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.
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?
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)
You, sir, are making a common mistake. There is a clear difference between stealing someone's domain name (there is only one Unix.org) and 'stealing' someone's song for your own listening purposes, which does not diminish its value unless you would have otherwise paid for it.
See, taking the domain name away from someone destroys the value to you, as you no longer have it. But copying a song may actually raise the value of the song, and thus the artist, by increasing exposure. This can be true even for mainstream, payola-based artists.
Pay attention, son.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
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
Ditto. However, I hate to bring this up, but the real key is not going to be supporting this in Linux, but in making Mac OS X and Windows support it. Given that ICANN is going to be much more friendly to Microsoft than, say, the GNU Directory, I'm not sure that it's going to be easy either to convince them to support this or even to make it realtively easy to be added by a third party unless you figure out some way to convince businesses that it's in their best interest to have such a scheme. Further, you're still going to run into problems with copyright, even if it's not run by such an insane agency but instead decided on a per-case basis by the courts. Instead of simply complaining to ICANN that jaguarenthusiastsclub.com violates the Jaguar trademark, you'll get complains to ICANN, GNU Directory, Free Directory, Apple .Mac directory, and so forth, and if those complaints aren't resolved, you'll simply have a whole spate of lawsuits. Unless at least these two problems can be resolved in some relatively simple way, I think we still need yet another solution.
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
Or we could just forget ICANN et. al. and start using OpenNIC - wouldn't we all like to use the .geek TLD anyway?
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/
Aside from the fact that this would fundamentally break nearly every application that already does DNS through the definitive/de facto root servers (and has for the past 25+ years), I still can't see this working.
Think of this: your long distance carrier is MCI [(333)333-3333]. You want to call your brother, who happens to be on Sprint [(444)444-4444]. Imagine having to call the MIC->Sprint Gateway, before calling him? Or having to dial the "Sprint Prefix" (//freenic). If you forget to do that, you'd get MCI's (444)444-4444 instead of Sprint's (444)444-4444 (which is what you REALLY want).
Not to mention, a third root system catching on, and having to purchase many instances of the same domains within many roots.
OR a resolution system for the various prefixes (how would your machine figure out which root servers to use for the various prefixes?)
These analogies aren't perfect, of course, but I can see how multi-roots would get very annoying and cause even MORE problems.
S
As a proud Canadian (in the original, true, and untrademarked sense) I find Molson's exclusive claim to the word "Canadian" especially ironic when they don't even seem to own the rights to canadian.com or canadian.ca.
Of course, the fact that the apparent technical error (Hex garbage like %2%2 showing up in the registrar's file) played such an important part of this case makes the decision extend beyond IP ownership issues by holding registrants liable for mistakes by their registrars while also raising concern about ICANN's lack of technical competence. Molson deliberately played up this angle to the "judge" by doing a business name search for %2%2 and proposing that since any such business (obviously) doesn't exist, the original owner must be a cybersquatter - even though the registrar seems to admit to the mistake with their database.
I will be actively protesting this decision by drinking my share of some real (although sadly, no longer Canadian owned) Canadian beer along with some pints from our many fine Canadian microbreweries.
My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!