Another Legal THing

[BLazeD]

Say you have a generic domain that some company wants.

If you park the domain and choose a keyword completely unrelated to their company, they can still target it in Adwords and their ads will appear on your domain, making you look bad.

 

[katherine]

I was thinking the same thing. Bottom line: do not park at all if the name is valuable and not 100 pure generic. You don't control the advertising feed.

 

[Restecpa]

But that's not fair! You should be allowed to manage your property however you see fit and as long as your content doesn't show bad faith, they should not be able to argue it... I mean what the hell, you own a $50.000 domain, but you can't monetize it? That's insane...

 

[Focus]

F*ck that, if they did that and tried to take it away - through discovery and a subpoena you could gain access to those records showing they targetted your domain to reverse hijack it...but good point, they can be sneaky

 

[PRED]

lightly develop it and put a google search box at top, it can be done in 5 minutes and it will blow away anything any parking company can pay you. thats guaranteed.
the stats don't lie :yes:

 

[BLazeD]

This is the whole thing about domains, the legal system surrounding them is rooted.

See my other post here - http://www.dnforum.com/f26/title-domains-thread-285414.html

 

[Dave Zan]

But that's not fair! You should be allowed to manage your property however you see fit and as long as your content doesn't show bad faith, they should not be able to argue it... I mean what the hell, you own a $50.000 domain, but you can't monetize it? That's insane...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/myspace_wins_domain/

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/85AEE84897725D758825738A005C180E/$file/0556794.pdf?openelement

The 2nd link is to show domain-trademark disputes aren't limited to bad faith.
UDRP requires bad faith, but trademark holders don't have to use that if they
decide to sue in court instead.

Last thing you'd want to do is give someone a "tangible" cause to sue you..or
worse.

 

[Deleted member 5660]

I think the issue of a company running ads on a site then claiming it was an issue was brought up in the PIG.com dispute. Also, as an As an Adsense publisher you can block ads from specific web sites.

 

[jberryhilljberryhill is verified member.]

This tactic was indeed tried in the pig.com UDRP dispute.

http://domains.adrforum.com/domains/decisions/843597.htm

Complainant has placed a spectacularly high maximum bid of $2.74 to have its advertisement for absorbents displayed in response to Internet searches for the word “pig.” Complainant caused the display of its own ad on the Respondent’s website, and that such a result was entirely independent of any consciously directed activity of the Respondent.

 

[HuntingMoon]

That is pretty 'pig'headed of the complainant. Very interesting tactic and thanks for bringing this issue to our attention.