ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-rap-dt]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [gnso-rap-dt] cybersquatting edit

  • To: Rod Rasmussen <rod.rasmussen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-rap-dt] cybersquatting edit
  • From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 06 May 2010 20:14:15 -0400

One critical edit: "cybersquatting is the deliberate and bad-faith
registration *AND* use of a name...," as the UDRP defines it.

--Wendy

Rod Rasmussen wrote:
> How about this sentence reshuffling alternative that keeps the primary 
> methodology mentioned (which people are familiar with) and should take care 
> of Bruce's concern:
> 
> Cybersquatting is the deliberate and bad-faith registration or use of a name 
> that is a registered brand or mark of an unrelated entity, typically, though 
> not exclusively, for the purpose of profiting through pay-per-click 
> advertisements...
> 
> Rod
> 
> On May 6, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Greg Aaron wrote:
> 
>> Dear WG:
>>  
>> For the definition of cybersquatting in 5.1.1: Our report says: 
>> "Cybersquatting is the deliberate and bad-faith registration or use of a 
>> name that is a registered brand or mark of an unrelated entity, for the 
>> purpose of profiting (typically, though not exclusively, through 
>> pay-per-click advertisements).... There was consensus in the RAPWG that 
>> provisions 4(a) and 4(b) of the UDRP are a sound definition of 
>> Cybersquatting."
>>  
>> In the Nairobi comment session, Bruce Tonkin noted that the above is 
>> internally inconsistent.  Profit is not always a motive for all 
>> cybersquatters.  Sections 4(a) and 4(b) of the UDRP mentions other proofs of 
>> bad faith (such as “disrupting the business of a competitor.”)   And its 
>> mentions profiting by getting people to come to the site.
>>  
>> So, I propose we just delete the phrase "for the purpose of profiting 
>> (typically, though not exclusively, through pay-per-click advertisements)".  
>> I think that would make the statement accurate, and respects the 
>> conversations we had in the WG.  Are there any objections?
>>  
>> All best,
>> --Greg
>>  
>>  
>> **********************************
>> Greg Aaron
>> Director, Key Account Management and Domain Security
>> Afilias
>> vox: +1.215.706.5700
>> fax: 1.215.706.5701
>> gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> **********************************
>> The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential 
>> and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the 
>> intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this 
>> message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
>> dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly 
>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify 
>> us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
>>  
> 
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
phone: +1.914.374.0613
Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
http://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy