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?