5 ms·

My memory is hazy now but I recall in the mid-90s Gap (the clothing company) suing Genesis Access Point (an ISP) over gap.com and winning. First come first serv

by gaius 9y ago

My memory is hazy now but I recall in the mid-90s Gap (the clothing company) suing Genesis Access Point (an ISP) over gap.com and winning. First come first served is the only fair way to run domain names.

lkrubner 9y ago
That relied on USA trademark law. Applied to the case mentioned in the above article, the government of France can seize France.com. The principle behind trademark disputes is, would a similar name cause confusion in the market place? The French government can make the case that it would be confusing if a private citizen was allowed to possess France.com. As a principle, "First come first served" has never won a case against trademark law. Or rather, the "first come first served" applies to whoever filed for the trademark, not the domain name. Put another way, trademark beats domain name.
mercurial 9y ago
Also known as "enabling domain name squatters".
- themaninthedark 9y ago
  Perhaps so. But how would you have the issue resolved? Should the domain go to the most well known party? The product a reasonable person expects to find when they type in the address? What happens if I register icar.com for product that syncs your car to the cloud. Then Apple decides they want to compete with Elon Musk, with their new Icar. Who will get the domain? What happens when a large company decides to rebrand it's self and wants the domain? What happens to Nissan? http://www.nissan.com http://www.nissan.com
  - mixologic 9y ago
    Wow. Nissan.com has a dropdown labled "people's opinions" with 505 pages. Thats.. one way to build a navigation.
    - cobbzilla 9y ago
      the most charitable explanation might be that they can't afford good web design because all their money is funding their legal defense.
  - dfxm12 9y ago
    Going by iPad.com as an example, you'd play a game of chicken with Apple, because the moment you try to monetize that site in almost any way, they'll sue you for trademark infringement. You'll hope they offer you a ton of money for it, but Apple's brand is strong enough that they don't need it. Mr. Nissan is lucky that he had an existing business that wasn't car related and he only registered his name...
    - onetimemanytime 9y ago
      Very dumb of Apple IMO. Just pay the guy. So what that he wants $x million?
      - varjag 9y ago
        If $x is more than $y they lose not owning the domain, it makes no business sense.
      - jakobegger 9y ago
        Then they would also have to pay millions for applewatch.com macbook.com ipadpro.com macpro.com iphone7.com iphone8.com iphonex.com ...
        onetimemanytime 9y ago
        >> applewatch.com, ipadpro.com macpro.com...iphone7.com iphone8.com iphonex.com UDRP cost a few thousand dollars. iPad.com, IIRC, was registered before Apple came up with iPad. Plus, iPad is an entire product line.
    - themaninthedark 9y ago
      Mr. Nissan is lucky indeed. One of the reasons I used Apple is because it is easy to point to some examples of them acting in bad faith. Iphone and the music side both had legal niceties surrounding them, from all the parties involved. If if was a small company or a single person in either of these cases, it would generally be a steam roll. Perhaps ipad.com is a squatter but I would want to make very sure before I give the rights to Apple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_iPhone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_iPhone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
- gaius 9y ago
  Ermm how exactly was an Internet company named Genesis Access Point domain-squatting a clothing company that didn’t even know what the internet was at the time they bought it? Did you think this one through?
  - mercurial 9y ago
    In this particular instance, clearly not. However, a rule of "first come first served" does not do anything but validate domain name squatting as a business model. It's like patents, you may have a patent linked to a legitimate business, or you may be in the extortion business. Let's not enable extortionists.
    - Zak 9y ago
      Perhaps first practicing entity come, first served then? First with a legitimate interest in the name? I'll grant that domain squatting is bad and not something we should want to enable, but it's also bad to automatically let the most powerful company win. If your name is Nissan and you own a computer store, you shouldn't have nissan.com taken from you because the car company is bigger. If your name is Mike Rowe and you thought to register mikerowesoft.com for your software projects, you're clever, and should get to keep your domain.

by gaius 9y ago

lkrubner 9y ago

That relied on USA trademark law. Applied to the case mentioned in the above article, the government of France can seize France.com. The principle behind trademark disputes is, would a similar name cause confusion in the market place? The French government can make the case that it would be confusing if a private citizen was allowed to possess France.com. As a principle, "First come first served" has never won a case against trademark law. Or rather, the "first come first served" applies to whoever filed for the trademark, not the domain name. Put another way, trademark beats domain name.

mercurial 9y ago

Also known as "enabling domain name squatters".

themaninthedark 9y ago
Perhaps so. But how would you have the issue resolved? Should the domain go to the most well known party? The product a reasonable person expects to find when they type in the address? What happens if I register icar.com for product that syncs your car to the cloud. Then Apple decides they want to compete with Elon Musk, with their new Icar. Who will get the domain? What happens when a large company decides to rebrand it's self and wants the domain? What happens to Nissan? http://www.nissan.com http://www.nissan.com
- mixologic 9y ago
  Wow. Nissan.com has a dropdown labled "people's opinions" with 505 pages. Thats.. one way to build a navigation.
  - cobbzilla 9y ago
    the most charitable explanation might be that they can't afford good web design because all their money is funding their legal defense.
- dfxm12 9y ago
  Going by iPad.com as an example, you'd play a game of chicken with Apple, because the moment you try to monetize that site in almost any way, they'll sue you for trademark infringement. You'll hope they offer you a ton of money for it, but Apple's brand is strong enough that they don't need it. Mr. Nissan is lucky that he had an existing business that wasn't car related and he only registered his name...
  - onetimemanytime 9y ago
    Very dumb of Apple IMO. Just pay the guy. So what that he wants $x million?
    - varjag 9y ago
      If $x is more than $y they lose not owning the domain, it makes no business sense.
    - jakobegger 9y ago
      Then they would also have to pay millions for applewatch.com macbook.com ipadpro.com macpro.com iphone7.com iphone8.com iphonex.com ...
      - onetimemanytime 9y ago
        >> applewatch.com, ipadpro.com macpro.com...iphone7.com iphone8.com iphonex.com UDRP cost a few thousand dollars. iPad.com, IIRC, was registered before Apple came up with iPad. Plus, iPad is an entire product line.
  - themaninthedark 9y ago
    Mr. Nissan is lucky indeed. One of the reasons I used Apple is because it is easy to point to some examples of them acting in bad faith. Iphone and the music side both had legal niceties surrounding them, from all the parties involved. If if was a small company or a single person in either of these cases, it would generally be a steam roll. Perhaps ipad.com is a squatter but I would want to make very sure before I give the rights to Apple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_iPhone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_iPhone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
gaius 9y ago
Ermm how exactly was an Internet company named Genesis Access Point domain-squatting a clothing company that didn’t even know what the internet was at the time they bought it? Did you think this one through?
- mercurial 9y ago
  In this particular instance, clearly not. However, a rule of "first come first served" does not do anything but validate domain name squatting as a business model. It's like patents, you may have a patent linked to a legitimate business, or you may be in the extortion business. Let's not enable extortionists.
  - Zak 9y ago
    Perhaps first practicing entity come, first served then? First with a legitimate interest in the name? I'll grant that domain squatting is bad and not something we should want to enable, but it's also bad to automatically let the most powerful company win. If your name is Nissan and you own a computer store, you shouldn't have nissan.com taken from you because the car company is bigger. If your name is Mike Rowe and you thought to register mikerowesoft.com for your software projects, you're clever, and should get to keep your domain.