy the concept - too much power in the hands of the "big boys", to my mind.
If someone has malicious intent to gain from someone else's TM, that is one thing - and if it is evidently happening, then I think a site should be taken down. But I don't think there should be a procedure to circumvent the legal process at the whim of big business.
