by Michelle A. Flores
To fully understand what cybersquatters are doing, it helps to understand what a domain name is. A domain name is basically a character string that serves as an Internet address, pointing your web browser to the "real" Internet Protocol (IP) address, a string of numbers that would be extremely difficult to use and remember (Mueller 1). For example, most Internet users know if they want to buy books on-line, all they have to remember is amazon.com. Can you imagine having to remember 208.216.182.15? Even less likely is Amazon’s advertising section successfully marketing a seemingly meaningless string of numbers. Most domain names consist of three levels, top, second, and third. For example, in www.amazon.com, com is the top-level domain that tells the purpose of the organization; amazon is the second-level domain that defines the organization; and www is the third-level domain, the server that handles the Net request. The most common top-level domains in the United States are:
| "A few minutes online and two weeks to wait for snail mail proved all it took for Quittner to own McDonald’s trademarked name as a domain name." |
|
|
Smith’s gamble may not have paid off yet, but for other cybersquatters, the payoff has been enormous. Until recently, almost anyone could register any domain name that was available, regardless of the name’s origin and if it was trademarked. In October of 1994, Joshua Quittner wrote an article for Wired Magazine called "Billions Registered: Right now, there are no rules to keep you from owning a bitchin’ corporate name as your own Internet address." Although the general thrust of the article was very amusing, an amazingly serious thing happened. In the progress of researching his article, Quittner realized there was no mcdonalds.com on the Internet. He called McDonald’s, and after getting nowhere, he decided to find out how long it would take him to register mcdonalds.com. A few minutes online and two weeks to wait for snail mail proved all it took for Quittner to own McDonald’s trademarked name as a domain name. When he received the letter, he described his reaction, "My fingers trembled, as if ripping open a Big Mac. Oh, that’s McCool. I feel like McPrometheus. I have stolen McFire" (Quittner). Eventually Quittner relinquished mcdonalds.com to the McDonald’s Corporation.
Quittner’s intuitive article made light of a serious situation which escalated as more and more domain names were snatched up. Even recently, individuals have tried to gain financially from the sale of a sought after domain name. In October of 1999, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Company were ready to launch their new on-line stock trading service, only to find out the domain name they wanted, www.msdwonline.com, had already been purchased. A 17-year-old from Los altos, California, Ivan Wong, created the site and said he named it after a shop that sold him his mountain bikes, Mud Sweat’s Downhill World. According to an article on The New York Times web site, the chain of events were as follows:
![]() |
It is no wonder cybersquatters have profited. Even generic domain names are being bought and sold at phenomenal prices. A visit to www.greatdomains.com, the web site of one of the leading domain name brokers, details which domain names are for sale and which have brought in the biggest money. Table 1 represents a small section of GreatDomain.com's inventory as it was posted on 3/31/00. If you have an extra couple of million lying around, you too can bid for income.com. Prices range from a modest $14,500 all the way to $7.5 million, the recent sale price of business.com (Chen 184).
Selling domain names is not the only way cybersquatters have profited from the domain name boom. Variations of popular trademarks or names are often registered to intentionally lead an Internet browser to another site. In April of 1999, a federal court forced a pornographic web site to relinquish wwwpainewebber.com (missing a period to distinguish it from the investment company’s site) (Cohen 58). In addition, hundreds of top celebrities have had their names hijacked by cybersquatters. Try typing in www.tomcruise.com. You will not see the official web site of Tom Cruise, but rather Celebrity 1000, a commercial site.
One of the first goals ICANN accomplished was to provide open competition in the market for domain name registrations. Internet users can now go to numerous web sites that have authorization to register domain names. The goal in providing open competition was to "drive down registration costs and improve consumer choice for businesses and individuals" (ICANN Background). In addition, in August of 1999, ICANN established procedures for settling domain name disputes. The first case to be decided dealt with the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) challenging Michael Bosman of Redlands, California, a self-proclaimed cybersquatter, who approached the WWF in October of 1999 with a proposal to sell the rights to worldwrestlingfederation.com for $1,000. The case was ruled in the favor of the WWF and ordered Bosman to return the rights to the domain (Parkes 20).In the past, many of the essential technical coordination functions of the Internet were handled on an ad hoc basis by the U.S. government, its contractors and volunteers. This informal structure represented the spirit and culture of the research community in which the Internet developed. However, the growing international importance of the Internet has necessitated the creation of a technical management and policy development body that is both more formalized in structure, more acco untable, and more fully reflective of the diversity of the world’s Internet communities. Specifically, ICANN is assuming responsibility to coordinate the stable operation of the Internet in four key areas: the Domain Name System (DNS); the allocation of IP address space; the management of the root server system; and the coordination of protocol number assignment. (ICANN Fact Sheet)
While ICANN was busy working out all the growing pains of a new organization, the U.S. Congress passed the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in November of 1999. The act gives corporations and individuals another method to protect themselves from domain name cybersquatters, and remedies for getting a domain name back if it does fall prey to a cybersquatter. The act was passed "despite opposition from the Clinton administration, which felt the bill undermined ICANN’s authority" (Parkes 20). Complainants have the right to sue cybersquatters for damages up to $100,000, going beyond ICANN’s own procedure for resolving disputes. The act protects owners of a trademark, as defined under the Trademark Act of 1946. It defines cybersquatting as:
In an article for the Washington Business Journal, Eidson and Bonello, attorneys for the Technology Business Law Practice Group in Washington D.C., outlined nine factors a court would consider in determining if bad faith exists based on the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act:The registration, trafficking in, or use of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark of another that is distinctive at the time of the registration of the domain name, or dilutive of a famous trademark or service mark of another that is famous at the time of the registration of the domain name, without regard to the goods or services of the parties, with the bad-faith intent to profit from the goodwill of another’s mark.
(United States Congress)
1. The intellectual property rights of the
registrant in the domain name;
2. The extent to which the domain name
is the same as the registrant's own name or nickname by which the registrant
is commonly recognized;
3. The registrant's prior use of the domain
name in connection with the offering of goods and services;
4. The registrant's noncommercial or fair
use of the mark in a Web site at issue accessible under the domain name;
5. The registrant's intent to divert customers
away from the trademark owner's Web site to a Web site that could harm
the goodwill of the mark;
6. The registrant's intent to sell the
mark without intent to utilize the mark for any other bonafide purpose;
7. The registrant's provision of material
and misleading false contact information when applying for the domain name;
8. The registrant's acquisition of multiple
domain names which the registrant knows are identical or confusingly similar
to, or dilutive of, others' marks; and
9. The extent to which the mark in the
domain name is distinctive.
With this new legislation, more and more cases of cybersquatting are making it to the courts. However, the results are not always in favor of the large corporation. Avery Dennis Corporation, well known for their office products since the late 1800’s, has web sites at avery.com and averydennison.com. They sued small business owner Jerry Sumpton who registered the domain names avery.net and dennison.net. Sumpton’s business is registering surnames and then selling e-mail addresses with those domain names. Initially, a district court ruled in favor of Avery Dennison and said Sumpton had to transfer the registrations to the corporation. In October of 1999, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the ruling, saying that "Sumpton did not dilute the well-known trademarks Avery and Dennison" (Kaplan).
Bibliography
Abernathy, Donna J. "Geek Smarts." Training & Development. Feb. 2000: 20.
Act." Washington Business Journal 26 Nov. 1999: 12.
Chen, Christine. "A Good Name is Priceless—Some of the Time." Fortune Magazine Feb. 7 2000: 184.
Cohen, Adam. "When Your Name Isn’t Yours." Time 8 Nov. 1999: 58.
Eidson, Walter J., and Bonello, John A. "A Guide to the Anti-cybersquatting Protection
Frieswick, Kris. "In Pursuit of Cybersquatters." CFO Magazine Nov. 1999: 16.
GreatDomains.com Showcase Page. GreatDomains.com. 31 March 2000 <http://www.greatdomains.com/showcase.asp>.
ICANN Fact Sheet. Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. 25 March 2000 <http://www.icann.org/general/fact-sheet.htm>.
ICANN Background. Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. 16 July 1999 <http://www.icann.org/general/background.htm>.
Kaplan, Carl S. "Judges Pick David Over Goliath in Domain Name Suits" The New York Times on the Web. 17 Sept. 1999
<http://www.thenewyorktimes.com/>.
National Telecommunications and Information Administration. "Management of Internet Names and Addresses" U.S. Department of Commerce.
June 1998 <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/6_5_98dns.htm>.
Parkes, Sarah. "ICANN Wrestles with Dissenters." tele.com 6 March 2000: 20.
United States. Cong. House. Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. U.S. 106th Cong., 1st sess. 1999.
What’s in an Address? Maybe a Lawsuit. The New York Times on the Web. 22 October 1999 <http://www.thenewyorktimes.com/>.
"What’s in a Name? Megabucks for Cybersquatters." Editorial. San Francisco Business Times 24 Sept. 1999: 74.
Woellert, Lorraine, and McNatt, Robert. "Your Name, My Web Site." Business Week 18 Oct. 1999: 6.
Woolley, Scott. "Master of Your Domain." Forbes July 26 1999: 244.