Ethical Question?

[Source]

Suppose you were recently reading a magazine article regarding an emerging technology that may revolutionize a certain aspect of computing. On a lark, you decide to see if the domain with the specific name of the technology / product has been taken. Low and behold, the creators of this new thingy have registered the .net and it appears the .com is currently available and there are no TMs pending on this technology (yet).

Would you reg it? :huh:

 

[Mr Webname]

If you don't it's likely that someone else will - if they don't want it then maybe you can gain from it. If they do want it, as such a concerned ethically-minded domainer you'll be in the best possible position to help them out!

 

[jquail]

damn right!

 

[GT Web]

register it, now!

 

[Source]

How does this action differentiate you from the unlawful practice of cybersquatting?

 

[GT Web]

if there is no TM....I dont think there is any problem....

 

[Mr Webname]

Originally posted by Name-Maker
How does this action differentiate you from the unlawful practice of cybersquatting?

Surely the fact that they have registered the .net shows they are aware of getting a domain for their technology, maybe they only want the domain for "internal" operations, otherwise why havn't they registered the .com?
You, on the other hand, require the .com for your commercial intentions when the technology is launched so you register the name and set up a holding page in anticipation of earning money from the commercial distribution of the technology.

 

[GiantDomains]

Originally posted by Name-Maker
How does this action differentiate you from the unlawful practice of cybersquatting?

The definition of cybersquatting is buying names that you don't intend to develop and have no interest in, to sit on and wait for a buyer. That is the true definition, much like people that used to squat land. So resellers are sqatters, but not necessarily TM squatters.

 

[Biggie]

Some people just prefer the ".net" extension, for their own purposes. They may want to use the association with "MS >.NET"


p.s ..... tell me the name, and if i like it...... i promise to regg it!

 

[LewR]

Originally posted by Name-Maker
Suppose you were recently reading a magazine article regarding an emerging technology that may revolutionize a certain aspect of computing. On a lark, you decide to see if the domain with the specific name of the technology / product has been taken. Low and behold, the creators of this new thingy have registered the .net and it appears the .com is currently available and there are no TMs pending on this technology (yet).

Would you reg it? :huh:

Immediately - Some "holier than thou" people here cannot tell the difference between squatting and staking a claim.

Squatting occurs on land someone already owns.
Staking a claim is speculation and completely legal.

 

[GiantDomains]

Originally posted by LewR



Immediately - Some "holier than thou" people here cannot tell the difference between squatting and staking a claim.

Squatting occurs on land someone already owns.
Staking a claim is speculation and completely legal.

I was pointing out the loose translation of a cybersquatter.

I see the differerce, as I am a reseller, as I pointed out ..

As for the definition of squatter, yes, a squatter can squat on owned land, but also public land.

Websters: To occupy a given piece of public land in order to acquire title to it.

Not these days though, you will end up in jail

Oh yeah, and .. there is no TM here ... go 4 it.

 

[Ed30]

It's a free untrademarked name...just take it.

 

[GiantDomains]

Originally posted by Ed30
It's a free untrademarked name...just take it.

ditto.

 

[LewR]

It gets to the point that you hate to post here -- everyone wants to split hairs.

I laugh, you argue about it, then turn around and say "reg it", like you should have in the original post - with out defining cybersquatting, etc.

Too funny ...

 

[GiantDomains]

Originally posted by LewR
It gets to the point that you hate to post here -- everyone wants to split hairs.

I laugh, you argue about it, then turn around and say "reg it", like you should have in the original post - with out defining cybersquatting, etc.

Too funny ...

lol, true.

 

[Source]

OK... I regged it.... I feel sooooooo dirty now. :-D

 

[Leading Names]

Can you tell us the name yet? :-D please

 

[actnow]

Name-Maker, I originally had registered that domain. However, my registrar did not notify me that I needed to renew it. Furthermore, I have a common law trademark on that name.

I am willing to pay you for your registration cost and your time. I will send you $ 20. for the domain.

If we settle this now, it will save you a lot of time and legal problems. Therefore, please transfer it to my Enom acct today.
Please email me for my Enom acct name.

Now, what is the name I use to own?

 

[Source]

I'd prefer not to post the name as it could lead to the very issue I want to avoid.

PM me if you are truly curious.

 

[Source]

Originally posted by actnow
Name-Maker, I originally had registered that domain. However, my registrar did not notify me that I needed to renew it. Furthermore, I have a common law trademark on that name.

I am willing to pay you for your registration cost and your time. I will send you $ 20. for the domain.

If we settle this now, it will save you a lot of time and legal problems. Therefore, please transfer it to my Enom acct today.
Please email me for my Enom acct name.

Now, what is the name I use to own?

OMG. I'm sooooo sorry.

Please send me your eNom account ID and I'll push it to immediately.

I'll hold my breath until you respond.

k:

(That's not his index finger that little dude is holding up - lol)