Slashdot Mirror
Dreamworks vs. Baggervance.com
An AC points us to baggervance.com, which Dreamworks (the movie studio producing "The Legend of Bagger Vance") has filed a complaint against in WIPO's slanted arbitration process. Oddly enough, it seems that most movies coming out are either getting sites that are off the company's home page (studio.com/moviename) or they aren't trying to get the most generic version of the domain name (moviename-themovie.com rather than moviename.com) so disputes like this one aren't as common as they could be. Not that that's a bad thing.
If you read the blurb on the page, this is totally legit. Assuming the facts are correct he has full rights to the domain. He registeded it before there were any copyrights, trademarks or service marks on the name. He is NOT attempting to sell the domain. He states that he is not affiliated with dreamworks. His intent is to critisize Dreamworks films and administartion.
So in this case he will win, or we can kiss our domain system goodbye.
Bagger Vance was a novel before it was a movie (published in '95). This site was registered three years after the book was published. Sounds like someone read the book, then got the URL. I think that true squatters should be gotten rid of, but all too often valid sites are taken down (and lost in the noise of all the other "Hey! This (real squatter) site was taken down!!").
You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco
So if the guy has some ties to the movie industry, or it was announced in one of trade rags then it's likely that he heard about it and registered the domain to thumb his nose at the studio.
Judging from WIPO's rulings before they probably will find the comments on the site indicate that he registered the site in "bad faith" and so will yank it. Frankly, it's a right to tell the world that somebody/something sucks (including me). I can take criticism, though apparently most companies can't.
- subsolar
When somebody out there wishes to complain agaist his business. When someone has a complaint, especially a legit one, and someone else tries to block it, it's called fascism. In the real world, when this sort of thing happens, all Hell is raised. But here on the internet, barely a whisper outside of sites like this one.
I think it's time for an all-out assault on the pigs that try to rule us as if we were merely cattle with wallets. Stop purchasing anything that is not required to live or go online. No more movies, no more crappy merchandise, nothing more than clothing, food, shelter, and a phone line.
Or are we all just spineless like those corporate cocksuckers think we are? Take up your weapons, people of the world, for with them we can destroy even the gods we created. But without them, our idols will destroy us utterly.
(I sincerely hope this does not come off as flamebait. My use of strong language is due to the fact that I feel quite strongly on this issue.)
Chris 'coldacid' Charabaruk Meldstar Entertainment
So you disagree that it is a fair way to protest DreamWorks support of DivX and highlight their technological ignorance?
.com does not necessarily mean a company, but thats a whole other discussion.
that seems like a valid enough reason for anyone to own a domain name. The system was supposed to be first come first served, it is unfair that someone with enough financial backing (a corporation) can screw over that system.
its unfortunate that
i personally think that companyname.com/product name was the sensible way to go. Not only is is easier to remember, but it advertises the studio as well as the movie, and it doesnot require you to register a new domain.
Hopefully sooner rather than later the current system will be improved upon, for example use Google and you have a better chance of finding what you are looking for than just trying to pluck domains names out of the air.
I do see more and more studies stickign their movie sites under their main site. Although I've started to see the use of Internet Keywords akin to AOL keywords (specifically, in the case of Little Nicky); since these actually cost a bit more money to obtain, I think it's more reasonable to go that way as well.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
The site really doesn't seem to have any actual content on it, other than a single page saying "we had this domain first so Dreamworks can't have it". Understandable, but if the owner bought the domain for the sole purpose of pissing off Dreamworks, it seems like a case of domain name squatting to me. :-(