Return to newtlds Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
||Sun, July 9, 2000 at 4:54 AM GMT
||Netscape Communicator V4.73 using Windows 98
I personally can't wait until a UDRP decision is countered and disputed in a "real"
court. I believe that true "cybersquatters" (that is, the morons who register TRADEMARKED
names in an effort to sell them for a profit) deserve to have their domains taken
away. However many domains are completely generic and have been taken away just because
the person looked to sell them (in the PETA.org case, the owner didn't even look
to sell the name!). Maybe PETA didn't like the fact that the site was being used
as a parody but that's really too bad. As far as I am aware, parody is protected
by the 1st amendment. I don't see how the domain was registered in bad faith according
to the definition of bad faith in the UDRP.|
As far as I'm concerned, many domains
have been stolen by WIPO from valid domain owners. It is about time that somebody
takes this to court.
As a side note, has anybody read the WIPO decision for eResolution.com
(link below)? The really interesting thing about this case is that the company that
brought the complaint (eResolution) is now one of the companies hired to handle some
of the domain name disputes. So a company that is hired to solve these disputes wins
the decision in its own dispute. Hmmm. Isn't this a conflict of interest?