I don't follow the logic in the article. As I read it the author reasons: "+.com is not legal, therefore it's a mistake to buy it". However, by the very fact th

I don't follow the logic in the article. As I read it the author reasons: "+.com is not legal, therefore it's a mistake to buy it". However, by the very fact that they were able to buy it, they have a good reason to buy it (e.g. someone else could beat them to it). Therefore, buying the domain sounds like an excellent idea to me. What am I missing?