homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Gold Sponsor 2015!
Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Domain Names
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: buckworks & webwork

Domain Names Forum

Co-Cybersquatting: Domain Registrar Operates a Domain Parking Company
Registrar Not Above.com Cybersquatting Law if Company Has Guilty Knowledge?

WebmasterWorld Administrator webwork us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

Msg#: 4340894 posted 5:19 pm on Jul 18, 2011 (gmt 0)

Interesting update at [domainnamewire.com ] about a lawsuit brought by Verizon against domain registrar Above.com, a registrar that also operates a domain parking/monetization company.

Judge refuses to dismiss a big money (penalties/fees) anti-cybersquatting law damages claim against Above.com.

This case addresses a legal liability question I've been raising for years: Just how many instances of profiting from the "bad behavior of others" does/will it take before the joint-profiter is held accountable for the full range of remedies?

When, in the effort to squeeze out profits, a domain registrar enters into the domain-monetization-by-parking business, does that impose a new/additional duty on the registar to police its domain registrations?

How many trademark typos can be monetized - for how many years - before any parking company is held accountable as a joint venturer, co-conspirator, corrupt partner, co-trafficker, etc.?

Is "we're too big to be accountable" - because they are simply too many domains, websites, publishers, etc. to scrutinize - a legitimate defense to a version of theft?



WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

Msg#: 4340894 posted 6:53 pm on Jul 18, 2011 (gmt 0)

Looks like they've got the sent of blood in their nostrils and are going for the kill. Could this go up a level and could pressure be brought to bear at the ICANN level on the accreditation of some of these PPC registrars? It would be an interesting imposition of liability on the registrars. The obvious targets are the PPC operators who have enabled this kind of activity.



WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

Msg#: 4340894 posted 11:32 pm on Jul 18, 2011 (gmt 0)

Have Registrar's been skimming off the top to long?

I let a domain name expired because I wanted to distance myself from the words within the domain name.

Sometime after the domain was released, I received a check [chump change] from the registration company after they resold it.

I did not request to have the domain put up for auction.

Does ICANN give registration companies the right to hold and resell valuable expired domains without freely releasing them to general public first?


WebmasterWorld Senior Member sgt_kickaxe us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member

Msg#: 4340894 posted 11:55 pm on Jul 18, 2011 (gmt 0)

If the registrar is willing to run an auction service they can dump domain names into it and park the pages until sold. The line between squatting and a legitimate reason for parking is mighty thin.

The problem could be solves by not allowing a registrar to hold a domain name for longer than 31 days from end of payment by customer. Long enough to sell but not much of a squat. The registrar would need to be barred from registering the domain again for 30 days afterwards to prevent a dump-n-scoop scenario.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Domain Names
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved