3 ms·

> He's not squatting on nissan.com per se, but in my opinion is fairly close to it That doesn't make sense. Sounds like you, and several other people, think t

> He's not squatting on nissan.com per se, but in my opinion is fairly close to it That doesn't make sense. Sounds like you, and several other people, think that anyone who is under-utilising a domain is automatically "squatting." That the biggest user of a property is entitled to it... He runs a business, the business is called "Nissan Computer(s)." That to me is the furthest thing from squatting...

nathanstitt 14y ago
I disagree & believe it does. Where is he advertising the business on that web site? I see it mentioned in the header but that's not even a link. Instead he's running adds for insurance on it. In my mind it comes down to what visitors of the website expect to see. I believe that the only possible expectation for someone visiting nissan.com is to see Nissan Motors. (At least in North America, I'm aware that Nissan is a popular name etc) I'm not saying that he's even a bad guy here. If I was in his shoes I'm sure I'd feel exactly the same, he had the name first, even before Nissan Motors existed. But, times change. Leaving aside the legal questions, I believe that there would be less confusion caused if nissan.com pointed to Nissan Motors, therefore it would be in this case a social good thing to have it be so.
- nwienert 14y ago
  That's a personal opinion (and you're entitled to it) but the fact is he has a legitimate claim to the name and that's all he needs. If Nissan Motors wants it badly enough, they will convince him with money. Until then, I (and the law) fully support his right to the domain.
  - nathanstitt 14y ago
    I agree it's not a legal issue. The law is pretty firmly on his side, as it should be. I believe that things of this nature are too fuzzy to be encoded in law, it's more of a "I know it when I see it" type of thing that reasonable people can have differing opinions on. However, a really stupid part of domain law is that Nissan Motor's can't convince him with money. If he had offered to sell to Nissan Motors or attempted to negotiate a price in response to an offer by them, that could be considered evidence of squatting and he could have lost the domain in court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Pro...

nathanstitt 14y ago

I disagree & believe it does. Where is he advertising the business on that web site? I see it mentioned in the header but that's not even a link. Instead he's running adds for insurance on it. In my mind it comes down to what visitors of the website expect to see. I believe that the only possible expectation for someone visiting nissan.com is to see Nissan Motors. (At least in North America, I'm aware that Nissan is a popular name etc) I'm not saying that he's even a bad guy here. If I was in his shoes I'm sure I'd feel exactly the same, he had the name first, even before Nissan Motors existed. But, times change. Leaving aside the legal questions, I believe that there would be less confusion caused if nissan.com pointed to Nissan Motors, therefore it would be in this case a social good thing to have it be so.

nwienert 14y ago
That's a personal opinion (and you're entitled to it) but the fact is he has a legitimate claim to the name and that's all he needs. If Nissan Motors wants it badly enough, they will convince him with money. Until then, I (and the law) fully support his right to the domain.
- nathanstitt 14y ago
  I agree it's not a legal issue. The law is pretty firmly on his side, as it should be. I believe that things of this nature are too fuzzy to be encoded in law, it's more of a "I know it when I see it" type of thing that reasonable people can have differing opinions on. However, a really stupid part of domain law is that Nissan Motor's can't convince him with money. If he had offered to sell to Nissan Motors or attempted to negotiate a price in response to an offer by them, that could be considered evidence of squatting and he could have lost the domain in court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Pro...