Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
The Courts The Internet Wins 1,017 Domains By UDRP 184

typosquatting writes to mention that the largest domain dispute case since the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) was enacted ten years ago has been decided. The decision saw 1,017 cyber-squatting domains turned over to, owner of The full decision can be read via the National Arbitration Forum website. "It would seem that this decision sets or reinforces a fairly strong precedent that trademark holders may be entitled to, not only to the domain name that exactly matches their trademark, but also to a wide swath of other domain names including nearly every possible misspelling or other variation of that trademark, potentially even if the trademark is comprised of generic words."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted. Wins 1,017 Domains By UDRP

Comments Filter:
  • by moz25 ( 262020 ) on Friday November 13, 2009 @07:18PM (#30093104) Homepage

    I do not really agree that domains that only bear similarity to a mark should be transferred, but in this case, they are part of a large collection of domains that appear to be very obviously registered in bad faith, with the sole intention of typosquatting.

    I wonder if the registrant paid for those domains... this should have set him back at least $5k.

  • by Skapare ( 16644 ) on Friday November 13, 2009 @07:22PM (#30093140) Homepage

    ... means squat.

  • Re:Reasons FTA.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Friday November 13, 2009 @07:42PM (#30093318) Homepage Journal

    One could argue that Bank of America opens themselves up to typosquatters by using instead of their old and easier typed domain,
    I notice that Barnes & Noble too wants users to type instead of

    No, it doesn't make the typosquatters any more right, but I think one is justified in also blaming

  • by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportland&yahoo,com> on Friday November 13, 2009 @07:50PM (#30093372) Homepage Journal

    How is talking trash fooling people into thinking your that site?

    If you are intentioal lisleading people on the page, then you ahe an issue, but even then I would argue they oly recourse to to force you to no longer ahve that page. Giving the domain to the company that claims to be harmed is just cheesy and reeks.

  • by drDugan ( 219551 ) * on Friday November 13, 2009 @07:51PM (#30093376) Homepage

    But its even deeper than this. Freecreditreport leeches off an even bigger scam. The whole premise that people allow, expect and pay these three companies to collect and sell their own information back to others is a intrinsically a scam.

    The "big three" do not see or treat consumers as their customers - which explains why they are so difficult to deal with: their customers are other companies that buy information about the "worthiness" of potential customers, like you.

    The absurd and unfair treatment that people received from these private companies was so bad that the laws were changed to require them to provide some information back to the unwilling subjects of their profits.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 13, 2009 @08:33PM (#30093730)

    Unless you're called "freecreditreport" I don't see how this affects you.

    IANAL but if your name is JohnSmith and you register, and end up being sued by John Smith's Brewery [], you'd have a fair crack at defending your page.

    Tell that to Mike Rowe []

  • by drsmithy ( 35869 ) <drsmithy@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Friday November 13, 2009 @08:53PM (#30093844)

    Don't ask me why this is the case...

    Because - as I have recently found after starting a job here - the American banking system is utterly insane.

    I can't believe you people still use cheques, for fuck's sake. And that even with a 6 figure income you're looking at 6-12 months of "credit building" before you can qualify for a cheap car loan without being raped on interest rates.

  • by benjamindees ( 441808 ) on Friday November 13, 2009 @09:32PM (#30094144) Homepage

    The "big three" do not see or treat consumers as their customers

    This is exactly correct. Not only are individuals not their customers, lenders actively profit when credit reports are worse than they should be, and these profits support the reporting agencies directly.

    It is the exact same scam as the ratings agencies passing off sub-prime mortgages as AAA. And it is completely due to the fact that the entire industry is supported by taxpayer money; financial institutions that fail to assess risk correctly are prevented from failing.

  • by jimmydevice ( 699057 ) on Friday November 13, 2009 @10:51PM (#30094560)

    I tried to log into my sourceforge account yesterday via SSH and mistyped the url, transposing 2 letters.
    I got a login prompt and dutifully typed in my username and password, without success.
    Only after staring at my commands for a minute did I see the error.
    I immediately changed my password.
    More squatting scums!

  • by lgw ( 121541 ) on Monday November 16, 2009 @01:32AM (#30112254) Journal

    In many places, a chip-and-PIN credit card gives up the "stolen card" protection I'm used to, on the blatent falsehood that someone couldn't use your stolen card unless you told them the PIN.

    And there's always a rationalization for living beyond your means, but very few legitimate reasons to get a car loan. The only exception I can see is if you're a taxi driver buying your cab (or owner/operator of a comercial truck or etc) where it's really a small-business loan. Don't have much cash? Drive a crapwagon and save up until you do. Better return elsewhere? Exceedingly unlikely (given you usually have a choice between a below-market interest rate and a significant up-front discount on the car), though I guess there are cases like the now-defunct Saturn, where they negotiated on financing instead of price. But most people can't understand risk-adjusted rate of return, so they borrow money to invest.

Each honest calling, each walk of life, has its own elite, its own aristocracy based on excellence of performance. -- James Bryant Conant