google Squatters cash in on human error - Dallas Morning News (subscription)

[A D]

'Squatters' cash in on human error
Dallas Morning News (subscription), TX - May 24, 2007
The World Intellectual Property Organization, one of several groups that arbitrate disputes over domain names, said disputes rose 25 percent in 2006. ...


Link To Original Article

 

[Raider]

Interesting article Adam....

"Errant visits and confused clicks on the sites' assorted links can mean cash – likely just pennies or less for each, but big money over time – for the squatters from pay-for-clicks providers such as Google Inc. "

And yet I see typosquatters taking it to the next level and selling there TM typos on this Forum. :disappointed:

 

[nametrader]

I do not understand why some cry on TYPO domains, and why people own such domains are called "squatters".
When it is known to the world that there is an opportunity, why cry? protect your domain name by registering all possible typos and avoid the fuss!
There are many things that are unethical as many of us feel like Casino's, Horse racing etc, for that matter anything gambling is a risk, many lives lost, many families broke etc etc. This is dangerous not the TYPO domains.
Aren't people making millions by suing other people/companies using a small loop hole or holes? likewise typo domains are a loop hole too. The issue is public, it is better to shut the window of opportunity or probability and to minimize the possibility of damage right from the start.
If I own xyzz.com, I will see that I also own xyxx.com and so on and so forth, do I say that I have legal right to force the owner of xyz.com to sell it to me, otherwise I file a WIPO complaint!!
Funny it's stupid .

Apart from all the above, when one is making money out of a typo domain and when approached or sued by the rightful owner of the real domain, I think they have to pay a fair price for the typo in question(It is the price for keeping the window of opportunity open allowing people to register their typos)
In reverse owner of the typo domain should be ready to loose his investment when SUED! you know from the bottom of your heart right from the start that your investment in the typo in question might push you into great loss. You took the risk you loose it.

Point is this has become an Industry of it's own kind, It's time to legislate keeping in mind the interests of both parties. Not one sided saying TYPO owners SQUATTER's, it is just not right.

When there is an opportunity people do pursue it, after all buying typo domains is not a sin or crime! is it?

I have just put in my opinion here as a member of general public who look for opportunities in general. My theory is when something is available to you to purchase it legally using the systems in place, you are legally entitled to own it. Further issues/complications must be solved cordially.

 

[Poker]

Here is an interesting case study of a real company out there. This company strongly defends their trademark but seems to wait for you to find their typos for them. Register one and you can expect a lawyer letter within days. Ask them politely to reimburse you the cost of reg (without inflating it) and they say they won't. They only seem to care about the domain once you register it (probably getting an alert from a TM tracking company they pay) and are apparently also willing to pay the 2k it takes to file a UDRP instead of just getting off their buts and finding all typos unregistered and registered.

 

[Raider]

My theory is when something is available to you to purchase it legally using the systems in place, you are legally entitled to own it.

Owning it and what you do with it are 2 different things.....Do you think that the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act extends to typosquatting? yes or no?

 

[Rockefeller]

Owning it and what you do with it are 2 different things.....Do you think that the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act extends to typosquatting? yes or no?

I feel that as long as the domain name doesnt include a TM'd term its okay. People who write these articles usually have no idea about the industry and they takes bits and pieces from different sources. Anyone who holds a domain name and isn't using it/developing it can be considered a cybersquatter. Just because they register domain names of words that people can't spell doesnt make them bad, it makes them smart...and we wouldn't have this problem if the world actually knew how to spell.

 

[Raider]

I feel that as long as the domain name doesnt include a TM'd term its okay.

I agree with you on this, I dont have a problem with registering generic typos like amatuergirls.com, it's the TM typo's that are at issue here, profiting off the backs of trademark holders and creating confusion in the marketplace at the same time.....I dont think the penalties are harsh enough for typosquatters, if they were, I think we would see less of it. I also think that selling there TM typos on this forum has gone unchecked for long enough, its sending a message to others that its OK.

I dont think we need anymore bottom feeders.

 

[Gerry]

I have been reading Adams...scuse me...-=DCG=-...post on domaining news every since I have joined. I was not aware of all the other related publications or organizations but have since been made aware and have joined some.

I used to comment every now and then. But I always wondered why or if anyone else was reading these little snippets.

I am glad to see that they are and glad to see that they do spark interest and conversation from time to time.

So, thanks -=DCG=-!

 

[eq78]

Doc this is a feed from Google news Adam is not picking these and posting them it is a feed

NameTrader so you are saying that a company should have to go out and reg every variant of their domain or a typo squatter is justified in regging the domain ? Someone ripping off someones TM is not an "opportunity" it is a TM violation. Generic typos are fine but to say Starbucks you have to reg every potential typo of your domain or others will take the "opportunity " to reg the typo of your Registered trademark is totally crazy IMO

 

[Gerry]

Doc this is a feed from Google news Adam is not picking these and posting them it is a feed

Darn...

HEY, Still love it Adam! Keep up the good FEEDING!

(No wonder he never responded to any of these feedback comments. It's like that picture...just frozen in time)

 

[Raider]

NameTrader so you are saying that a company should have to go out and reg every variant of their domain or a typo squatter is justified in regging the domain ? Someone ripping off someones TM is not an "opportunity" it is a TM violation. Generic typos are fine but to say Starbucks you have to reg every potential typo of your domain or others will take the "opportunity " to reg the typo of your Registered trademark is totally crazy IMO

Good point, the variations are endless, And to say that if a TM holder doesn't reg every typo, that somehow gives typosqatters privilege to earn as much as they can off a TM?, absolute nonsense.

I remember reading some court rulings, where typosquatters were criminally convicted......I'll try to dig them up and post them.

 

[nametrader]

NameTrader so you are saying that a company should have to go out and reg every variant of their domain or a typo squatter is justified in regging the domain ? Someone ripping off someones TM is not an "opportunity" it is a TM violation. Generic typos are fine but to say Starbucks you have to reg every potential typo of your domain or others will take the "opportunity " to reg the typo of your Registered trademark is totally crazy IMO

There is ACPA act as Raider mentioned above. Most of us have matching opinions with generic typos.
Let us take StarBucks, Star+Bucks if some one registers starbuckscontest.com it may be or is a TM violation. But what is the owner of starbuckscontest.com says, this is altogether different, stars and bucks are two generic words in dictionary and this website is all about giving prizes to people who gaze at stars all night continuously for 6 months. Honestly speaking every one have their own way of doing stuff and looking at things.

We have to agree with xnx here, it is impossible for starbucks to register all variants including starbucks+* . But again starbucks is a combination of 2 generic words and that word itself cannot be a TM, where as That word in various form/art can be a TM as an image or logo.

We all should still remember google's concern on google word being added to the dictionary that this might dilute their trademark. After all google is a genuine TM, it's founders found.

In the end making everything foolproof is next to impossible, as there is a window we all look through it out of curiosity or whatever when you do peep into the window and a ball of fire blows your face, visit your doctor or apply an over the counter ointment. There is no way to escape when you took the risk(peeping into the window).

 

[Raider]

I see your point about generics, Using your example, it would depend on how the domain was being used, if you put a parked lander and nothing else having to do with a contest gazing at the stars, Yes, I would say the falls under the definition of typosquatting, especially if you serving ads for coffee.

I'm referring mostly to non generics, names like, microsoft, ebay, aol, chevrolet, honda, disney, etc....when someone regs a misspell of one of these and throws up a parked lander or try's to sell it, that's typosquatting not matter how you look at.

 

[Rubber Duck]

Most domainers actually know diddle squat about Intellectual Property Rights, and that is the cause of much of the problem.

TM Holders have been lax but they do have an obligation to their shareholders to protect their TMs which are effectively company assets and many of them are now becoming much more proactive.

Couple of points though. UDRP cannot award damages, although the courts can. It is, however, incumbent up the TM Holder to notify the transgressor in each case, largely because it is not just registered TM holder, who have rights. Cease and Desist means precisely that. If you don't then you are liable to very costly claims for damages.

If you are buying a domain, then an investment in a TM Typo is likely to be a very costly mistake, so their realistic retail worth is virtually nothing, whatever the current owner may claim about earnings.

If you have a portfolio that contains a lot of very good domains, an adverse UDRP decision may act against you in the defence of otherwise solid registrations. Unless your portfolio consists largely of such junk then going to UDRP is not an advisable course of action.

 

[whitebark]

I've got Canada typos - does that make me a squatter? Maybe people really are looking for cabada and not Canada?

 

[Rubber Duck]

I've got Canada typos - does that make me a squatter? Maybe people really are looking for cabada and not Canada?

As nobody can really lay claim to a TM on Canada, I think it fair to say that would be fair game.