Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More Domain Disputes Labeled 'Reverse-Hijacking'

Posted by michael on from the no-harm-in-trying dept.

merodach writes: "This article on technews.com actually has a rare piece of good news in it - two corporations whose attempts to take domains from others were rebuked as attempts at "reverse hijacking." We can only hope that maybe the arbitrators are finally beginning to see the light." Read the story and be amazed at the audacity of these companies.

4 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. The link's dead, Jim! by phong3d · · Score: 3, Funny

    Technews was slashdotted before any comments went up! Now that's effeciency, folks!

  2. Trialing a defense against the slashdot effect? by Talez · · Score: 3, Funny

    IF REFFERINGURL="http://www.slashdot.org"
    THEN chmod 000 slashdottedpage.html

    Sorry bout the pseudocode, it would probably work though :P

    Talez

  3. Now I wonder... by Kasreyn · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Findings of reverse hijacking are relatively rare under ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), even though the system for settling disputes over conflicts between trademark holder and domain-name registrants has seen more than 4,500 cases in less than two years."

    Hmmm, now I wonder why that is...

    Oh, wait, corporations have more money than ordinary shmoes. I knew there was a simple reason!

    (sigh)

    -Kasreyn

    --
    Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger /. flamers since 1999.
  4. Coffee by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Whoever you are, whatever you put in the coffeepot at WIPO headquarters, please keep doing it. Thanks.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;