Is It OK To Sucks? 189
I have a problem with the whole notion of taking domains away to begin with. The only tune that corporate, capitalist American can sing is "the free market" -- except when it comes to the free market in domain names.
Real estate speculation? Great, it optimizes efficiency. Currency market speculation? Balances resources internationally and assures prosperity. But domain name speculation? You filthy cybersquatter!
Personally I could see this being useful in 1995, when companies were just waking up to the internet, but I think it's run its course. Any company in 2001 that hasn't registered its corporate name, and all its major products' names before making them public, is stupid and deserves to pay large sums of money to savvy entrepreneurs. In 2001, we're just seeing natural selection running its course. Bailing out stupidity is corporate welfare.
Anyway, the big picture is that the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), in adjudicating the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Protocol (UDRP), is trying to find a way to apply trademark law to the internet. The rules put in place ensured that there was to be no free market on "LockheedMartin.com" -- the company that owns the trademark on "LOCKHEED MARTIN" gets it, and others are only allowed to have it if they are doing something appropriate with it (not using it in "bad faith," to be precise).
WIPO makes its decisions based on the UDRP, but has a wide latitude in interpreting it. This is one of its problems, of course. The UDRP has a handful of fuzzy two-word clauses like "bad faith" and "legitimate interests"; WIPO's panelists can interpret them almost any way they want. Consistency is a prerequisite of justice, and randomly-administered justice is no justice at all.
But Monday, the two fuzzy words were "confusingly similar," namely, whether LockheedMartinSucks.com is confusingly similar to LockheedMartin.com. The decisions came down, and they may be the most startling display of WIPO's arbitrary arbitration.
As the decision states, Lockheed-Martin "relie[d] primarily on previous ICANN decisions that have found domain names that combine a trademark with the word 'sucks' to be confusingly similar to the trademark."
Lockheed probably thought it was on safe ground by doing so. The list of domains taken away for that reason was long: guinness-sucks.com, guinness-really-sucks.com, etc., wal-martsucks.com, cabelassucks.com, directlinesucks.com, dixonssucks.com, freeservesucks.com, natwestsucks.com, standardcharteredsucks.com, and wal-martcanadasucks.com, etc.
But Monday's decision, for once, told the truth:
"The disputed domain names are neither identical nor confusingly similar to Complainant's trademarks, since no one would reasonably believe that Complainant operates a website that appends the word 'sucks' to its name and then uses it to criticize corporate America."
What took Captain Obvious so long to arrive?
The decision also notes that in the WalmartCanadaSucks.com decision, the only other case where the trademark-holder was told to take a hike, the sole panelist "expressed skepticism" about the confusing similarity of sucks, "but stopped just short of advocating a per se privilege exempting all 'sucks' domain names."
Likewise here; they make it clear that "no one could reasonably believe" sucks is confusing. And more interestingly -- they do not bother even to consider the other two parts of the three-part test. As soon as they decided that LockheedSucks was not Lockheed, that was it, the case was over.
But, unfortunately, I don't see any language that encourages future panelists to reach the same decision. This is an international body and they don't have to follow the almost-uniquely-American tradition of following precedent and being, you know, predictable. The next ten sucks sites might be taken away, for all anyone can tell. Or they might not. Sucks-sters will just have to hope they get the right panelist.
There were some good lines in this decision, by the way, that tell me that the panelists know what's what. "A website that functions for the exercise of free speech by its nature can not operate with bad faith intent." I like that. Kudos to panelists Foster and Sorkin.
And shame on panelist Wagoner, who was the dissenting voice.
Wagoner was embarrassingly honest in his outrage that the UDRP was being followed, for once. The implication of the majority decision, he complained, is that "the lack of 'confusing similarity' would prevent a finding that the Policy had been violated."
Well, yes: that's exactly how the Policy demands that WIPO rule. When your personal beliefs about what the UDRP should say, Mr. Wagoner, differ from what it actually does say, we'd hope you can figure out which to follow.
And among his reasons why "sucks" should be swallowed up by corporate America is that consumer eyeballs belong to corporate America. If you the consumer do a search for Lockheed, happen to notice that someone is criticizing it at a sucks domain, and then of your own free will and volition decide you want to click and see what the criticism is all about, your reckless websurfing has made you party to a filching of Lockheed's intellectual property:
"...it is likely (given the relative ease by which websites can be entered) that such users will choose to visit the sites, if only to satisfy their curiosity. Respondent will have accomplished his objective of diverting potential customers of Complainant to his websites by the use of domain names that are similar to Complainant's trademark."
The other two panelists smacked down that insipid argument explicitly, too, by the way, saying that once the searcher sees the sucks and nonsucks alternatives, he or she will exhibit a discernment and intelligence measurably higher than the average garden slug.
Someone needs to ask WIPO: what the hell is going on?
Trademark law (in the United States at least) exists for the citizen's protection, not the corporation's. The laws against dilution of trademarks exist so that you and I will not be confused. When the law, or in this case the arbitration rules, start to protect corporations' trademark interests over ours, something has gone wrong.
And domain names are the real estate of the internet. Obviously a sucks domain name is parody, and will not be confused with its target -- obviously. People who would criticize corporations have enough problems to worry about already with libel suits they can't afford to defend (win or lose). The last thing they need is a governing body that can take away their website on absurd charges of trademark violation.
And the second-to-last thing they need is a governing body that can't make up its damn mind.
Found on LockheedMartinSucks.com (Score:1)
"Outraged! Outraged! Our glorious revolution nearly failed this harvest season when a C-130 Hercules transport [lockheedmartin.com] cracked an engine mount. This shit-eating miserable plane had THREE STOPS for unscheduled repairs last month alone. THREE! Meanwhile the insurgent peasants are rearming and power is slipping through my fingers like rice bobbing down a spring stream.
So of course I try to return the plane but the ignorant swine at Lockheed-Martin will not accept it without a receipt! A RECEIPT! They say I could have bought it from some OTHER aircraft and aerospace manufacturing concern! Absurd! They will not even give me in-store credit!
If the ignorant revolutionaries gain control of our southwest border because my LOCKHEED CRAP could not deliver supplies, may the stinking, rotting carcasses from this company swell and burst, soiling the earth of their foul campus with their necrotic entrails for seven generations to come!"
The worst Domain Name Hijacking never gets to WIPO (Score:1)
Re:note to /. (Score:1)
[slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]
Re:usuck.com (Score:1)
attn college student slashdotters (Score:1)
-----Original Message-----
> WIPO LAUNCHES ESSAY COMPETION
> The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has launched an
> international essay competition as part of a series of events to mark the
> first ever World Intellectual Property Day on April 26, the date on which
> the Convention establishing WIPO entered into force in 1970. WIPO member
> states decided at their annual meetings in September 2000 to designate this
> date for special activities to highlight the importance and practical use of
> intellectual property in people's lives.
>
> The competition, conducted by WIPO's Worldwide Academy (WWA), is open to
> university students. The 2000-word essay must address the question "What
> does intellectual property mean to you in your daily life" and must be
> submitted in English. The two best essays will each be awarded a scholarship
> for the 2001 session of the WWA Summer School in Geneva for a period of six
> weeks, including accommodation and return flights.
>
> Entries must be sent to the WWA by March 15, 2001. The winners will be
> announced on April 26, 2001. For further information, please consult
> www.wipo.int. Questions can be addressed to dl101.academy@wipo.int.
>
> Essays and university details must be sent to:
>
> Mrs. Francesca Toso Dunant
> World Intellectual Property Day International Essay Competition
> WIPO Worldwide Academy (WWA)
> PO Box 18, CH-1211, Geneva
> Switzerland
Re:History... (Score:1)
"The Panel does not infer that "-sucks" domain names are immune from scrutiny as being confusingly similar to trademarks to which they are appended. Each case must be considered in light of the facts presented."
And which facts are relevant? How am I to know whether I'm breaking the law or not?
Re:usuck.com (Score:1)
Now, the band might not like it if the people who own primus.com decided to tell everyone how good the band is....
Re:Yet another knee-jerk, anti-WIPO /. Posting (Score:1)
Absurd cases are routinely tossed out by courts. This one should have been among those.
Re:Yet another knee-jerk, anti-WIPO /. Posting (Score:2)
The Guinness case should have been tossed out without ever bothering the domain owner. The case was ridiculous. If guinness wanted the domain they should have bought it. If not, then they should have just left it alone.
Initiate the lawsuits.... (Score:2)
If anything, we need a way to challenge WIPO rulings; as such, they are considered final and thus one cannot appeal them. Or even better, reinstate the initial policy: first come, first served, whiners can show their own way to the door.
Re:The "Real" first amendment (Score:1)
Treaties are great - but they shouldn't really have any effect until there's a federal law passed to comply with the treaty (otherwise you have impermissable situations like the President and a majority of the Senate taxing people through treaties w/o any involvement by the House) and that law has to be constitutional or it'll get overturned.
Re:The "Real" first amendment (Score:1)
Obviously if anyone for any reason wishes to change their name servers, they can anyway. If some heathen country (why yes, I'm an American
But just because WIPO says jump, doesn't mean that the US has to ask how high.
Imagine if they had requested that he be thrown in jail without a trial, tortured, and his property siezed without due compensation. The US hasn't got the power to do any of that, and aren't allowed to follow the orders of anyone who tells them to do it anyway. It's no different in this case.
hmm guess im in trouble (Score:1)
*smirk*
IRNI
Simple Solution... (Score:2)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe (Score:1)
--
Re:Lockheed does not suck (Score:1)
It's good that they're helping educate people about technology...
Just don't try to register the $5000 server as "lockheedmartindoesntsuck.net", or you may find yourself in trouble....
---
"They have strategic air commands, nuclear submarines, and John Wayne. We have this"
Re:Initiate the lawsuits.... (Score:2)
So...what you're saying is that Verizon is a cybersquatter (as they obviously have no intention of ridiculing themselves with a "...sucks" site, their purpose in registering it is obviously to prevent someone else from using it)?
---
"They have strategic air commands, nuclear submarines, and John Wayne. We have this"
unelected (Score:2)
It's exactly the same deal. You may not have directly elected the rulers of WIPO but you DID vote for the people who voted to join WIPO and agreed to its rules and regulations. And if you don't like it you can vote other people in to have us leave.
Hmmm... (Score:1)
Nah... Silly me.
- Sig me baby, eight to the bar!...
Re:Oh man... (Score:2)
</pedantic>
"If ignorance is bliss, may I never be happy.
Re:I need to register... (Score:2)
--
Disclaimers? (Score:2)
If I ran a site (Xsucks.com) and put a large disclaimer at the top, saying something on the lines of "This site is not affiliated with X, please visit X.com if you wish to see the real site", then any argument that the site would be confused with the real thing would surely fall over, as long as your disclaimer wouldn't be missed (after all, "read this before installing" type agreements have been enforced before, so a "read this before viewing the webpage" would certainly hold water).
Likewise, I've always thought that companies with like names, but totally different businesses, should offer links to each other's sites. If you remember Prince vs Prince, where a British computer consultancy was sued by the American sportswear manufacturer for Prince.com (and you can see who won by visiting). The current prince.com would not lose any business by pointing visitors to the site they might really be wanting.
I think I'm just saying, "be nice".
Re:I need to register... (Score:2)
Re:I need to register... (Score:2)
That should read
wipo.really.fuckingsucks.net [fuckingsucks.net]
There used to be more, but Laurence Godfrey [google.com] got pissed at my site and threatened to sue, call the FBI, etc.
Well the FBI called, and I was forced by them to take down half of the content.
Append the url with old_index.php3 and you can see the origial content. I submitted the story to Slashdot under YRO but it was rejected as usual. I have a very funny log of emails from Prof. G.
Re:You're right, but you're being a jackass. (Score:1)
Re:I need to register... (too late) (Score:2)
Whois Server Version 1.3
Domain names in the
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.
Domain Name: WIPOSUCKS.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: GATE.TELLURIAN.NET
Name Server: NS1.INFOLOOK.COM
Updated Date: 05-aug-1999
>>> Last update of whois database: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 11:19:21 EST
The Registry database contains ONLY
Registrars.
gone from suck to blow! (Score:1)
---
Re:Initiate the lawsuits.... (Score:1)
Several companies have already done this. After a particularly nasty episode with non-functioning ATMs, branches that closed way too early, and a paycheck what Needed Depositing, I found out that citizensbanksucks.com had already been taken by, you guessed it, Citizens Bank. Guess they feel that acquiring the name instead of playing Rock'em Sock'em Lawyers makes them look better or something.
Funny, though -- in their haste to get that .com registered, they missed .net and .org... (have at 'em!)
Personally, I think that the trend will move towards "-blows" as the Suffix of Choice for naysayers. If we can change trendy prefixes at the drop of a hat (i-, e-, x- ...) why not angry suffixes? -blows, -bites, -chews... and all with the same great oral fixation we've come to know and love from -sucks. Grab those domains now, kids!
Contrast (Score:2)
Re:Similar to email usernames (Score:1)
The reason why no one cares is that no one has to use Hotmail, or any other webmail shite. You can easily register your own domains and give yourself any email addr you want.
DNS, though, is a different beast alltogether. While it is possible to set up your own root DNS servers, it's kind of pointless since no one will use them. Thus, we are stuck using the current DNS system, which means that domain dispute resolution policies affect us all.
New top level domains? (Score:1)
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe (Score:1)
- Rev.
SLASHDOT SUCKS!! (Score:1)
Think about it.
Re:SLASHDOT SUCKS!! (Score:1)
What the hell is going on... (Score:2)
How did this troll get published, anyway?
Re:Jurist Shopping (Score:1)
I take your point about people not challenging complaints, but surely you don't think that a www.guinnesssucks.com is cybersquatting if it complains about guinness? I'd've thought that was a legitimate use for that name.
Re:You're right, but you're being a jackass. (Score:1)
I don't think Guinness does support the IRA. However, I don't think it would be a point in their favour if they did. The IRA isn't about republicanism any more, it's just about terrorism and gang warfare. If you wish to support the Irish republican cause, may I suggest donating to the SDLP [www.sdlp.ie] instead, as they won't ever blow innocent civilians up. As far as the Northern Ireland question, I don't think the British government could care less, it would happily hand NI to the Republic of Ireland if it would solve the problem (which it wouldn't - a majority of NI residents are unionist).
[This may be slightly OT: moderate me down then. I'm on 100 Karma, but dropping below that will be no big deal. The real big deal will be when I drop below 0x40]
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe (Score:1)
sigh. Another person who thinks the troubles would be solved by a united Ireland. There are very few English people living in Northern Ireland; however, 60% of the NI population are unionists and want NI to remain part of Britain. So if the Republic of Ireland owned Northern Ireland, the problem would still be just as bad.
Hopefully one day people will be past caring and the two communities can integrate. Tiocfaidh an là, to steal a phrase.
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe (Score:1)
Re:The "Real" first amendment (Score:1)
Not quite. Anyone running a DNS in any country can make www.lockheedmartinsucks.com point to whatever IP address they like. The US Govt only has the power to regulate this if foreigners choose to point their DNS servers at a root server in the US.
Hence WIPO can disagree with the US government. If it wants to, WIPO can say that a.root-servers.net violates international treaties. If it wants to, WIPO can rule that member countries should block traffic to a.root-servers.net. So a significant number of people would be able to see 216.182.45.14 at "www.lockheedmartinsucks.com", no matter what the US government wanted.
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe (Score:1)
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe (Score:1)
That is probably why you bought it that one time in your life, but some people actually buy it because they enjoy it.
Really, there are many other, better, cheaper stouts out there, if you don't want to make your own.
There are many different stouts out there, and if you really knew anything about beer, you'd know (good) beers are pretty unique, and there's more that just 'stouts' and 'Bud'. Murphys is good also, but is not a "cheaper stout", it's a different beer.
Wait a minute here... (Score:5)
I can accomplish the same thing by registering www.pinkelephants.com and sprinkling the HTML with the phrase "Lockheed Martin Sucks!". Search engines do not search only URL's. THey'd be pretty damn useless if that were the case.
Re:The WIPO sucks (Score:2)
- - - - -
Re:The WIPO sucks (Score:2)
- - - - -
You're right, but you're being a jackass. (Score:2)
Second, your over-generalization is disgusting. May as well say that "only the mentally retarded use Windows". - forgetting about and offending the millions of people that use the OS of Doom to play video games [does Linux have Halflife or Baldur's Gate?], office work and so forth. People who drink Guiness, unlike people who use M$ products, are usually doing so for a reason. These are mine:
Yeungling sucks ass in any flavor. It fills the gap between real beer and the beer you see on TV. Guiness is opaque and thick. It's like bread, only better. The taste is decent, and the availability over a comparable beer [Murphy's] is much greater in Pittsburgh- and Guiness is *cheaper* here. It's one of the few beers I can actually finish without feeling sick- I drink it because I like it, not because I'm an Irish fanatic [I'm not- I'm of German decent], or to piss of my friends [when I want to do that, I drink Zima], and the fact that it could be supporting the IRA is a point in its favor.
In any case, what about Primus' website? www.primussucks.com ? It's the official band site, which makes it pretty flack-proof, and a good case in favor of how stupid legal maneuvers like this really are.
Re:The WIPO sucks (Score:5)
Thanks for the comment, stud... (Score:1)
"How many DNS (the word 'server' is implicit in the use of DNS here, FYI) are on U.S. soil, and are therefore subject to US judiciary control?"
It is not beyond imagining that some DNS operators might choose a different set of servers as "root". There's nothing to prevent this. You should try setting up BIND some time, this might help you understand.
There's a Difference Between "Law" and "Regulation (Score:2)
As has been proven time and time again, baseball free-agency being a good example, no matter how consistent or inconsistent your system is, it is still subject to revocation through the lengthy court process.
Eventually, there probably will be a ban on 'sucks' domains (because of corporate-funded decision-makers) or there will not be (because the free-speech issue is held to be prominent). And if some bodies don't like it, perhaps there will be country-specific '.sucks' registrars...
Re:The WIPO sucks (Score:2)
What will be interesting is, given a company FOO, if Register.com [register.com] receives money by selling the domain foosucks.com, are they acting in bad faith? Probably not, given they are an objective, flat-fee service, neither judging nor upcharging particular domain names based on the commercial desirability thereof. But if enough companies threaten and pressure them, and force them into legal expenditures, they just might cave and start filtering against *sucks" and so forth, just to stay unharassed.
--
brucespringsteen.com arbitration (Score:1)
does anyone know (Score:1)
UO does the same thing (Score:1)
I was trying to rename something "Rosie" and it wasn't taking it.
>since I couldn't have my "hotmail_sucks_ass" username.
Why didn't you just pick "hotmale_sucks_ass@hotmail.com" ?
Re:UO does the same thing (Score:1)
Origin Systems, Inc. [uo.com], is the company that produces Ultima Online [uo.com]
Re:SLASHDOT SUCKS!! (Score:1)
Nice try anyway
Re:Similar to email usernames (Score:2)
So, go create a sucks.[?] SLD (Score:2)
sucks.com is unfortunately already registered, but...
patents, trademarks, and copyright 101 (Score:1)
As for your apathy toward abuses, well thanks for nothing...
Re:The decision is obvious, different buyers targe (Score:1)
Maybe they stumbled upon the vatican's site while searching for authentic Irish beer mugs. Do yoou sue the vatican? (I would just for good measure, payback for Inquisitional Tendencies and all0
However, if I went and poisoned the DNS cache the way Alternic.com took over InterNIC way back when, that would be grounds for a trademark suit. How far it would get who knows, but there's something clearly amiss there. Granted I agree with the Alternic guy, protest and all.
Huh? (Score:3)
Companies use trademarks to defend thier interests. Saying trademarks are for the citizens protection is a little like saying patents are consumer protection. Even if the laws are written such that trademark law is as above, that is certainly *not* the case in the real world. Trademarks protect identity, product names and differentiate companies and they are viciously defended to increase revenue. They don't give a hoot about citizen protection as long as the citizens are shopping with them.
-Moondog
The WIPO sucks (Score:3)
I'm wondering... if the guy with the .sucks.com domain started selling names like microsoft.sucks.com and apple.sucks.com, could the WIPO do anything about it?
Just curious.
www.suckssucks.com would fail their test ... (Score:1)
Of course, Dan would laugh at the humor ...
Re:The "Real" first amendment (Score:1)
The WIPO is not an organization of the government of the United States, and is therefore not bound by the Constitution of the United States. If the WIPO were a U.S. government agency, you'd have a point. The first amendment doesn't really apply here.
Re:The WIPO sucks (Score:1)
bye bye karma
Re:Similar to email usernames (Score:1)
The Domain Name System, on the other hand, belongs to the net population at large. It is therefore a public resource. Public resources are administered by public organizations, and they must respect the rights of their users, because it is the users as a body who have an inherent right to control the resources. With webmail, it's the organization who is actually providing the service that has the rights to control the resources.
The difference is subtle, but vast.
Re:bullshit, (Score:1)
OK, so mark me off-topic ...
-Martin
Re:does anyone know (Score:1)
http://www.uspto.gov/
-Martin
Re:SLASHDOT SUCKS!! (Score:1)
Now if you registered slashdotsucks.org, Cmdr Taco would be all over you with his crack suicide legal team.
Re:Who controls WIPO? (Score:2)
My understanding is that basically it's a UN deal and works like the UN. Members are appointed to a panel who votes. I'm assuming the Super-7 or whatever they're called control the majority of what goes on in WIPO.
Mordred
trulysucks (Score:2)
That's why I registered trulysucks.net [trulysucks.net]. I can run my Warner Brothers sucks site as warnerbrothers.trulysucks.net [trulysucks.net] and there's nothing ICANN or the WIPO can do about it, since the "trademark" bit is in the third-level (and their policies only apply to the second-level domain, not what you put in it).
Anyone who wants to slag off a trademark holder is welcome to a DNS delegation in the domain (just send me an email); it's not a commercial thing at all.
-robin
Re:.. different buyers targetted (Score:2)
Hang on a mo, this might be true in America, but Guinness isn't aimed at America. It's neither overpriced or a luxury in Britain/Ireland where most of the sales are, it's just an everyday pub drink.
Over here, Mexican Sol and American Budweiser (not the proper Czech stuff) fall into the category of "overpriced luxury beer", but I'm not xenophobic enough to believe that applies eveywhere.
Re:Jurist Shopping (Score:2)
Re:Yet another knee-jerk, anti-WIPO /. Posting (Score:2)
Re:Jurist Shopping (Score:2)
No, it is not. That's why Lockheed lost its complaint. But the guinesssucks site was not a site for complaining about guiness. It was purchased by someone for the sole purpose of selling it to guiness at a higher rate. That is cybersquatting.
Yet another knee-jerk, anti-WIPO /. Posting (Score:4)
READ THE FUCKING DECISIONS!!!!!!!!
In the Guiness case, the Responded was someone blatently trying to make money off of selling the domains to Guiness! HE DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO FILE A RESPONSE!!!!!!!!!!
In the Lockheed-Martin case, there was a very well-reasoned response and the decision on the part of the WIPO itself was very well written and very well reasoned.
Different situations, different results.
You lose when you quit. (Score:2)
If you just give up, you lose. If you fought, you probably could have won very easily.
80% (Score:2)
You say that 80% of the disputes are ruled in favor of the trademark holder. But, what percentage of that are defendants that never respond?
Proper trademark use (Score:3)
A trademark is to properly identify a company, product, or service.
If you use Xsucks.com, where X is a trademark, you are properly identifying what sucks. If you have mattelsucks.com [mattelabuse.com], you are properly identifying the trademark Mattel, a company identification mark, sucks. It can also come under fair use.
Now under the anti-SLAPP statutes [casp.net] available in many states, the case can dismissed fairly quickly. Also, it has been ruled that trademark cannot be used to silence critism or commentary. See Mattel v. MCA. (the Barbiegirl case).
Linux sucks! (Score:2)
www.boeingsucks.com
www.airbussucks.com
www.intelsucks.com
www.amdsucks.com
www.microsoftsucks.com
All of them are registered, altought none of the above have any content at all.
I was happy to see that even a www.linuxsucks.com exists!
Disclaimer to the moderators: I am not saying that Linux sucks, I like Linux, only that I am happy to see that a linuxsucks.com exists because it means that to someone it is important enough to start battling against it; I hope you get my point.
slashdotsucks.org NOT available (Score:4)
slashdotsucks.tv
myslashdotsucks.org
e-slashdotsucks.org
aboutslashdotsucks.org
slashdotsucksonline.org
slashdotsuckscentral.org
Bugger off, Richard.
The "Real" first amendment (Score:2)
There are 456,326,563,743,445 subclauses, do you want me to list them all?
Seriously, though... How can you truely tell me that these WIPO rules aren't a direct violation of the first amendment??
--
I need to register... (Score:5)
Re:I need to register... (Score:4)
Re:Similar to email usernames (Score:2)
I think this is more likely so that stupid people don't get email from "hotmail_support@hotmail.com" saying "Please send us your password, we need to fix our database," rather than from any motive of squashing your right to say that they suck.
Re:I need to register... (Score:3)
Registrant:
Secaucus Group (WIPOSUCKS-DOM)
295 Greewich Street Suite 184
New York, New York 10007
USA
Domain Name: WIPOSUCKS.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Billing Contact:
Parisi, Dan (DP996) dparisi@GARDEN.NET
Dan Parisi
Post Office Box 1009
Secaucus, NJ 07094
973-503-1785
Record last updated on 30-Aug-2000.
Record expires on 19-Apr-2001.
Record created on 19-Apr-1999.
Database last updated on 7-Feb-2001 00:54:09 EST.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.INFOLOOK.COM 216.182.45.2
GATE.TELLURIAN.NET 216.182.1.1
Re:The WIPO sucks (Score:3)
Unfortunately, the WIPO is almost stupid enough to do it.
"Evil beware: I'm armed to the teeth and packing a hampster!"
Oh man... (Score:2)
#define tongue_in_cheek
There goes my plan for my vacuum cleaner promotional fansites:
http://-really-sucks.net
#udefine tongue_in_cheek
Re:Oh man... (Score:2)
Or, I should say that I visit:
http://people-who-don't-preview-html-tags.sucks. co m
D'oh
I meant to write:
http://insert-vacuum-vendor>-really-sucks.n et
parodies need to be more creative (Score:2)
Re:or maybe not ... (Score:2)
Web proxy, here I come!
-------
Ugh, morons. (Score:2)
Least Intelligible Headline Ever (Score:2)
"Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto"
(I am a man: nothing human is alien to me)
Back to reality... (Score:2)
Minor Premise: The UDRP is an ICANN-issued policy.
Conclusion: The UDRP is subject to U.S. law
Major Premise: The Network Solutions root DNS servers are in the U.S.
Minor Premise: Items within the U.S. are subject to U.S. law.
Conclusion: The current DNS root servers for
Now, if you want to build overseas root servers to replace the NSI ones, fine. Nobody's stopping you (although you might ask AlterNIC about your odds of getting people to use your servers). In the meantime, the U.S. Supreme Court has final jurisdiction over the core DNS root servers in operation today.
Jurist Shopping (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I need to register... (Score:2)
Similar to email usernames (Score:4)
I encountered a similar situation to the "sucks" domains, when trying to get a Hotmail account username. (Yes, Hotmail/MSN is evil, but this was years ago when I was a newbie). After trying a bunch of usernames and finding them all taken, I started to express my ire and frustration by trying variations of "hotmailsucks". They had taken steps to protect their trademarked name against such usage, by not allowing any username to have the word "Hotmail" in it. Pretty smart on their part I suppose, since I couldn't have my "hotmail_sucks_ass" username. (I eventually had to drop the hotmail to end up with a lovely email address that I was embarrassed to share with my relatives.
I guess my point is that email providers have been blocking their trademarks from use for years, and some even block potentially offensive words altogether. I wouldn't have even gotten "sucks" past some webmail providers. No one seems to have gotten upset over intellectual freedom in these cases, at least not enough to post a story on
What do other slashdotters think?
Jetgirl
bullshit, (Score:2)
"Just how many root DNS server's does the US Supreme Court have?"
And I suppose the US Supreme Court is going to tell root DNS servers hosted overseas how to run them? Maybe in your USian-centric wet dream.
The decision is obvious, different buyers targeted (Score:5)
A Guinness buyer is usually an impluse buyer, who buys this overpriced luxury beer to be perceived as a snob, an Irish fanatic or to piss off his friends. Really, there are many other, better, cheaper stouts out there, if you don't want to make your own. Might I suggest Youngling, or even Murphys (and when you buy Murphy's you're not supporting the IRA).
A LockheedMartin uyer is usually acting as an agent of government, with millions to spend on expensive airplanes, and they won't be swayed by a false web page, unlike the drunken sot of a Guinness buyer.
Pretty simple, when you think about it.
History... (Score:5)
This outcome isn't necessarily breaking with the tradition of WIPO. In the case of Guinness [wipo.int] it is stated that: "The Panel does not infer that "-sucks" domain names are immune from scrutiny as being confusingly similar to trademarks to which they are appended. Each case must be considered in light of the facts presented. "
In the Guinness case, the Respondent never responded, and was so unable to present facts affecting the outcome of the decision. Time and again, the panel says, "In the absence of a Response..."
In the Wal-Mart [wipo.int] case, again the Respondent never Responed. And he also was attempting to sell the domain name, which constitutes bad faith. This is not the case in the Lockheed decision.
In the Lockheed decision, the Respondent responded in a timely manner and argued in a well-thought out manner.
It's nice to see some people still listen to logic.