Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

WIPO Awards 'Sucks' Domain to Vivendi

Posted by michael on from the yet-another-travesty dept.

Sarcasmo writes: "A WIPO Panel has decided in favor of Vivendi Universal in the dispute over VivendiUniversalSucks.com. The arguments made on Vivendi's behalf are strange, to say the least." It's so unjust as to be farcical. When the domain name holder makes a sarcastic comment that he wasn't making any money off the domain (in contrast to the lawyer who was billing a few hundred dollars per hour to handle the dispute), the esteemed Panel takes that as evidence that he wants to sell the domain (which in itself was already a flimsy plank to call "bad faith"). Kangaroo court is too kind a description. ICANN is currently asking for input on the domain dispute resolution process, so if you've been a victim of the UDRP, now would be a good time to speak up.

10 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. The Bastards! by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm going to vote them all out in the next election! Oh... Wait...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  2. Bad faith by YuppieScum · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If Disney hold on to this domain to prevent it's use for "fair comment" criticism, can we take it from them citing "bad faith"?

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
  3. Re:Media Monopoly by Trepalium · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I think all this has more to do with the absolute lack of consistency in WIPO rulings. First the rule that adding sucks to a domain name is a recognised method for protesting a company, and deny the request to have the domain turned over. Later on, when Vivendi Universal gets hit with a sucks.com domain, WIPO rules that [companyname]sucks.com is "confusingly similar", and goes to great lengths do legitimize handing over the domain to them.

    I often have to wonder if either ICANN or WIPO have heard of the term "integrity". Can anyone remember when ICANN's mandate was to be democratically elected? Seems like such a long time ago.

    --
    I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
  4. That would be justified if... by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...non-english speaking people would be going to the VivendiUniversal.com site in the first place. Since the whole site is English, I highly doubt that.

  5. Phooey. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Let's say someone is looking for information on a Spanish company called "la comida de vida" (the food of life). Their first choices will be "lacomidadevida.com", "lacomidadevida.net", or maybe even "lacomidadevida.es", if this person is particularly savvy with his country codes. If he does not know Spanish and some guy who DOES speak Spanish happens to have taken "lacomidadevidacomiomipene", the guy will not run into this parody website called "the food of life ate my penis".Why?

    Because you have to already know the domain name you are looking for to access the website! If someone else has registered a parody domain name, a person who does not speak Spanish will probably not run into it in the first place.

  6. Customer Confusion by Happy+Monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To avoid customer confusion, the owner of a domain name should be required to put up a page at that domain that is appropriate to the domain name. Someone putting up a pro-Vivendi site at a "Sucks" domain is obviously attempting to trick customers into thinking that Vivendi does not suck.

    --
    __
    Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
  7. There are merits here... by weez75 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let's think about things for a second. If I opened up a fast food restaurant called "McDonald's Sucks" should I be forced to change my name? Yes.

    If I decided to call my bookstore "Barnes and Noble Bites" should I be forced to pick a new name? Yes.

    If I decided to starta phone company called "AT&T Blows" should I be forced to use something else? Yes.

    Then why shouldn't the same standard be applied to websites? Why shouldn't trademarks be protected? I'm not a fan of being hampered in life by the law, being oppressed by monopolistic behavior, or having commercialism shoved down my throat. However, I believe in the right to have my own name and not have someone slander said name.

    --
    Of course we torture people, we need the information --Gen. Pinochet
    1. Re:There are merits here... by wytcld · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If I decided to call my bookstore "Barnes and Noble Bites" should I be forced to pick a new name? Yes.

      If I title a magazine article "weez75 Sucks" you'd come after me? I'm not selling what you're selling in competition with you, I'm just reviewing your business and character. If we get to a world where it infringes your property to mention your name in a noncomplimentary context, then, weez75, because you will have helped in your insignificant way to get us there, what I'll do if I catch up with you will also be unspeakable.

      --
      "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  8. Re:It's a fair decision. by zenyu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Look we're all on the same internet, and most of us that visit .com and not just .ru,.is, etc speak English at some level. And having grown up in another country I can tell you we learned American curse words long before we learned English in school.

    I always try visiting the ...sucks.com if I'm about to buy a big ticket item from someone, or if I've already been screewed. Often it goes to that sucky sucks500 site, but it still works enough of the time to be useful.

    BTW Is there anything but tradition keeping us attached to the ICANN? Couldn't any group set up alternative root servers and ask everyone to point to them? If the group had consistent rules and an effective feedback process we might all join it and leave the icann to serve the .mil & .gov ghetto. Yeah, Yeah, fracture the internet.. just cc the old database, set up rules dissallowing anyone from owning a sucks.com for a company they do not actively critizise, review all icann domain decisions awarding the domain to the deserving party instead of the monied party. Have the complaintant pay the defendants legal bills up to some multiple of the complaintants cost, say 1.5x if they lose, 0.5x if the compaintant wins.

    You could donate fairnamessucks.com to icann ;)

  9. The simple way to fight stupid WIPO rulings. by gopherdata · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Registering a domain name costs $10-$20. Add the cost of some low end hosting for a year and you're looking at $50-$100.

    Filing a complaint with ICANN costs $1000 or more. Add to this the cost of lawyers required to draw up the complaint and a company like Vivendi Universal is probably looking at $5000 to take the domain name.

    Why not simply register a new name and wait for Vivendi Universal to get around to taking that one as well. Then repeat the process until you get bored or Vivendi runs out of money. Remember it costs a company about 100 times more to take a domain from someone as it does to initially register it. Under a system like this a few geeks could easily wage a guerrilla war against any opponent and either make them stop taking domain names, or drive them into bankruptcy.

    So if Vivendi Universal now owns vivendiuniversalsucks.com here are a very short list of a few similar domains might still be available. With a little imagination I'm sure there are hundreds if not thousands of possible domains that embody the basic idea that "Vivendi Universal Sucks".

    vivendiuniversalreallysucks.com
    vivendiuniversalreallyreallysucks.com
    vivendiuniversalsucksbad.com
    vivendiuniversalreallysucksbad.com
    vivendi-universal-really-sucks-bad.com
    vivendi-universal-really-really-sucks-bad.com
    vivendiuniversal-reallyreally-sucksbad.com
    etc...