| 2:17 pm on Apr 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The such people are business men. Basically the only way to avoid it is to buy the domain before they do otherwise they can charge what they think you will pay.
Just like when the .eu domain came out... you will find that certain people/businesses will buy thousands of 'popular' domains they will never use but can sell on at a profit.
Sad but true
| 2:22 pm on Apr 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
hope some rules are framed by internic at some point of time sooner..
| 3:52 pm on Apr 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|hope some rules are framed by internic at some point of time sooner.. |
Actually, there already are certain rules. For instance, if a cyber squatter registers a domain name that is your registered trademark, you have 99.9% chance of having it transfered to you. It's called Domain Name Dispute Resolution.
| 3:53 pm on Apr 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Domain reselling is a big business.
Domains worth millions are sold and will be sold everyday.
The domain industry promotes it as Real Estate on the net.
These people are just smarter, they got their first.
As for rules, on registering a domain which is not a TM , I dont see that happening for a .com
What restrictions can you put for generic words, industry names etc etc ..its more of a first come first serve thing...
| 3:59 pm on Apr 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I used to work for a guy about 10 years ago, he would have about 3 of us go through long lists of domains and try to register them for him. It was the most boring job ever. However I did get some fame because he ended up getting sued by a ton of celebraties for cyber squatting. He would just use all these domains to redirect to a couple of poopy sites he ran.
It goes on and on as you can imagine as we probably registered about 100 domains a day for about 3 months.
[edited by: Webwork at 4:26 pm (utc) on April 28, 2006]
[edit reason] Charter [webmasterworld.com] [/edit]
| 6:21 pm on Apr 28, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|When I contacted him he priced it at 4000$ |
Make him a counter offer.
If it's a 5 letter common word with a .com TLD it's unlikely he bought it for registration fees unless he's had it for several years.
| 3:42 am on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thanks John for the information
MamaDawg are we not promoting such unethical business practices by offering them such a cost.
But I need that domain so much.
How much will it cost to register a trademark. I am from India. I am ready to go for it even if it is twice or thrice costlier than what I have to pay for that guy.
| 4:43 am on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Unethical? But you want to create a trademark in the attempt to steal someones domain name.
Your late to the party and all the hot chicks are taken and its someone elses fualt?
| 6:12 am on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Is it ethical to register a domain with no real purpose for using it.
It is not steeling. I just want to stop the person who just want to cash upon others popularity with no real hard work. I would never have bothered him if he is using the domain.
Their primary intention is to cash upon others popularity. That is where trademark comes in..
| 9:46 am on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Hey testy, come on. Many of us buy real estate on earth. But we never use it. Just its form of investment with solid returns. Same with Domains Industry. By the time you know about Domains, many people already ahead of you and registered them.
Better buy from him or register some keyword-keyword-keyword.com domain.
| 10:23 am on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
And how can you tell that he do not use it for other than http. in ex. email, ftp or other use?
Or have a plan for it, he just not have had time for yet?
| 10:42 am on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Cyber squatting is undoubtedly unethical. That's why cyber squatters have very low chances of winning Domain Name Disputes.
| 3:55 pm on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If someone's registered a domain to profit from someone else's established business or steal customers, yes they will most likely lose if the business/TM owner takes legal action.
However, there is also something called reverse cybersquatting, when a company tries to strongarm a domain away from someone who purchased it legitimately at an earlier point in time - and it looks really bad to have that ruled against your business. For example, I own a domain which is my first name - I keep meaning to do something with it but haven't gotten around to it. Does that mean some business, that may choose the same name for their business can come after me and demand that I hand over the name? I don't think so! I'm not acting in bad faith and I had it first.
As someone else pointed out, like it or not domain trading is like real estate, and unless it infringes on a trademark or you're acting in bad faith, buying a domain and not using it is like owning an acre of swampland somewhere - you hope that someday either you can sell it for more than you paid for it, rent it (paid parking) - or retire there (develop it) ...
| 4:26 pm on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Also known as "reverse domain name hijacking", which is my book is worse than cybersquatting, as the cybersquatting action is typically initiated by a layperson whilst reverse hijacking is typically initiated by, or with the assistance, of a legal professional. Abuse of process, tortious interference, slander to title, false light, extortion . . . every possible cause of action that could result in an award of punitive damages ought to be thrown at the person/company that initiates such abusive proceedings as such actions are nothing less than using process to bully and strongarm in my book, pure legal thuggery. The nuclear option is not only on the table it's the only appropriate response to such despicable tactics.
| 4:32 pm on Apr 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If the domain is taken just move on...come up with a new domain name...even the stupidest domain name can be a massive success if the site is good...having the flashy running shoes won't mean you will automatically win the race...there are millions of great domain names available...the domain name is not as important as the concept of the website...in my opinion...I don't think any domain name is so important that one of my website concepts would fail if I didn't have a particular domain name...you can come up with something better
| 6:54 am on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for sharing all your views
I have chewed a lot of them.
Even though I wish to answer each post, currently I am stuck with a very important issue.
My only wish is that domain names should not be treated as real estate / mutual fund kind of business.
If it is so, why should all the names be sold at just around 10$ by accredited registrars. why can't they set all 4 letter domains as 100$, all 3 letter domain as 1000$ etc..
There should atleast be a limit set by internic where in a single domain should not cross a maximum price range..
Even though it seems impractical as of now It can be done ( after all it is just a wish! )
| 9:53 am on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Way too simplistic model - qzj.biz $1000 and home.com $100
| 11:35 am on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|My only wish is that domain names should not be treated as real estate / mutual fund kind of business. |
All because you can't assert any degree of "greater rights" to the domain name? You wish.
Can you possibly provide a logical, reasonable and fair explanation as to why you're entitled to it more than the registered owner is? Before you post your answer, I suggest you "research" a little more and give it a long deep thought because this issue's been discussed a gazillion times, especially by those who came too late into the game.
|If it is so, why should all the names be sold at just around 10$ by accredited registrars. why can't they set all 4 letter domains as 100$, all 3 letter domain as 1000$ etc.. |
If you looked at the history of domain name registration, there was only one registrar that time who allowed people to register domain names. And it's only with that registrar where some parties were able to grab 2, 3, and a couple of 4-character domain names.
Heck, there were a few that were registered even long before domain name registration was opened to the public. But come to think of it, it's too bad they didn't do what you just suggested. :D
|There should atleast be a limit set by internic where in a single domain should not cross a maximum price range.. |
Even though it seems impractical as of now It can be done ( after all it is just a wish! )
If you yourself can come up with credible, logical, and reasonable "metrics" that's beneficial to all parties concerned, then I'll support you. Otherwise, as you say it's only a wish.
I'll probably be philosophical for saying this, but there have been numerous opportunities I lost simply because I came too late. But I've yet to lose sleep over them since new ones crop up, and I just gotta prepare as much as I can.
| 12:15 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)|
In our country, around the independence time, the guy who pays the tax for the land owns it. They need not own them. If they pay tax for it, then the land is theirs. Many people thought what shall we do with this lands and ignored this. Some intelligent people paid the tax and owned acres of land and are now millionaires.
The same thing is with domains. Once upon a time, domains are absolutely free and its alloted to the person who first came and asked for it. Later they introduced the registration fee. Obviously some intelligent beings registered them either during the free time or by paying a small fee and they are millionaires now.
Testy, you must be ahead of your time. Then only you can achieve something. By the time you are in the domains market and realised the value of it, lot of people are way ahead of you and know the value of domains much earlier.
I am against registering domains with Company Names and Trademarked words. I dont find anything wrong by registering keyword.com domains either for development in the future or selling for big bucks. I even buy some domains keeping in my child in mind so that he can have some valuable cyberspace to do something. Its like people buying lands for their future child business.
Try to be ahead of present times and think big. One Day will be yours. Good Luck.
| 5:18 am on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I dont want to hear suggestion from people making domain a real estate kind of business. You can post your views but dont try to suggest me, I can have my own point of views.
I would be happy to take suggestion from people like cerebrum and those who would have faced a similar kind of situation.
| 5:28 am on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
It's like buying an empty lot of land.
Maybe you'll develop it in the future or maybe you'll wait for the right buyer to come along.
It's called capitalism.
| 6:20 am on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well testy, I am afraid what you describe as people's: "suggestions" are actually real facts. The domain name business is approached and dealt with in very much the same way as that of the real estate business. Who ever comes first and pays up has first right. To start changing those rules and take away domains from domain owners without appropiate compensation sounds a lot like the ideas of Mr. Stalin and co.
| 6:42 am on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Sonny, what you and most others are supporting is about purchasing a domain or few domains for the sake of own use. It might or might not be used.
I am not against it.
The problem is in purchasing 100's & 1000's of selected domains so that the person who realy needs it can not have it at the price of the registrar. He has to put 1000 times more than the registrars price.
Why do think domian registrars sell both home.com and xdfcxcddfsdf.com and same price. What is the need for a broker in between.
If there are 1000 people who need home.com, let them compete and let the one who wins use it. Lets us not entertain even a single broker in that 1000...
If home.com has such a greater value, it should be set by the registrar or internic, not by the broker.
| 8:10 am on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
In near future, ICANN (under pressure from large companies) is planning to auction the following domains and anyone can bid for it.
I read about it long time back and I dont know whether it going to happen or not. Yahoo already trademarked Y.com. But I think this poor Trademark Team at Yahoo dont know that the alphabet "Y" cant be trademarked. Anyway they have the money and will buy it at any cost. As usual Google will buy "G.com".
| 12:53 pm on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Sonny, what you and most others are supporting is about purchasing a domain or few domains for the sake of own use. It might or might not be used. |
I am not against it.
The problem is in purchasing 100's & 1000's of selected domains so that the person who realy needs it can not have it at the price of the registrar.
People who buy in that volume usually ARE putting the domain to use. Advertisers pay money to show their ads on domain parking programs - they acquire targeted customers through direct navigation, and the domain owners get a cut of those advertising dollars. Much as we all love to hate parked pages full of ads, they're part of the economy...
Few people buy domains just to keep others from having them - if they don't turn a profit they will drop when the registration expires.
| 2:16 pm on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
You clearly don't like the domain = real estate analogy. That's fine, I don't either.
I prefer thinking of domain names as bits of art.
Some are like the crayola scratches a child makes. When it becomes yours, it goes on your fridge for a select few to see, but deep down, there's more love than crayola on parchment and it would never be traded for mere money.
Some are like doodles drawn by a warm fire. You create them, you tuck them away and maybe you'll take things a step further some day, maybe not. Some will undoubtedly be discarded, others will become the framework for a nice bit of art.
All are unique works of art. Many can be had for a song because no one really knows the artist yet, but in time, the domain may become more valuable. Some become the inspiration for other forms of art.
Still others are already classic materpieces. Their beauty, and the intrinsic value that accompanies beauty, can far exceed the aquisition price and even border on priceless.
So, one can obtain an endless number of knockoffs of the Mona Lisa. Some will be cheap. Some will be danged near as pleasing to the eye, even admired by many, as the original. At the end of the day each is still a knockoff.
The entity which holds rights and title to the one true Mona Lisa has a large say in deciding what price, if indeed any price, would be sufficient to forego the right and title to make use of the Mona Lisa in accord with individual preference.
As you've already determined your particular work of unique art is not interesting enough for the acquisition price, you now need to decide is it worth bargaining for, or can you be happier with an inexpensive knock-off, one which you can turn into something others will also admire.
After all, Mona has an interesting smile, but there is more than one way to cause and enjoy a smile.
Luck to you as you move forward.
| 4:53 pm on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The real-estate analogy is a good one so I am going to take this analogy and apply the domain parker attitude to it.
So you buy 100 domains and your intention is to advertise other sites. Great that is your right and you should be able to do this. Now think of this in real estate terms, this would mean you buy a bunch of property and then put up bill board ads all over them.
Now think of the appraisers, how long will they allow the community to become dirt lots with billboards on them before they start dropping property values.
Now think of the appraisers in the domian world, I would say that the major SE are the appraisers as they can rank and place penalties on a domain.
So what happens to the value of these domains as these ads are parked on them? It is my contention that by parking ads on domains they are damaging the value and therefor it should be worth less and not more.
I think that if you want to buy domains and have their value increase then you should do like a good property owner and develop it.
The thought of paying $4000 for a domain that is an ad site seems to me insane. The property value as it were has been completely driven down by the actions of the previous owner and it will take a lot of renovation work to fix it up. Plus it will take even more work to change the perception of people who have seen it as an advertising plot rather then a nicely developed one.
So if you want this to stop then don't buy these types of domains. Your URL doesn't have to be the most simple iteration of the niche your site is on. It can be totally unrelated to the subject of your website and still do amazingly well as long as the content is relevent, well orginized and gives the uers what they want.
I can think of many sites where the domain is totally unrelated to the subject and yet they are the most visted site on that subject.
BTW I hate domain parking, it really does ruin the neighborhood.
There is one I have my eye on, made them an offer only to get a reply that they are asking over 3 million. I emailed back to ask if they were joking as the site has only ever had 2 lines of text on it, and that text asks you to email offers. They told me they turned down a 5 figure offer. I call BS on that one but still that is what they want.
| 8:02 pm on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I prefer thinking of domain names as bits of art. |
There's at least one darn rich insomniac who thinks that way too when he collects domain names. :)
| 8:23 pm on May 1, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|So what happens to the value of these domains as these ads are parked on them? It is my contention that by parking ads on domains they are damaging the value and therefor it should be worth less and not more. |
Personally, I think it is the worse thing you could do if you were purchasing from a "real estate" perspective. I agree with you 100% on the above issues.
There's also all sorts of other stuff happening at the domain parking level. Some of it not even known to those parking the domains.
To the original poster, there really isn't a whole lot you can do in this instance. If it is a generic term or phrase, the chances of litigation are slim to none. Although you might be able to find a lawyer in the States to accept the case for a mere $50k USD up front with no guarantees. Hmmm, that's about $46k more than what the initial offer is. ;)
|It's was so frustrating, these fools (genius?) just register the site for 3-10$ and ask us such a huge price. |
Actually many of those fools are laughing to the bank. Domain names have made people millionaires. It's a business model just like anything else online.
If you really have to have it, negotiation is now in order. ;)
| This 78 message thread spans 3 pages: 78 (  2 3 ) > > |