Cybersquatting lawsuit not enough to protect typo domain:
Despite Facebook’s cybersquatting lawsuit effort, the typo domain Facebopok.com sold for $1,999 on SnapNames.com, according to TheDomains.com.
Facebopok.com forwards to f-questionnaire.com, which is clearly a counterfeit site using the same colors, font and facebook logo in order to deceive consumers.
Just because a registrar allows you to register a domain name, or you are able to pick a domain name up on the aftermarket, doesn’t mean it isn’t domain theft.
Actually Bret, the ACPA is actually titled the Anti-cybersquatting Piracy Act. Of course, trademark infringement is a completely separate issue than a violation of the ACPA. Isn’t it interesting that congress actually used the word “piracy” when referring to the third party registration of domain names which violate trademarks. If it’s anything, it is a violation of the ACPA, trademark infringement and dilution. But the interesting thing from the consumer side, not unlike congress’ view of the world, is that third party registration of a domain name which violates a trademark is viewed as “domain theft.” Most consumers don’t know what the word cybersquatting even is. In a way, consumers are right. When you steal someone’s goodwill, or other intangible property, it feels no different than the theft of tangible property. When a parking page goes up, it is stealing traffic, stealing revenue and stealing value.
I appreciate your comments and applaud your SEO savvy by realizing that “UDRP-Attorney.com” will be returned as a top search result for any consumer looking for a “UDRP Attorney.” Keep up the good blogging.
Posted by: Enrico | 2011.09.20 at 11:41 AM
Uh, that's not "domain theft." Not even close. If it's anything, it's potentially trademark infringement. You might want to fire your SEO / blogger contractor. :p
Posted by: Bret Moore | 2011.09.19 at 06:31 PM