Slashdot Mirror
Latest UDRP Stupidity: Unix.org, Canadian.biz
The Uniform Dispute Resolution Procedure, an expedited process for allowing corporations to steal domain names, continues to be abused as arbitrators stretch the definitions of "cyber-squatting" to any length in order to find for the corporate complainants. Lunenburg writes "Unix.Org, a site that was apparently used for noncommercial discussion of Unix(tm) operating systems, has been ruled a "cybersquatter" by a WIPO panel and given to the X/Open group. In spite of not actually matching any cybersquatting criteria, a WIPO panelist felt that by providing links to commercial sites, Unix.ORG was acting in "bad faith" and thus should be given over to the Open group." And WEFUNK writes "Exploiting an obvious technical error to help build their case, Molson Inc. has been awarded the seemingly generic canadian.biz domain from the original owner who "registered this name because I am Canadian and want to develop a Canadian business directory" and is now appealing to the courts." John Gilmore has a bit of commentary.
the one and only
and http://www.fuckyou.co.uk is already taken too but provides free webmail (in exchange for spam)
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
For now on, I'm only using IP addresses.
Well, if there's one person who's qualified to talk about seizing/censoring domain names, it's Mr. Censorware.org himself, Michael Sims.
Someone take YRO rights away from this guy, please.
How does Molson Inc. have any sort of rights to that site, that just seems like bullshit to me.
Molson isn't even good
It's all good.
...let's ruin it!!!!
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
...That this is declared cybersquating, but when someone grabbed our robotics team website there wasn't a thing done about it. We really need to clean this stuff up.
The WIPO troll is dead
I agree completely. This guy is a hack!
Maybe it's time for the Canadian government to step in. I'm sure they will have a better claim on the name Canadiam than Molson.
Reminds me of the problems 2600 was having with ford. Ford didn't like them linking to thier site so they sued them. 2600 then found out that ford was sueing a bunch of people for stupid reasons, such as Jaguarenthusiastsclub.com, which is an animal site. You can read about it HERE. The case recently got droped BTW.
Unix.org is not allowed due to website owner not owning the tradmeark unix..
..it snot conspiration theory or that wipo made amistake..they went by their own rules on this subject..
..its the the same stupid story..oh no wipo can;t do it..
Its reeal simple
People wake up cybersquatters have been for years registering domain names that are trademearked then turning around and trying to sell them to the trademark owner..
I use to work for a cybersquatter
Yeah right..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
I suppose you don't have deep corporate pockets to sue the bejeezus out of those scum.
/different from/ government dictation - exactly HOW?
That's what the difference is, of course.
Corporate dictation - better than
This latest move doesn't suprise me. Their beer sucks, so nothing seems beneath them.
"Now tell me again that free speech guarantees should not be part of the incorporation charter of ICANN."
Blatant sarcasm mode on:
Free speech guarantees should not be part of the incorporation charter of ICANN.
BSM off.
You expect professional behaviour from ICANN?
You know what ICANN stands for don't you?
Idiots Controlling A Nationwide Network.
.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
Funny how http://www.udrpinfo.com has its own cybersquatter(s)...
http://www.udrp.info - complete with an automatic homepage-changer, and Gator!
Buy it today!
Karma: \Kar"ma\, n. [Skr.] (Buddhism) One's acts considered as fixing one's lot in the future existence.
Remains the fact that their beer is really, really, nasty...
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Forget the twinkie defense or any other legal silliness, now we have the case of Molson Canada v. %2d%2d! I might cybersquat domain names just to get a court case named Big Company vs L33t Hax0r!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oh bother.
[I] "registered this name because I am Canadian and want to develop a Canadian business directory"
It's a good thing this guy didn't capitalize the "am" in "I am Canadian". For "I Am Canadian" is a trademark owned by Molson, and this poor chap would be sued for even using that sentence as a defence!
Michael, you guys are so two-faced, it's unbelievable. You people will go on and on about you guys aren't stealing music and other IP, but go apeshit when the evil, nasty corporations are stealing domain names (another form of IP).
Slashdot hypocrisy 101.
SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
sales-team@opengroup.org Graham Bird Vice-President, Marketing Tel: +1 415-374-8292 g.bird@opengroup.org Adam Cargill Marketing Communications Tel: +1 415-374-8291 a.cargill@opengroup.org i.dobson@opengroup.org There are more listed on there site..
It's because of cases like these that make people want to disgust such regulatory bodies.
I think that the UDRP should be revised to let people outside of ICANN voice their opinion as to whether cybersquatting is occuring with a specified domain. That way, there is more of a popular opinion, and thus also more popular knowledge and views of the matter.
Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
That's one beer I'll never drink again. (Not that I did that much anyway it tastes like paint thinner, usually pretty cheap here though) Why don't they get that this just generates bad publicity. It would be one thing if a guy was posting goatse on the page but it's a legitimate businessman right?
"Save me jebus!" - Homer Simpson (btw, I'm probably talkin out of me arse)
It seems that microsoft.org is owned by a very large company (Microsoft) and isn't even being used. Could they be holding out to sell it to the highest bidder? Or, is this just another example of Cybersquatting?
The .biz tld was meant for businesses to be able to get domains for their Registered(R) Trademarks(TM), wasn't it?
Molson corporation makes the 2nd most popular beer in canada which is called 'Canadian', don't they?
Mr. Black had "thought" of starting a business that was basically a glorrified yellow pages, right?
His corralation to why he thinks his business idea (nothing registered, started, or operating as of the ICANN decision) deserves the domain canadian.biz is that the country he lives in just happens to be Canada.
Yeah, I think cyber squatting is completely shitty -- but this d00d didn't even have a functioning business, or even content on his website. Molson owns the freakin' copyright, and registered trademark on the word for christ sakes! It a top level domain that's geared towards owners of copyrighted trademarks, so this is one case where I gotta be reasonable and say Mr. Black -- you don't have a case.
dmarien
Well God Bless Canada (TM)
Note: Canada is the legal trademark of Molson Inc, while God is copyrighted by the Vatican. No prayers, beer, or food masquerading as the body of Christ may be distributed without the express written consent of either Molson or the Catholic Church.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oh bother.
Disclaimer: Duh! this never happened, CowyboyNeil never said that, you beleived me? What a shmuck!
Little Brother, watching the watchers
Since when does ICANN give a crap about cybersquatting?
How can i use this to kick a cybersquatter off a domain? If i want, say, italianmeatballs.com (bad example, that isn't a cybersquatter, it's just someone who hasn't set their site up yet) can i start a business, register "italian meatballs internet services" as a trademark, and then go bitch to UDRP?
How does the "little guy" go about abusing this arbitration panel?
Refer to the beer, there are folks out there/ date/all/mo lson/
with the last name 'Molson'!
http://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/index
Clearly shows what beer drunkards think of the
stuff.
(Personally, I'd get stuff from Stevens Point
Wisconsin's Point Brewery - still tasting em
and the BOCK was OK)
Also, there is some guy named Michael Jackson
who drinks beer for a living. A different Jackson, I'm sure.
Never call a man a fool. Borrow from him. * -** *-** --- *-- - **** * *-*
I run a small internet game, hardly worth mentioning, called No Reality. It's a MUD -- I know that there are quite a few in the /. community who are familiar with this type of game.
I own noreality.org for the game and website. It seems like corporations always win with these things. Because I own it, an individual, not a business, is it likely that if some corporation comes after me for this domain, I would also lose?
It seems like these other domains were owned by individuals also. Is it power and money that's giving companies the ability to pry these domains away from people..
Out of curiosity, what is the process involved in appealing these disputes? I see that some have taken ICANN to court, but doesn't ICANN have international authority in assigning these names? If I was a citizen of, oh, say Egypt, how much authority would Egyptian courts have over ICANN? Ultimately, what legal recourse does one really have when getting an unfavorable ruling from this body?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
The YRO section's integrity is compromised by Michael's presence. What's worse is that this is treated similar to all questions of this nature regarding the /. editors -- refusal to speak to the problem, except to occasionally dismiss it as being a problem at all.
It's like asking a World Com executive to head up your taskforce on corporate malfeasance, or a Texas oil baron to lead the EPA. At this point, I think we should ask John Ashcroft to take over for YRO, just to finish casting the section as a total joke.
The enemies of Democracy are
This isn't overly surprising. It's simply another example of the 'Big Business' (tm) attitude of "bend over and take it". What is almost worse is the craven fauning of certain organizations (and/or persons within said organizations) in order for possible 'future financial considerations'.
Well, I was all set to rant and rave about how evil the WIPO and ICANN['t] and everyone else is. But after reading all of the links above (be honest: did you?), I have to say I'm reconsidering my stance.
I don't know if many of you remember the cybersquatting "name rush," so let me provide some background. Basically, when the web started exploding, there was a small but significant minority that would purchase tons of domain names of major corporations, betting that just a few would bring in a bunch of money when the trademarked domain name was sold back to its rightful owner.
Needless to say, these greedy bastards were ruining it for the rest of us. A few bright spots (Guy Kawasaki's holding mcdonalds.com hostage in exchange for donations to public schools) didn't make up for what was largely the profitting of a few at the expense at anyone else.
The rules put into effect against cybersquatting were necessary to save the web from anarchy and plutocracy. And if those rules were to disappear, or cease to be enforced, then we would be plunged back into that corporate-sponsored hell. These rulings seem terrible to us now, but if we want to save the 'Net, we need to be firm in our application of the rules. Those found in violation need to be held responsible for their actions, or we will find ourselves back in the web of 1996.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
What? No one here likes Molson?
GEEZE, you bunch of freekin snobs. Molson is damn fine beer. Smoother than Blue, and you can pick up a case pretty cheap here in Michigan.
Sure, I _LOVE_ Guiness, but it just doesn't go well with Hockey Night in Canada.
Now Budweiser, that is absolute crap.
Anyone remember the pattern?
- a central organization allocating goods, in leases, itself the sole owner
- goods granted on condition of "need" and taken away from those who "don't need"
- ownership of goods to which others are felt to have a higher claim given nasty propagandistic names like "cyber squatting"
- those names being flip-round from their normal meaning - real squatting is trespass in and theft of existing property.
- allocation requiring allocators, allocators being corruptable, the result is corruption in which the little guy always loses - and in which the only way to become a "big guy" is to belong to some exclusive group.
Can anyone say "U.S.S.R."? Or, "communism in action"?
Time for private, permanent, tradeable ownership of domain names, methinks.
What we need is to dump ICANN. However, it isn't feasable to do this in one fell swoop, at least not yet.
.tm domain for trademarked names, to which trademark disputes would be confined (ie. anyone can register mtv.com, but only the owner of the MTV trademark can register mtv.tm).
So, instead, we need DNS resolution in our libraries (glibc, etc.) and our internet applications (browsers, ftp & ssh clients, etc.) that include the concept of multiple root authorities, with easilly settable defaults.
Need to go to ICANN's unix.org? Fine, click a pulldown tab in your Mozilla 2.0 browser and select ICANN, or better yet, type http://icann//unix.org/ . Otherwise, stick with http://freenic//unix.org/ or (if opennic ever decides to dump ICANN peering) http://opennic//unix.org/
Obviously, old nomenclature would remain in place, using the system default for root authority (presumably Opennic and not ICANN).
It is only this approach, that will default to freedom but allow those of us who need to access ICANN-managed sites (most of the web today) to cross the line at will, that will enable us to free ourselves from ICANN's grip while still being able to make sensible use of the web.
Whether the alternative becomes Opennic, or some new entity ('freenic' anyone?) it needs to be constructed with a solid, equitable constitution that preserves freedom of speech above everything else, and does not favor large corporate or government interests over the rights of individuals, with an open, public, and fair judicial process for resolving name disputes. Ideally it would also include a
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
"It no longer means, 'originating from Canada.' It means, 'beer originating from Molson."
I'm Canadian, and I'm sure as hell not a beer originating from Molson.
I don't like most of Molson products in the first place, but after this I'm going to totally boycott.
According to the netsol.com domain registration search:
;) )
molsonsucks.com is available
molsonsucks.net is available
molsonsucks.us is available
molsonsucks.biz is available
molsonsucks.info is available
molsonsucks.tv is available
molsonsucks.org is available
molsonsucks.ws is available
molsonsucks.cc is available
molsonsucks.bz is available
Anyone want to grab a few of these and redirect them to www.guinness.com?? 2600, where are you? We need once again for you to come register silly domain names in the name of truth and justice!
( P.S. : Actually, well, my personal preference would be baileys.com, but it's up to you
Money wins. 'Tis the way of the world. Occasionally the little guys will win a victory, but if you go back and look at the situation 6 months after the fact, 9 times out of 10 the situation will have reversed. Mr. Forum for Canadian Businesses is screwed.
I especially liked how the article said that anyone who thinks of "Canadian" thinks of beer. Personally, I think of "Aboot".
With my dying breath, I curse Zoidberg!
It should be completely obvious at this point that the system of domain name dispute resolution is nothing more than a method for those with money to take domains from those with less money. Since it wouldn't be politically feasible to actually state this, a set of rules that appear to have some other purpose but which easily allow the true purpose are necessary. The actual content of those rules is irrelevant so long as it meets that criterion.
So you really shouldn't be sick that something that isn't cybersquating is declared so, and that something that is cybersquating is not declared so. The term "cybersquatting" is irrelevant to the matter at hand, since it is nothing more than window dressing to the real matter -- who is declared to be economically more important. That's what should make you sick.
The enemies of Democracy are
b. Evidence of Registration and Use in Bad Faith. For the purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(iii), the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith:
(i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
(ii) you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
(iii) you have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
(iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location.
The complainant argues that the domain name is indistinguishable from their trademark. Respondent asserts that the trademark has become diluted to a generic, and is therefore not enforcable. According to the ruling:
Basically WIPO is saying that you can not defend a domain name by asserting that a trademark has become a generic. If you wish to challenge a trademark, you must do it in the jurisdiction where the trademark originates. As long as the trademark is considered valid in its original jurisdiction, it is accepted as valid in WIPO proceedings.
Nope, no sig
The example was so stupid.
But people who call copyright infringement "theft" are, as a rule, very stupid.
That is insane. IF some company can take a site that is being used for whatever the purpose long as it is being used for a purpose shouldn't be able to say anything. Cybersquating is dumb and hurtfull but is it really illegal to buy a domain name. What gives the companies rights to it more than people.
Dan Mayer: my blog, essays, art, etc
I thought I'd take a look at unix.org to see what their take on the decision would be.
I was a might suprised to find it blocked by the wonderful corporate content filter.
Checking the URL checker I got the following response:
URL Checker
Thank you for your submission. Below please find a listing of the category (ies) in which your submitted URL appears. For a detailed description of each category, visit our filtering categories section.
The Site: www.unix.org
is categorized by N2H2 as:
Pornography
Should you still wish to inquire about the URL in question after checking with your System Administrator, please submit your request to N2H2's Review Editors for further analysis.
Yes, it's sad that the name of my (and ~30 million other Canadians') great country has been made synonymous with what is in essence bottled piss. Imagine if Coors Lite was called "American Beer", and "I Am American" was trumpeted as a commercial slogan in commercials for an inferior product!
Freedom: "I won't!"
"Respondent feels that the Complainant has been opportunistic in this regard to group Respondent with other organizations by simply modifying the unix.net complaint by replacing all occurrences of with ."
Looks like they just used find/replace to issue the same suit against multiple domains. Does anyone else think this is actually an insult to X\Open?
And how do they own the Unix mark worldwide??? It was developed for free at AT&T!
A Google.com search for "canadian -beer" yields almost 4 million results!
[Begin Blatant Troll]
Additionally, a search of "canadian" yields the same 4 million results!
[End Blatant Troll]
Some time ago, I was really disgusted about some things which were happening in the US. (Read DMCA, SSSCA, ...). And I was afraid that it would come to Canada soon. But then, I tough that those law would be ruled out and that everything would come back to normal. Then, here in Canada, they put a tax on blank CD's... And then, one day, my first day at work after some wonderfull vacations in another world(country), I read things like that...
I know some folks are saying that we shouldn't be crying and whining about those things, but as I see it, everyday there is a new case. It's just a "bit" worse each times and peoples seems not to react because they are becoming used to see life that way. I live in Montreal, and I assure you, it is a strange feeling to read things like that this morning. I really wonder where are the ones who used to beleive in the new world, where are now the ideals we all had when we were younger? Have they all been killed by being repressed so much? I dunno... I sure would like to see things change, It still makes me angry, but I guess I'm just to weak to put up a fight. Just as everybody else I guess.
So I'll just go back to work, trying to accept that we are no more human being, but rather ants working for the success of the Queen, the economy, the success and the world ego. I'll forget about it and just live a bit more sad everyday, until the life which made me human until now ain't no more but a rationalized resource...
I can't help it but to wonder, who are those days heroes?
I'd rather be sailing...
I can clearly see that the doctrine of first-come-first-served (FCFS) was well weakened by this event.
... probably when Molson has developed the site and thus has much more to lose to what will essentially be blackmail. All this is not a solution.
Under the assumption that FCFS is more of a joke now, no one has pointed out that Molson's 'right' to the name canadian.biz is just as valid as any other company's right to the name if they have any product called 'Canadian' anything. ("Frank's Canadian Moose Jam", yum yumm!) If Molson is truly granted the name, then another challenge can come
I say deny the name to either party and instead reserve the name for the Canadian government or well-established Canadian business association. Note that this may mean the name isn't used at all, there being no right fit for it.
Molson at any rate should reg MolsonCanadian.biz and work with that.
(I think that now I will go and reg products.biz and then sue everyone for their *.biz sites' infringing upon my IP.)
[also misbehaves on Kuro5hin as Peahippo]
> Molson isn't even good
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, in practice there is. >
There is a difference between theory and reality.
Son to Father:
Explain the difference between theory and reality?
Father:
It's like this. Go ask your mother if she would have sex with the next door neighbor for 1 million$.
Son:
Why?
Father:
Just do it and tell me what you find out.
--
Son asks his mother this and she has to think long and hard but says 1 million$ is 1 million$. I guess I would do what I have to do.
Son:
Dad I asked mom if she would have sex with the next door neighbor for $1mil, and she had to think about it for a moment but said she would to get the money.
Father:
Now son go ask your sister the same thing and report back.
--
Son ask's his sister the same question and she say's I don't even have to think about it, for one million you bet. So the son runs off to dad in exitement.
Son:
Daddy, Daddy, my sister said she didn't even have to think about it. She'll do it in a heartbeat.
Father:
Now son that is the difference between theory and reality. In theory we a setting on top of 2 million bucks but in reality we are just living with a couple of whores.
Other domain names in arbitration:
music.com - RIAA says they have the rights to this, since they "own music"
switch.com - Apple claims they deserve it because of their oh-so-clever ad campaign. But Cisco says it belongs to them, because they make switches, and can afford the most lawyers.
fordreallysucks.com - Now Chevy is claiming rights to this one, as it is a fundamental part of their corporate philosophy.
bendoverandtakeit.com - Microsoft is pursuing this one, using an argument similar to Chevy's.
"I am a cipher, a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret sauce" -Jimmy James
I almost took this poor dude's side, until I read an absolutely preposterous remark.
Being Canadian isn't just about drinking beer...
As long as I can remember, being a Canadian has been about drinking beer. Good beer, too. Canadian beer. Besides, Canadian.biz is kind of like saying Cuba.biz. Nobody really cares.
Is that a real poncho? I mean, is that a Mexican poncho or is that a Sears poncho?
Corrupt
Can I raise a practical question at this point? Does this mean we have to go back to blotting out the "i" with an asterisk again when we write un*x?
The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...
Michael, you guys are so two-faced, it's unbelievable. You people will go on and on about you guys aren't stealing music and other IP, but go apeshit when the evil, nasty corporations are stealing domain names (another form of IP).
Nonsense. When someone violates copyright they are not stealing anything. Neither the original creator, nor those who comply with the creator's copyrights, nor those others who do not, are being deprived of anything. Hence, by the very defintion of the word 'stealing,' no theft is taking place. This is why the law clearly differentiates between theft and copyright violation, and a remedial understanding of this should be required before idiots like yourself start banging away on their keyboards.
As to domanin names, the original holder of the domain name is most definitely being deprived of that name, i.e. the name is being taken away from them.
Does this make it theft? Arguably so, since this is being done in an extralegal fashion (not via a court of law). It is arguable that it isn't, since virtually every registrar has a clause in the contract you sign basically saying "you're paying for this, but we can deprive you of it anytime we like, for any reason we like, and you agree to this." However, it remains to be seen whether or not such contract clauses are in fact enforcable (in any other industry they would clearly not be enforcable). If it turns out that this notion of 'we can deprive you of the service you've paid for anytime we like' is in fact an illegal stipulation, then that portion of the contract is void, and depriving a party of the domain name for which they paid would in fact arguably be "theft" of a sort. Certainly more so than most of the things people around here like to label "theft."
Either way, it is in no way analogous to copyright violation, bandwidth misuse, or any number of other things which are constantly, and erroneously, being called theft around here.
Slashdot hypocrisy 101.
Idiocy 101, more like it.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Note that at the end of the decision, it lists the links to commercial sites as the evidence of bad faith. The first is a link from an unrelated web page that the guy owns. They do note that there aren't any links from unix.org to that web page.
The other example of links to commercial sites is sendmail.org!
Solution to blink tags: wrap them in another blink tag, with a javascript delay loop, so they cancel each other out
Dear Opengroup,
Bullying people is not the sort of behavior I would expect from a proper member of the Unix community. However it seems you chose to do so by ripping the unix.org domain name away from Marshall Sorenson. I suspect that my admonition will not mean anything to a large organization such as yours, but to say nothing might be misconstrued by you and yours as agreement with your distasteful actions, which I most certainly do not. If you have any conscience at all, you might wish to think about your actions in this matter and consider how it reflects upon your organization.
Is madness a syptom of genius or vice-versa?
The word "Canadian" is, unquestionably, generic. "Canadian" is a word whose usage is far, far more broad than the context of beer. A Google.com search for "canadian -beer" yields almost 4 million results!
Yeah, and "stupid -bush" turns up about the same number. That doesn't mean the words don't have a deep and meaningful connection.
----------
I am an expert in electricity. My father held the chair of applied electricity at the state prision.
Happily enough, Molson has a feedback form!
Molson Feedback
I've already submitted to them a lengthy comment on what I think about their frivolous litigation efforts, and I hope you will too.
"So on one hand, honey is an amazingly sophisticated and efficient food source. On the other hand it's bee backwash."
Hmmm, maybe because many are just mindless monkeys that only parrot rhetoric to get support instead of using that stuff in between their ears? Intersting.
The following is my opinion on how this domain name mess can be resolved.
.uk, .au, etc.).
.com.us type domain. If they are international corporations, they register under each country they are in.
.org.us type domains go to non-profits, churches, and general organizations like discussion groups, clubs, etc.
.edu.us type domains.
.per.us (personal), or a generic .www.us domain. Sonething that distinguishes them from corporate or non-profit or organized entities.
.com.us types.
First, all domain names get registered under a country code (.us,
Second, companies (Inc, LLC, Co, etc.) get domains registerd under a
Third,
Fourth, schools would get
Fifth, individuals who want to put up a site could get a
If a company has a trademark on a slogan or phrase, and they want to use it as a domain name, it goes under
Domains get registered where they should, no more cross TLD registrations because entities have a specific classification.
Additionally, the oversight group would need to be able to verify the correct classification of a domain if a problem arose.
Again, just my opinion.
That would be my sig, but good call!
Did you have enough batting helmets in little league?
It's all good.
A lot of (heavily tech impaired) users have trouble understanding that there are TLD's besides ".com"
/dev/null \;
Yes.
It is absurd for us to hold ourselves to the least common denominator. A degree of literacy is required to make use of the internet and the web. Claiming otherwise, or even claiming that pandering to illiteracy would be a good thing, is akin to arguing for the replacement of text in all the books in all our libraries with color pictures because the "reading-impaired" can't understand all those big words.
The sooner we divest ourselves of these sorts of idiotic fallacies and begin educating people so that they can make sensible use of technology, the sooner people will begin to have a positive, useful computing experience (rather than the constant frustration most people are confronted with today).
Note that this doesn't mean everyone needs to understand what
find / -type f -exec grep blah {}
means, nor does it mean that so-called "user friendly" interfaces are a bad thing (when properly implimented to facilitate knowledge and understanding, not obscure it) but basic concepts such as IP addresses, domain names, registrars, root authorities, filesystems, network connections, system memory, system storage, are something anyone wishing to use a computer should be required and expected to understand.
A modern computer connected to the internet has a lot more in common with a library than it does a toaster, and it is time we started treating it as such.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
First go and read the document about the decision.
Basically it states that X/Open has had UNIX trademarked since 1986. It also states that several large/high-profile companies (AT&T, Unisys, ect..) have all licensed the name UNIX. This strengthens X/Open's claim of the UNIX trademark.
Marshall Sorenson (the previous owner of unix.org) makes the claim that his actions are still legal because his site is about reviews and editorials of UNIX operating systems and that under X/Open's license agreement you do not need permission to use the term UNIX in an editorial or review.
However, ICANN brings up the point that X/Open's license states that UNIX can be used without license only if it's used in an adjective form and not as a noun. Since there is no noun in the domain name with which UNIX could be applied as an adjective (such as unixreview.org) it is used in a noun form.
As dumb or as much as it may seem dumb, the decision is totally on the level.
Question - What happens if one simply ignores the judgement of this arbitration panel?
I assume the domain registration authority simply changes the domain behind your back. But what really happens?
Is to declare domain names just like the old west claim "Fisrt come, first serve." If you're late, you lose. End of story. The only exception would be with internationally known brand-names (like "Coke", "Pepsi" and "Gerber's", for instance.) Now, under my plan, the "Canadian.biz" guy would win, Molson would get slapped, and all would be right. On second thought, why don't we just set all routers to deny traffic to and from Canada. It's not like they do anything anyways... ;)
I'm American. Can I take America.biz, or is some one claim that just "cuz"?
Sad, but fair.
30 million? Where are you all hiding? You should be glad that Canada is associated with beer, or otherwise when I heard the name, nothing would come to mind at all.
Well, that's not really true. I heard you have bears. But what mostly comes to mind is Ren and Stimpy's "Royal Canadian Kilted Yaksmen" episode, which does a much better job poking fun at Canada than I ever could.
On the other hand, it is amusing some of these examples... just start typing common words and ideas (more words I guess... hmmm) into the path window.
I seek not only to follow in the footsteps of the men of old, I seek the things they sought.
According to some whois queries that I just ran you can register such high quality domain names as fuckicann.[com/net/org], fuckwipo.[com/net/org] and fucknsi.[net/org].
As a side, several years ago when NSI was pounding the company that I worked for in the butt hard core because they had a problem in their root servers, I proceeded to register fucknsi.org while on hold with them. Their tech support didn't believe that I could have a domain when I said my email contact was everyone.should@fucknsi.org.
Of course, you're probably just wasting your $10.
My Slashdot account is old enough to drink...
Ideally it would also include a .tm domain for trademarked names, to which trademark disputes would be confined
You realize ".tm" would only be meaningful to people who use the English word "Trademark" don't you? If we're really trying for a valid, international solution, it won't depend on abbreviations of English legal terms.
(Yes, English is [currently] the defacto language of the internet. One argument at a time, please.)
Nope, no sig
IMO, the corporate world has brought a lot of the cybersquatting problem upon themselves by being collective dumbasses and _encouraging_ confusion, which cyberquatting relies upon, by failing to properly follow DNS naming conventions in the first place.
Look at ABC for example. You've got abcnews.com and abcsports.com. Now, if they go and create a financial news service, what's to keep them from sueing www.abcmoney.com (an existing, unrelated business apparently) claiming "cybersquatting". If ABC'd follow proper convention and used subdomains "news.abc.com" and "sports.abc.com" there'd be no doubt as to which venture was affiliated with the ABC network. Corporate dumbasses have so abused the convention that our nation of dumbasses doesn't know any better.
That's what you get when you open the Gates to the masses, I guess.
Has anbody seen my AOL disks?
The comment from John Gilmore is (in conclusion) "Now tell me again that free speech guarantees should not be part of the incorporation charter of ICANN."
Hard to argue against that. Until, that is, you remember that John's definition of freedom of speech extends to running an open mail relay that he knows is being used by spammers. The tacitly admitted reason is that securing it might inconvenience his friends (to the extend that they'd have to remember a password), but the touted reason is that it's a freedom of speech issue. Sure, whatever.
John Gilmore doesn't necessarily represent my ideas about what constitutes freedom of speech, and you really have to consider everything he says on a case by case basis to decide if it's an informed insight, or just blind kneejerk rhetoric. I believe he's right in this case, but let's be careful about just quoting him as though he's the authority on everything related to net issues.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
At least you're not alone.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
How do y'all feel about the fact that www.php.org points to Amazon?
As the owner of unix.net I was very unhappy to find that the open group is going after myself and also the owners of unix.com. My registrar (godaddy) actually changed my admin contact email so that I couldn't modify the domain... apparently that is their policy for domains involved in disputes. I don't necessarily agree with it! I've owned this domain longer than the Open Group has owned the trademark UNIX and I also feel that UNIX is so generic these days they hardly have the right to go after "cybersquatters" even if they did just buy the trademark from another party. I'm a lowly administrator and don't have the resources to fight the open group... but i'm sure their decisions to go after the domain owners of unix.com/net/org will not end up being a wise business choice. When you think UNIX, do you think of the open group?
Did anyone bother to even check the wayback machine before jumping to conclusions? (You see it's a game, where you jump to conclusions, nevermind)
Link
Apparently they had some cheesy links up, and nothing up since 1998.
Guess what, they WERE squatters./B>
Go see the archive for yourself. If that isn't a squatted domain, I don't know what is.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
* Use of the following function: strcpy
... just that alone will clear most (not all) of them buffer overflows....
lol
If they had only used the Chewbacca defense, perhaps they wouldn't be in this mess...
"Ladies and Gentlemen of this supposed jury, Mr. Black's accusers would certainly want you to believe my client was maliciously squatting the canadian.biz domain name, and they make a good case. Hell, I almost felt pity myself. But Ladies and Gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider.
Ladies and Gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk who carried a gun and ran from the mob. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it. That does not make sense. Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor with a bunch of two-foot-tall Ewoks. That does not make sense.
But more important, you have to ask yourself what does this have to do with this case. Nothing. Ladies and Gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case. It does not make sense. Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company producer and entertainer and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and Gentlemen I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense.
And so you have to remember when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Uniform Dispute Resolution Procedure, does it make sense? No. Ladies and Gentlemen of this supposed jury it does not make sense. If Chewbacca lives on Endor you must acquit.
I know he seems guilty. But ladies and gentlemen this is Chewbacca. Now think about that for one minute. That does not make sense. Why am I talking about Chewbacca when a man's life is on the line? Why? I'll tell you why. I don't know. It doesn't make sense. If Chewbacca does not make sense you must acquit. Here look at the monkey , look at the silly monkey.
The defense rests."
Your argument only works if the price of the thing stolen is so high that a single sale would cover the cost of making it and if that sale had already occured. Pretty stupid argument.
Once again, you demonstrate why a modicum of education on intellectual property would be very useful before people begin banging away on their keyboards when discussing, or in your case, trolling, this particular subject.
Lost potential sales does not, and never has, equaled theft, either in law, or in common use of speech (outside of rhetoric deliberately employed by copyright and intellectual property cartels, which hardly counts as it is intended to change the language to their political advantage).
Your argument requires that deprivation of potential sales would equal theft (which in fact would make every act of competition equal to "theft."). A pretty stupid argument.
Oh, and by the way, I do make my own literature, art, and movies available, freely, under a GPL-like license, so unlike trolls like yourself I actually do put my money where my mouth is.
Thank you for playing.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
This leads to the question as to who's trademark law ICANN operates under. I would be willing to bet that if I held the Guam tradmark for the word Canadian, I would have lost out to Molson.
;)
It's ludicrous that the big corps are allowed to screw around with this. Usually under tradmark law, you can't hold title to generic terms - Ford don't actually own the trademark for the word "Jaguar", they own the logo and the design for the word Jaguar that they use on the cars. Even then, it's a bit more complex than that - they only own the Jaguar trademarks in the arena of car manufacture. You could make food processors with pretty much exactly the same logo, so long as people didn't think that you were the same company as the car manufacturer.
It would seem, then that ICANN is running roughshod over laws that have, interestingly enough, developed the way they have because the courts were concerned over the limited namespace for company names and logos causing this kind of abuse by large companies. ICANN are simply reverting to the maxim of he with the biggest bank balance wins.
The only way that I can see this getting resolved is if the domain name system gets changed so that the namespace isn't so limited. How about DPS - Domain Picture System? - you have to draw the logo for the site that you want. This would lead to some interesting effects as the big corporations fight to the death over who has the easiest logo to draw. Squabbles would ensue as firms selling double glazing to pensioners adopt a squiggly version of the Windows (R) logo because their target market draws a bit shaky anyway. Slashdot would still be easy to get to. An almost perfect solution for us then
Next, Molson will be going after people using a red maple leaf on their flags - clearly an infringement upon their brand...
I mean, as a Canadian, aren't you just a bit offended that a word so closely tied to your identity has been usurped by a corporation for its own gains?
One of their slogans seems to be I am Canadian. (Forgive me for being unfamiliar with their marketing - we don't drink much Molson here...)
Can you legally even say that aloud anymore without infringing upon their trademarks?
Not being Canadian, I won't try to tell you how you should feel, but I'm just a bit curious.
(Maybe it's such a good beer that Canadians don't mind - I honestly don't know...)
Cheers,
Jim in Tokyo
-- My Weblog.
I've been living in North Carolina for the past 2 years and I really miss Traditional (and Big Rock in general...Warthog, Grasshopper and the rest...) Very good beer for a very good price. They get some okay imports and microbrews down here, but they don't get Big Rock and they don't get Kilkenny (another of my favourites.)
harsh, but fair
Ironically enough, Fosters in America comes from.....Canada.
[UID-HeinzIntel]
Helments? What helments? Drunk a lot of beer while playing college softball. Good ole Moosehead. None of that watered down stuff.
You realize ".tm" would only be meaningful to people who use the English word "Trademark" don't you? If we're really trying for a valid, international solution, it won't depend on abbreviations of English legal terms.
.tm would be the best approach.
//china//domain.tlds and reserve a TLD for chinese trademarks that ends in some chinese character(s) I can't type here. Ditto for any other language purists out there.
.tm style domains, and kept out of the mainstream domains the rest of us use, I really couldn't care less if there is one, or a 100, such little domains, or what language the TLD characters are taken from.
Unless you would like to push for Esperanto as the Official Language of the Internet (I would support you in this argument, even though it would mean I'd have to learn Esperanto from scratch), I think you are going to have to concede, and live with the fact, that English is the defacto language of the internet, and that for the domain system to work at all we have to accept that, to some degree.
Thus,
However, it isn't as simple as that, because, with more than one root authority to choose from, China could, for example, have
As long as Trademark nonsense is reserved for
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
this guy is bang on.
But back to what happened with Unix.org ... that's an outrage.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Take a look at the index file below:
Dang it.. what more can we say? so many #'s in a row.. its obviously Porn or a message from Bin Laden to his followers!
to them, any form of Unix is obscene after all. So the Pornography description makes sense in a Gatesian way.
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
Imagine if Coors Lite was called "American Beer", and "I Am American" was trumpeted as a commercial slogan in commercials for an inferior product!
I don't need to imagine it. I've lived overseas a number of times, and we Americans have the emberressment of "Budweiser, King of Beers" being promoted (successfully) in such places as the UK, Germany, and elsewhere as (a) the quitisential American beer (despite our numerous excellent brews (especially our Micro-brews), this is the bottled urin most of the world associates with American beer.
What makes it even more emberrassing is that the label closely resembles the 'true' Budweiser of Czech fame, Budweiser Budvar, which in contrast to the American pisswater variety is one of the finest Pilsners on the planet. Only Corporate American arrogance could ever lead to such a situation, where a nasty, cheap knockoff of arguably one of the world's finest pilsners has the audacity to call itself the King of Beers and even try to displace that which it mimics so poorly in that product's native markets.
Kind of sheds an interesting light on the psychology of the Corporate Moghuls fleecing our economy and driving into the ground these days (cf Enron, Xerox, Worldcom, and a whole bunch more coming soon to a courtroom near you).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Anything could do a better job poking fun at Canada than you ever could.
It's not a potential sale, it's an actual one. You wanted to use the product (that's why you stole it), you took it, you didn't pay. Theft.
As long as the sale is potential you can't have already taken the item, can you? By the same token, once you've taken the item the (uncompleted) sale is a fact.
What possible interest has the GPL for you? If you don't believe accept that I can place the very basic restriction of paying for a copy on my work why should I give a flying fuck about what restrictions you want to put on your work? Why not just release it PD?
There's a world of difference between saying "I don't agree with your restrictions so I'll go elsewhere" and "I don't agree with your restrictions so I'll just ignore them and take what I like".
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
"NAMESARENOTTHETHINGSTHEY NAME!" sayeth the troll.
Also, he hates non-English speakers.
So true.
Before PBR went out of business, they bottled the nast.
On the other hand, there are some imports that are rather awful too -- Asahi (sp?) is the dryest beer ever -- Heineken is quite rank too (what sense is beer in a green bottle??!?) -- but yeah, Miller is up there with the worst of them.
Imagine if Coors Lite was called "American Beer"
Isn't that what those pesky Europeans are always saying? Not a beer thread goes by when someone doesn't accuse American of only producing Bud and Coors as if we don't have smaller brewers in number in every state.
SHHH! Don't give any of the big brewerys any ideas. It's only a matter of time before patriotic pride comes through and they start the "American Pride" commercials.
I read the internet for the articles.
IPv4 32 bit addresses are easy enough to remember, but how do you suppose we remember IPv6 128-bit addresses?8
try memorizing this:
125.26.32.9.124.52.128.93.65.0.26.48.85.195.16.24
Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it
There's some history of all this on Budweiser Budvar's page on the trademark dispute. Basically, it looks like it's not completely clear on either side - kind of like if someone had started making "Deutsche Bier" in the US, then started exporting to Germany.
fencepost
just a little off
MSNBC has been calling itself "America's News Channel" for at least two weeks. That turns my stomach.
BLOCK STRUCTURE breathing apparatus required for special maneuvers!!
I AM Canadian, and in my line of work I travel alot, things I have discovered: you can find a wonderful range of local micro brews, and internaltional imports at specialty shops in usa, i have tried so many brands its unreal, Old Speckeled Hen, Red Hook.. If you are a beer conneseaur you go for these more robust and flavourful beers. The average joe doesnt care, wants somthing cold on a hot day, and something that goes down easy, so its a Bud, or Molsen Canadian. In Canada, sorry, but the best beer comes from the east coast, Moosehead produces a wide variety of brews that im sure would appeal to many. (Moosehead is located in Saint John, New Brunswick). Budwieser is actually a derrivative of the Czech brew hailing from the city of Budwar, and ive tried the Budwieser over there and it has more of a bite to it. Now you want to get into quality ales? Anything from Youngs, with the exceptional Youngs Double Chocolate Stout. Spitfire, Bishops Finger are also awesome. Belgium? Chimay, Bere d'esperiance, Dilerium Tremens are all fantastic brews, good with a sharp cheese. You can find good beer pretty much anywhere, you just have to look. :)
True, these are very different beasts. But just because you wouldn't have paid for the song doesn't mean that you weren't unjustly enriched when you downloaded it without permission of the copyright holder. Maybe you don't want to pay for the song, and if the download wasn't available, you wouldn't have listened to it. But if you listen to your downloaded MP3 and enjoy it, perhaps listen to it again...you're taking something that doesn't belong to you and gaining benefit from it. So what's in it for the artist? Sure you wouldnt have paid them either way, but it sure isn't fair for you to be getting the satisfaction of listening to their music when they dont want you to, and you give nothing in return....
IPv6 Addresses are written in HEX. Two bytes seperated by colons, but you can leave out leading and adjacent zeros. FE80::2AA:FF9A:44DD isn't so hard to remember is it?
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
I AM Canadian, and in my line of work I travel alot, things I have discovered: you can find a wonderful range of local micro brews, and internaltional imports at specialty shops in usa, i have tried so many brands its unreal, Old Speckeled Hen, Red Hook.. If you are a beer conneseaur you go for these more robust and flavourful beers. The average joe doesnt care, wants somthing cold on a hot day, and something that goes down easy, so its a Bud, or Molsen Canadian. In Canada, sorry, but the best beer comes from the east coast, Moosehead produces a wide variety of brews that im sure would appeal to many. (Moosehead is located in Saint John, New Brunswick). Budwieser is actually a derrivative of the Czech brew hailing from the city of Budwar, and ive tried the Budwieser over there and it has more of a bite to it. Now you want to get into quality ales? Anything from Youngs, with the exceptional Youngs Double Chocolate Stout. Spitfire, Bishops Finger are also awesome. Belgium? Chimay, Bere d'esperiance, Dilerium Tremens are all fantastic brews, good with a sharp cheese. You can find good beer pretty much anywhere, you just have to look. And yes Samuel Adams makes a great beer, I especially like thier winter ale. :)
Molson had a Trademark, Black didn't, therefore, the domain goes to Molson. That's how it's supposed to work for fucks sake.
You mean like "America's Team", the Atlanta Braves? Gack.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
that's not ironic.
Hey Molsen, if your reading this. I'd like to send a big FUCK YOU to you and the Molsen company. Don't be a bunch of assholes and mind your own shit. I don't really care for Canada to begin with, not much good really ever came out of Canada, but what your doing makes Canada as a whole seem even more lame.
Especially Canada!
"I am a cipher, a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret sauce" -Jimmy James
No. You were defining taking (or copying) something because you want it as theft, then using that definition to 'prove' that taking something because you want it is theft. Classic circular reasoning, and a sure sign of a very limited intellect.
You are correct, though, you are making tautologies right and left
Even replicating something you earnestly desire does not, and never has, equalled "theft" or "stealing" in the English language, or under U.S. law.
In other words, you can't think of a reason why you should be allowed to ignore my requirements for copying while I have to honour yours (as enshrined in the GPL) so I must be a troll again.
Your GPL ignorance is astounding. Either you are a troll (most likely) or you are woefully ignorant and should do a little research before displaying such ignorance for all too see.
The GPL is an imperfect attempt to insure freedom in a society, and within a legal regime, that is designed to destroy freedom when it comes to sharing so-called intellectual property. As such, it is only required because there is copyright, and is a countermeasure against said restrictions. Get rid of copyright and you get rid of the need for a license such as the GPL.
But you probably already knew this. If not, 3 seconds on google (or slashdot's search facility) would have made this clear, had you bothered.
Your last sentence clearly identifies you as a troll, as does your posting history (as another pointed out). I only respond this one last time to hopefully insure the idiocy you display does not mislead another. As for reasoning, I've already pointed you toward a resource where you can remedy your sore lack of education and understanding. As with the proverbial horse being led to water, no one can force you to drink.
Now go educate yourself, troll. While you've provided me with a good, hearty laugh over lunch, I am not your teacher, and I'm through feeding you. Drink, or don't drink and remain ignorant
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Never thought I'd see myself doing this, but dear God, this is possibly one of the most Insightful things I have read here in months.
Mart"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
How come the German urine is riper, stronger smelling, and for some odd reason more expensive here in St. Louis, MO than it is in Germany?
Oh, that's right. Some of you people actually like 'beer.' sorry.
The .biz tld definition, whatever it says, doesn't trump trademark law and 250+ years of precedent. A trademark is only infringing if it uses the same (or very similar) mark to market a product or service within the same class as the registered mark. Molsen doesn't own the mark for word "Canadian" in any and all contexts; It only owns it as related specifically to beer.
For example, let's say you own the mark to the phrase "Fucking Moron". You market jelly beans under that mark: "Fucking Moron's Old Style Jelly Beans".
Now, along comes another guy, and he wants to sell fishing tackle under the same name: "Fucking Moron's Fishing Tackle".
Can you sue him? Yes, but you'll lose.
Can you challenge the mark? Yes but, again, you'll lose.
Why? Because jelly beans and fishing tackle are not in the same market space. It's that simple.
Read, and be less of a fucking moron.
Look, Someone comes after my domain with there lawyers im coming at them with a baseball bat. Im not squating. I use my domain just as Unix.org was using there domain. Dont know much about canadian.biz but since I dont think molsen has a trademark on being canadian I dont think they should have got it.
At any rate, this is the kinda crap that has destroyed the Internet. The original squatters were bad but limit domains to 1 per company or person and the problem goes away for the most part. Example. Cocacola Deserves Cokacola.com, no doubt there. But Coke.com should go to one of the columbian cartels as coke is short for cocaine which is what cocacola is named for and the drug was here first. They also dont deserve cocacola.org as they are not in the nonprofit buisness.
The whole system is fubared so I say since using proper channels doesnt help, we should resort to violence. The world would be alot better place if people thought twice before calling lawyers and after a broken knee cap or two people would.
Violence is the only answer left. Lets use it.
I could see a few exceptions to "first-come, first serve" - at least at the inception of the Internet. e.g. McDonald's Corp. should get mcdonalds.com, regardless of who's using it - their brand is internationally recognized (and this can be measured).
I cant see, why McDonalds should have more right to the name, than anybody whoes name is McDonalds. If a company chose to have a name, that is also fairly ordenary surname then they can't/shouldn't expect evrybody just to give it too them.
unix.net
Not only that, but Anheuser Busch freely admits that their bud products are there to appeal to the lowest common denominator. They actually do brew and ship better beers (perhaps not any truly excellent ones, but I can drink a Michelob Hefeweizen that doesn't make me want to go throw up--unless I drink too many).
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
I did not do that, you are using a petty and pedantic interpretation of what I said in order to avoid addressing the issue. Again.
Desire, curiosity, even by mistake, to name just three of a dozen or more common reasons. So not only is your definition circular, it ignores huge swaths of reality in the process (as most tautologies tend to do).
Acting on desire or curiosity to steal something is hardly a great defence, so the huge swathes of reality I'm ignoring comes down to accidental copies, hardly the issue at hand.
Even replicating something you earnestly desire does not, and never has, equalled "theft" or "stealing" in the English language, or under U.S. law.
Read US law before making assertions about it: Title 17, Chapter 1, Sec 107:
So, yep, it is against the law in the US; taking a copy will have an impact on the market at least insofar that you have reduced it by one persion who could reasonably be assumed to have been a paying customer otherwise. UK law is in flux at the moment as EU laws shift but the end result will almost certainly be the same as US law.
Get rid of copyright and you get rid of the need for a license such as the GPL.
Read the GPL again. Copyright serves the aims of the GPL, without it we would be much worse off. The GPL's main function is to enforce the "commons" of software. It does this by using copyright to force people to re-release modifications. Without copyright there is nothing to enforce this turn-and-turn-about approach to software and the GNU/EFF's aims fail. Large companies would be able to take code and use it to produce binaries with no source code and there would be nothing you could do about it.
You've had four posts on this thread and have single-mindedly avoided the question of why a person should be denied payment for work when that work is used by someone else, if that's what they ask for. You've tried sematics, pedantry, ad hominem argument, pretending you didn't understand what I was saying, insults, and blank refusal to answer direct simple questions on your irrational claim that you should be protected by copyright and others shouldn't.
In short: fuck off.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Use of the following at the start of each program: int main(int argc, char** argv)
Use of the semicolon character at the end of each program line: ;
Use of the following in numerous instances at the top of each source file: #include
Use of the following function: strcpy
No no NO! M$ doesn't use C!!! They use Visual Basic... don't you know ANYTHING?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
It looks to me like it is some form of ASCII steganography. At least after staring at it for a minute or so I could make out pretty pictures.
--All I want is a warm bed, a kind word, and unlimited power.--
So I wonder what lodge the XOpen CEO belongs to?
I guess the same one as the WIPO panelist.
Live not on evil.
Technically, you don't need a lawyer in a UDRP action, but really you do. I am a para/legal writer and I write documents for submission in UDRP actions for an attorney and trust me, you need a lawyer. It's like family court: you aren't *required* to have a lawyer, but you'd be a bonehead to go in there without one.
If you absolutely can't afford one, then at least do a full-text search looking for cases kind of like your own and see what earlier panels decided. It'll help you understand what the rules actually mean, so you can structure what you say to be effective. The UDRP website has a search page at http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrpdec.htm. So does Berkman Center (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ilaw/P2P.html).
In this case, the Complainant had a valid trademark. The UDRP was set up to protect valid trademarks. That's it. End of story, as far as the UDRP is concerned. They have a limited mission.
The Respondent argued that it was licensed to do what it wanted to do for its website, but the license Respondent was relying on evidently said that you could use the "unix" word as an adjective only. So if his site were unixeditorials.com, it might have survived a challenge. But unix alone, they held, was not an adjectival use. As for his arguments that they Complainant had let the trademark lapse, he is free to argue that in another forum, though it appears from what the UDRP panel wrote he'd be unsuccessful, but the UDRP decision said they can't decide that issue. The issue for the UDRP is whether the domain name *itself* is identical to the trademark, which in this case it was, by Respondent's admission.
He can file in a federal court (fast, 10 days, I think) asking for a declaratory judgment that he is not a cybersquatter, but there is a real danger in doing so, in this case particularly, because if he loses, they can fine him mucho dinero, which doesn't happen in UDRP.
The real answer is: He should have hired an attorney before he paid $5,000 for the name unix.org, to let him know if the name was legally valid. Instead, he apparently just paid and thought it was ok. It's called live and learn. Lawyers are so you don't have to learn the hard way what you should have done, by showing the pitfalls that are looming ahead. An attorney could have read the license and set him straight. Had he spent a few hundred, it would have saved him the $5000, not to mention all the angst of a UDRP problem and losing the name, with his money down the drain.
In short, get an attorney when you do the UDRP dance. There is a language to the law you have to learn to be effective. Trying to get it all figured out yourself really fast isn't impossible, but it's not advisable. Otherwise, when you represent yourself, you'll be like a guy who really knows how to program in Cobol suddenly trying to figure out how to do so in C++. With time constraints, the results can be bad. The law is worse, because it uses the English language, so you can think you get it, but you really don't, because the law uses certain words in particular ways, and if you don't know that, you can fall in a pit.
So you mean now we can have people's domains revoked because the information they gave the registrar is not technically correct? WHOO!
That's only like, 3/4 of the domains out there!
http://www.linuxsux.org
Anyone know who these guys are/where they're from?
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
Exactly which nation would that be?
What really makes me laugh about this, and really, of the whole "I Am Canadian" thing in itself, is that that Willam and John Molson were pro-annexation.
"Foster's. Australian for Piss."
Ok - time to clear this one up right now. Nobody in Australia - and I mean nobody - drinks Fosters. I can't even recall the last time I saw if available for sale in a liquor store, or on tap in a pub.
Oh, sure, we have some very ordinary mass produced, mass marketed beers (Caslemaine XXXX, Swan Gold, Emu Export, and others). We also have some really good mass market beers (Redback would be a personal favourite; even Victoria Bitter isn't that bad). However, calling Fosters an Australian beer is so far from the truth it defies description. It's not brewed here, and it's not sold here - so how exactly is it Australian?
Russ %-)
... and never, ever play leapfrog with a unicorn.
so how exactly is it Australian?
Because it is advertized in North America as an Australian beer. The slogan being: Foster's, Australian for beer
I just wish most of mankind would disappear some morning.... Unfortunely it was only a movie (or a dream).
Simply put, this is bullshit.
The guy for UNIX.org had a legitimate use for his site; he was not using it to squeeze money. He had a site-in-progress and had paid $5,000 dollars. Why pay 5k to cybersquat? That's absurd.
Furthermore, does this ruling mean that OpenFucks (aka OpenHypocrites, and those fucks who use the word Open in their name but are against those principles) gets to steal this persons domain name, but he doesn't get compensated the $5,000 dollars he spent on it?
Cybersquatting may be an issue. I argue that its no different than an investment. If people think a domain name may be valuable for its name, they buy it. Any problems with it can be solved by having the rights to such expire after a certain time of inactivity, with a hearing if the person objects because they're working on something in progress (as this person did).
Auto-terminating a person's rights to a domain-name after say one year of them not associating any website with it would almost completely solve cybersquatting problems. After all, a cybersquatter who purchases 5000 sites is certainly not going to able to put up sites for all of them (also do a redundancy check for simply putting the same page on diff. domain names).
In any case, ICANN's rules are crap. The only way to prove someone cyber-squats is if they explicitly ask for money for their site and buy many domain-names for such. One instance is certainly not proof.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
You mean he "registered this name because 'I Am Canadian [TM]' and want to develop a Canadian business directory"
Music speeds up when you yawn, but does not change pitch.
Canadians have no problem poking fun at ourselves, I thought that episode was hilarious. BTW Ren & Stimpy creator, John Kricfalusi, is a Canadian. We Canucks are everywhere.
YHBT. YHL. HAND.
This is completely contradictory to what the UDRP has done for Hong Kong-based company "Ultimate Search, Inc."
Case 1: Poetry site.
Case 2: PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Case 3: WBW
Case 4: Home of the Underdogs.
And you'd better believe there are lots more cases in which these cybersquatters have taken over sites without retribution.
[insert witty comment here]
I think that from time to time, people will steal domain names. I think we should take it upon ourselves to deny them the fruits of their foul labors. Allow me to suggest that we re-tool a handy piece of free P2P software to allow folks to choose to participate in any listed ongoing DoS attack.
Oh alright, I'll stop daydreaming now...
I don't give a XXXX
If you don't like something just say "To hell with it!" and opt-out of/castrate it. Just like they did/are doing with the International Criminal Court:
"Well it would leave us open to false accusations by rogue governments!" Well yeah, that's the justice system. Not perfect, but they wouldn't be able to do any harm without any evidence. Oh boy what I'd give to fly over to America, meet Dubya, and say "Hi! I don't recognise your legal system because someone might falsely accuse me of something!" And give him a quick bit of justice upside the head. [Well, the prezel obviously taught him nothing, if indeed it was a prezel. Wouldn't you go get help if you were choking? Hmmm... *strokes chin*]
I imagine I'd still have to be off the scene before you can say "Unocal" though.
Ali
Ph33r m3!!!
I must have missed that post. I remember him saying that nobody lost anything when things were copied and making false assertions about the law.
... one which seems to be rather unanimous, by the way.
OK, this is my last post on the subject. You'll have the last deceitful word I'm sure, but anyone perusing your posting history and this thread will not be mislead by your nonsense.
I do find it irritating how you do put words in my mouth which I never wrote, which of course is your intent as a troll (I refer anyone to your posting history if they are in any doubt).
I never made any assertions about copyright violations not being illegal. Quite the contrary. I stated that copyright violation is not the same as theft, and as the AC poster noted, I have backed that up factually. Both the law, and every publicly available online dictionary, corroborate that fact which you seem unable or unwilling to grasp: copyright violation may be wrong, but it is not theft. Why. Because nothing is taken.
Potential profits are not "something", they are a nebulous, theoretical value which in at least one case can be pretty firmly shown to be $0.00 (the $18,000 program that almost certainly none of the copyright violators would have ever paid for, regardless), though as a theoretical value its size is irrelevant.
If you equate the taking of theoretical, or potential profit with theft, then you have by definition redefined every act of competition, legal or illegal, as theft, which is demonstrably nonsense.
End of story.
You've now had three different people point out the error of your assumptions, your fallacious arguments, and your conclusions. You have been led to water and clearly chosen not to drink.
Your perogative, but don't be surprised at the disdain you earn from critically thinking people as a result.
Oh, and by the way, identifying you as a troll isn't name calling. It is a value judgement on the quality of your posts
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
There seems to be nothing left of Unix.org now but to see it as it was in 1998 go here.
I tried Google's cache (by searching on "unix site:unix.org" and clicking "Cached") for a more recent view but that shows nothing.
"Be thankful you are not my student. You would not get a high grade for such a design
No I do not. The term UNIX, for me, invokes general images of the people that use it and of the different flavors and standards. I wouldn't consider it a sofware name brand any more than "tire" could be considerd a brand name for vulcanized rubber.
Is madness a syptom of genius or vice-versa?