Subscribe
Domainers are not Cybersquatters
April 11th, 2007 by 
Jay Westerdal
There are several types of professional domain investors and not all are created equal. Cybersquatters is a term for domain owners that knowingly find a victim and then register the victim’s name or variations of their name. In the 90’s, Cybersquatters were commonly registering the actual names of corporations. Back in the hay-day, “Laws didn’t apply to the Internet”, or that is what one squatter told me. We have all grown up since then and many court cases have established the rights of trademark holders on the Internet.
Fast forward to today and we find that cybersquatters can’t register a victims name anymore because generally that name was resolved a few years ago. But there are hundreds of misspellings on brands and those corporations have failed to protect these domains. These misspellings get traffic and generate real revenue, making them easy targets, so it is important that Domainers not fall for the dark-side of Domaining. Once a Domainer crosses over to being a Cybersquatter, they honestly can’t be called a Domainer anymore. I have met a few born-again Domainers, they gave up squatting once they found success on generic targeted traffic. Once they crossed back over and dumped their TMs, they felt a lot better. Why worry that the next nock on your door will be a process server giving you notice that you are being sued for a few million. Even if you sniff a TM name for 3 days and hide your identity behind a proxy, you can be found guilty. John Does can be served just like everyone else, and once served they have the power to reveal who is behind that proxy.
Cybersquatters have tried to rebranded themselves as ‘domainers’, but they certainly aren’t. Domainer is a term that is reserved for Domain Professionals that make their living off of quality traffic and good domains.
Can a Domainer own a misspelling? Sure! Misspellings of generic things are fine. New Yorrk.com is a good example of a typo on a place. Places can’t be copyrighted. Miicrosoft.com is an example of a trademark violation which is confusingly similar to the trademark of Microsoft. The term “hacker” got distorted and I don’t want to see that same thing happen to “domainers”. The term “hacker” was originally intended as a description of a skilled computer programmer, but was later redefined to as person with computer skills that were used for bad purposes.
As the futuristic novel 1984 by George Orwell taught us, if you re-define words on your opponent you can defeat them. Be vigilant against people that try and distort “Domainers” as an evil term.
« Newer Post Older Post »
Posted in Domain Parking, Domain Tasting |
April 11th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Jay I really like this post.. I’m gonna blog about it
You’ve inspired me bro.
April 12th, 2007 at 12:53 am
“Domainers”?? I’m sorry, but let’s call a spade a spade.
If you’re in the business of registering a domain name (trademarked or not) in the hopes that, one day, someone will offer you big money for it, you’re a squatter. Plain and simple. Registering a typo domain isn’t “domaining” either, it’s “Typo-squatting”, which is almost as deplorable as “Necro-squatting” an abandoned domain or sniping one that someone forgot to renew in time, which has happened to far too many friends of mine.
If you don’t have a bona-fide need for a specific domain name (E.G. You’re going to actually use it as opposed to park it), you shouldn’t be touching it. I scoff against people who attempt to paint an image of legitimacy to this deplorable practice, and I must to draw into question just whose trying to pull an Orwellian word redefinition here.
April 12th, 2007 at 2:18 am
I think it is clear that domain names can be compared to virtual real-estate. Squatter is a term generally associated with a person who lives in an abandoned building, home or piece of land for free and without the owner’s permission.
The copyright issue is clear, it’s as if though the registrant was committing fraud and as you say this issue has been resolved a long time ago. I agree with you, typos cannot be considered squatting and certainly registering a domain name after it’s original owner “forgot” to renew it cannot be considered squatting; registrants pay rent. The registrar is like a landlord if you don’t pay rent, then you’re like a squatter … and the lease is passed to a new tenant.
Investing in non trademarked domain names is OK in my book, condoning it would be like condoning realtors or Donald Trump or just anyone who owned more than one place of residence.
April 12th, 2007 at 2:27 am
Uh, wait a minute.
“If you don’t have a bona-fide need for a specific domain name (E.G. You’re going to actually use it as opposed to park it), you shouldn’t be touching it.”
You obviously missed a grade or two. By parking it and making money off a website, that is actually using it. You might need access to a dictionary to understand this. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/use See Definition 1.
And for those sites that get sold at auction (not the norm), then there are domainers who make money selling “virtual estate” as in words that have value. This is bona-fide use certainly. You might even consider Definition 2.
Now, in the interim between purchasing a domain — even on a whim just to have a name with “Coke” in it or something — this is called bona fide speculation, just like real estate speculation. What’s the use there? Try Definition 17.
1. Domain names have value
2. They are bought, sold, rented, leased, auctioned, borrowed, marketed, traded, and subject to large corporations collecting them, fighting over them, and suing over them. Certain ones will never be sold (e.g. ibm.com), others will never be bought (buh3gz7ekq9sqp2.org). They are worth whatever the market will hold. The government controls some, and the courts dictate who gets some.
3. They are virtually similar to real estate in many ways.
4. If a person forgets to pay their rent, and they cannot be contacted, then the business model says they should be out on their ear. So do the courts. Filling vacancies in a crowded market is pretty easy. Don’t forget to pay your rent. Good thing there is about a 70 day grace period for many domains!
5. It is not “sniping” to rent a nice place where someone just got canned.
6. In retrospect, domains are hardly ever “bought” because they are only registered for finite time periods. No one actually owns the domain in perpetuity except maybe a government or international agency or organization. The WHOIS data calls the “owner” a “registrant.” This makes it like a service (such as a utility or a ticket to an event) which can be denied for non-payment or for violating certain rules.
April 12th, 2007 at 5:43 am
“…You can’t drive by a vacant piece of land, an unused car in a parking lot, an empty house, vacant office space or unused machinery anywhere in the world that is not OWNED by somebody. That’s capitalism. And next time you bite into your Big Mac you should thank God we have capitalism.. lest you wake up from your dream in North Korea chewing on a raw rutabaga.” - Frank Schilling (Feb. 22 2007)
April 12th, 2007 at 6:45 am
I suppose your establishing a domain owner’s code of ethics would receive a reception similar to that which the call for a blogger’s code of ethics did.
It might however reframe the argument for both squatters and domainers.
April 12th, 2007 at 8:08 am
I’ve been in the professional auto racing biz for 30 years and have registered several domain names with the intent of starting online magazines, etc. Since I’m moving on, I would like to sell them however the comments above leave me concerned about copyright issues. I should add that none of the domains currently have copyright protection. One example is http://www.nascarlife.com.
April 12th, 2007 at 10:31 am
1st sorry for my spelling
Well seeing this blog at this time is a bit weird am pretty new to building and running web sites just over 6 months i run a few one is well on the way its an online community but i got in to web sites to make money lol i have spent plenty not made any yet but i have had fun and i have learnt a lot.
The one thing i have learnt above all is that traffic is the be all and end all with out it it dosent mater if you got the best site in the world and the hard part i have found is getting traffic so when i heard some news on early this week about a comp a .com comp was about to get really really really big very soon i did a search and was happy to find the .org and .biz names free so i got them in my eyes i had seen a chance and took it feeling very happey with my self i wanted to tell ppl what i had done and to my supprise i got a lot of the sort of thing being sed in this blog sed to me in the dp forums i am to young to know any fin about the 90s problem and just seen and still do see it as making full use of a good chance.
One man meat is anuther mans poison thats the way of the world thats how the big comps got big seeing a chance or a gap and taking it y the hell should i or any one else not make money from some good luck or bad judge ment thats how the world works life is ant fair my view is i had the in site to buy it taking a chance a risk and y the hell should i not or any one else profit from it
daz1034
April 12th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
“If you don’t have a bona-fide need for a specific domain name (snip) you shouldn’t be touching it.” XStylus
How about me determining my ‘bona-fide need’ for a domain is to simply stick my finger in your eye? Would that suffice?
Who are you to decide and determine what my need is for a domain?
“which has happened to far too many friends of mine.”
Well, then. Maybe you or your friends ought to be better attention and stop blaming a legitimate business person and practice for your failures.
April 12th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
Unfortunately this blog’s definition of “cybersquatting” is one that no one is compelled to follow, especially if it isn’t exactly that clear.
“Domainer is a term that is reserved for Domain Professionals that make their living off of quality traffic and good domains.” Says who?
I guess I’ve got scotoma.
April 12th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Now you can say you were squatted too. By me.
Most domainers have typos. Most have TM names in their portfolio. What’s your point?
April 13th, 2007 at 1:17 am
Except for a handful few most of the domainers were either squatters or still are squatters.
Just because they have moved to a new side they can’t frown upon others.
The domaining world is filled with hypocrisy …. where a famous parking company calls squatters as a seedy underbelly but provides a platform to monetize and sell such domains.
Except a handful few, all the big domainers incl. iREIT, Buy Domains, Marchex, Dotster …. all of them hold TM domains. They even try to sell such domains and have sold such domains in the past to others. Why didn’t they just delete the domains when they found out that these domains were TM violations?
Why all this noise about cybersquatting now?
April 13th, 2007 at 7:12 am
Hi all…
Many factors if we want to take a domain name. It could be for profit orientation, social only, or others.
So, if you want to say someone is a Cybersquatters, you must ask to the domain owner. Of course, the domain owner can answer all your question.
I will make more clear here that if you want to say someone is a Cybersquatters or not, you must ask to he/she as the owner. Then you can publish it to public. Because, this case, is officially binding to good name of a person.
Good luck and success for you all.
Ahmad Rusli
Indonesia
EDITED by Admin: Please no sales pitches