Why Corporate Entities Should NOT Be Able to Sue Typo-Squatters

[taboo]

Source: http://www.net41.com/2007/03/15/why-corporate-entities-should-not-be-able-to-sue-typo-squatters.htm

Has it crossed anyone’s mind that the domain industry might last a bit longer than the companies who are fighting for their TMs? For instance MS is going after a lot of their domains, but domains are forever, a company and it’s presence is not. Just because something is popular one moment, within 5 years it could be completely disbanded. And now the domains they acquire are not even relevant.

You are all domainers, fight for your rights please. Don't let lawyers and these companies scare you. Buy and sell TM domains! What is a typo? Nothing is real, words and characters in man-made language. Guess what no one owns the rights to any of this, the internet was made to be free. Seems everyone has forgotton this solid belief.

 

[Focus]

registering typos as we speak....**** them...we always have!

 

[GT Web]

Yawn.

I sense a large argument coming.

Profiting off someone else's TM = wrong. You register www.appel.com - I hope you get your ass sued off. Obviously some corporations take this a little too far...but seriously. Stop trying to sound suave by proclaiming how corporations don't scare you. They have the resources to screw with you...and if TM infringement keeps up some companies will probably take a few domainers and use them as an example of what can happen when you poach of their TM.

 

[ShaunP]

Yes, and taxes are too high, gas costs too much, and Las Vegas doesn't let you win enough. Boo hoo... real lifes a bitch.

 

[Focus]

Yes, and taxes are too high, gas costs too much, and Las Vegas doesn't let you win enough. Boo hoo... real lifes a bitch.

Amen Shaun.

 

[PRED]

registering typos as we speak....**** them...we always have!

:smilewinkgrin:

 

[foundrstack]

Trademark infringement should be upheld, even on the internet. You can't go out and buy property and put up a McDonalds knockoff without getting rightfully sued. However, if you put up a "Burger Heaven", McDonalds can't touch you.

 

[Mr. DeletedMr. Deleted is verified member.]

then if i buy a pig farm and put pigs on it, they cant sue/wipo me, but if i buy pig.com they are allowed to sue? "pig" won't be around in 5 years, so if they would have won, they would have just held it till it dropped. Then who would have got it?

 

[taboo]

My point was not singularly directed toward blatant TM infringement. It is concerning the amount of lawsuits brought on by these companies with their teams of lawyers trying to win every domain they can. We have all seen people lose valuable domains to a company, simply because the person was not using them properly. This is absurd, and I am trying to state that the lifetime of a domain is exactly the same as a persons lifetime ala true real estate.

If you own micronsoft.com now and place it on a parking page that has ads about software you are violating a TM. However no one is arguing the fact that a TM is meaningless in comparison to REAL PROPERTY, and should not be applied as if it were intellectual property because it is not.

Anyone see what I am getting at here?

And Shaun, I am not trying to act a victim here. I am trying to change the general perspective of domain names, could give a damn about lost wages.

 

[kwok]

I was to afraid of the lawyers. I used to own a generic name America _ _ _ _ _ _ .com and I received a letter from a lawyer claiming he works for AOL. He told me to release the name to him or he will sue. I was too afraid and gave him the name without fighting for it.

 

[GAMEFINEST]

I care less...take me to court....and then ill give u the domain.....never been court before.....but i know how to fcuq with them.

 

[Mr. DeletedMr. Deleted is verified member.]

if it is generic they need to hit me on the head to take it from me.

 

[foundrstack]

If you own micronsoft.com now and place it on a parking page that has ads about software you are violating a TM. However no one is arguing the fact that a TM is meaningless in comparison to REAL PROPERTY, and should not be applied as if it were intellectual property because it is not.

Anyone see what I am getting at here?

Not really.

A Trademark is:

A trademark is a word, symbol, or phrase, used to identify a particular manufacturer or seller's products and distinguish them from the products of another.

Source...

Trademark Infringement is:

If a party owns the rights to a particular trademark, that party can sue subsequent parties for trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125. The standard is "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of a trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes infringement if it is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the source of those goods or as to the sponsorship or approval of such goods. In deciding whether consumers are likely to be confused, the courts will typically look to a number of factors, including: (1) the strength of the mark; (2) the proximity of the goods; (3) the similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) the similarity of marketing channels used; (6) the degree of caution exercised by the typical purchaser; (7) the defendant's intent. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elect. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 820 (1961).

So you're saying it's okay for someone to go around on the internet, steal your identity and sell bogus domain names, then run with the money? When the FBI comes knocking on your door, you have to prove it wasn't you.

Trademark infringement on the internet is valid. Real reputation and money is at stake and companies/people have a right to sue to protect their identity.

 

[Kventures]

...

 

[Gerry]

I am so guilty.

However, I did dump 14 blatantly "beyond a doubt" microsoft TM infringed domains the other night. Just a small tiny fraction of my portfolio, not generating any revenue to begin with, no point in even renewing.

However, I think some of the big name companies still profit off of the typos. After all, as someone pointed out earlier in the thread APPEL.COM...what keywords would you use? Ice Cream?

Naw, man...you use APPLE iPOD COMPUTER MAC and anything else Apple related and they (apple) end up getting the traffic in most cases and their vendors may get a sale.

The typo squatters as they are probably helping the bottom line.

Just a theory, not a proven scenario, just a statement, not a fact finding mission.

 

[taboo]

Not really.

A Trademark is:

Source...

Right, this is under the assumption that domain names are just words, and not physical property.

I am saying domains are not apart of this category, and should be considered along the lines of a physical address.

If you own a house, and place McDonalds ads all over your house, sure they can sue you and tell you to take the ads down. However should they be entitled to your house? This is what is going on, and everyone is just bowing down as if domains are not destinations themselves.

A domain name is NOT a mark, it is a location. This should be a fact, and it completely disintegrates the entire WIPO/UDRP process.

Do I make a point or not?

 

[Gerry]

Right, this is under the assumption that domain names are just words, and not physical property.

I am saying domains are not apart of this category, and should be considered along the lines of a physical address.

If you own a house, and place McDonalds ads all over your house, sure they can sue you and tell you to take the ads down. However should they be entitled to your house? This is what is going on, and everyone is just bowing down as if domains are not destinations themselves.

A domain name is NOT a mark, it is a location. This should be a fact, and it completely disintegrates the entire WIPO/UDRP process.

Do I make a point or not?

Not sure. That depends if you consider something like WWWZune.com or WWWiPOD.com a typo or not.

 

[Rarethings]

I have to jump in here.

That article was very poorly written. It's one thing to state facts and back them up; it's another to rant like a child. Now I'm mostly unbiased when it comes to TM owners. But domain names are not based on land, and they never were. That's a nice analogy, but that's not what ICANN had in mind when domain names were available for registration. And if you are stupid enough to register micronsoft.com and put software ads or even any name for that matter with the keyword microsoft in it, you deserved to get sued. It's one thing to squat generic typo's; it's another thing to squat names that companies worked hard to build so you can steal traffic that belongs to them.

If you register in good faith, and don't go after TM names, you have nothing to worry about. You will almost always win in court should you come under fire.

I love how he refers to registering TM names as a legit business. Domaining is a legit business. That doesn't qualify under legitmate to me.

This would be akin to opening a small shop in real life called Mcronalds, starting to sell meals in numbers and giving the same analogy.

Why should MS pay for them? I'm not a fan of them either but holding company domain names hostage for ransom doesn't sound like business to me.

 

[mulligan]

I care less...take me to court....and then ill give u the domain.....never been court before.....but i know how to fcuq with them.

You will care when they take the domain and then sue your ass for cost's and damages.
And if you're under legal age they will take it off your Mommy and/or Daddy

 

[taboo]

Not sure. That depends if you consider something like WWWZune.com or WWWiPOD.com a typo or not.

I don't consider either one of those anything! Like I said before this is a man made character set with infinite word combinations and possibilities. There is no way to track any of this on a long enough time span.

If the internet becomes a staple in human society for 100's of years to come. Then products, services, and the corporate entities that built them are subject to drastic changes. Changes that cannot be predicted, therefor claiming one mark is more significant than the other based on the now is not relevant. Considering the fact that domain names can potentially last longer than product or service the company is advertising.

Compare company marks from the 80's to today. So many things that were at the time considered important don't even exist. There are even new companies that would be infringing on older companies registered trademarks.

Thus why trademarks should not be used in domain name disputes, it is simply not relative. Unless you think time does not exist, and we live in a world that does not turn and everything is not subject to change.