Slashdot Mirror
Cybersquatter Ordered To Give Up iTunes.co.uk
DigitumDei writes "Originally reported on Slashdot last year when Apple accused Benjamin Cohen of being a cybersquatter, the UK Internet registry has now ordered Cohen to give up the domain to Apple. Nominet ruled that Cohen had made an "abusive registration," and that he "is using the domain name in a way which has confused people or businesses into believing that the domain name is registered to, operated or authorized by, or otherwise connected with the complainant."
I had no problem telling the differencd between iTunes and this site.
First Psot.
How far in advance before Apple had the trademark did he get the domain?
Personally, I don't see how having some cheap pyramid-esque scheme up equates to "using the domain name in a way which has confused people or businesses into believing that the domain name is registered to, operated or authorized by, or otherwise connected with the complainant."
There's nothing that even remotely connects to Apple...even the digital music player the site promotes as a freebie isn't an iPod!
So all your domain names that might be worth having belong to major U.S. corporations?
It's all about the stupid people isn't it? People get confused between his site and Apple's. People can't tell the difference between Napster and iTunes. What's the difference anyway? If they can't tell the difference between the two, they won't know what they are buying anyway, and won't be able to use their iPod or anything else because they can't understand that either.
Back in the day, computers were only for people who could understand them or who could take the time to learn how to use them. Today, computer and software makers want every Tom, Dick, and Idiot to buy their crap, and therefore everything they make is geared toward the lowest common denominator of human existence.
It won't be long before every website that starts with the letter i will be taken over by Apple, because people will get confused if it doesn't.
There are only a few people with my name, but I own the domain name for it. If one of those other people become famous, does that mean they can take over my site because people will get confused? Does it make me a cyber squatter to register a name that someday some company may choose to use as a product name, and therefore claim rights to? If I want your domain name, can I just market some product under that name, and then claim that I should own it?
The lesson to learn here: Deep pockets and expensive lawyers are all you really need in life.
Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean that they're not out to get you.
OK, so if the original owner of itunes.co.uk had their site doing something music related but different from Apple's offering, then it would probably be Apple that had slipped up.
However, a quick look at the site www.itunes.co.uk shows not one, but two redirects,
from http://www.cyberbritain.com/itunes
to iGetGifts.com earn Points for making purchases online: Get paid to use free stuff. Quick Quid: Go shopping with iGetGifts.com today. Earn at book shops (books), bet, betting, fashion, food, cds, music, dvds, film, games, electrical, entertainment, insurance, finance, travel and various other online retailers
If it's not cybersquatting, then it is, at the very least, trading on the reputation of another organisation.
Still, it could be worse. The Food Standards Agancy and Financial Services Authority are both UK government run, but only one gets the http://www.fsa.gov.uk/
"She's furniture with a pulse"
about buying mistyped domain names? shouldnt those fit the same catigory? shouldnt they just redirect to the correct spelled site? ( slashdot.com for example)
By reading this, you have given me brief control of your mind.
Apple applied for the trademark on October 24, 2000.
Now I wonder how they will go with itunes.com.au. Which seems to of been registered for quite a while.
"sometimes I wish I was blind I thought I saw a whole lot more than this"
I don't understand why domain names are not treated like ownership of property. I feel it should be mine to do what I feel fit. If I buy a domain, it should be mine to do whatever (legal) activity I feel fit. I look at this as yet another story of the little guy getting pushed over by the big company because he can't possibly defend himself against such a large company, and they have a team of lawyers coming up with all sorts of reason's why "it should belong to them" even though, before the conception of it, they should have spent the $5 (per year!) to register it.
Fresh out of college for law students, the golden company to work for is Apple...now anyways...I would imagine...
This article seems to suggest that the battle isn't completely lost.
Online & Feelin' Fine
And right up there with Spammers in my opinion.
You have to be a born Devil's Advocate to think that cybersquatting is a legitimate activity. The sole reason these %$#$ers register a popular product's name or every possible mispelled variation of those names is to catch the unwary and attempt to separate them from their money.
Why do you think that slahdot.org, slasdot.org & slshdot.org all have such a strangely familiar name and all lead to a bogus "search the web" sites? Coincidence, right?
Good on the UK court system for taking away the iTunes.co.uk domain away from that low life and I hope it sets a precedent that helps to rid the web of more squatters. We're not talking about someone registering "Romance.com" and making a profit from a legitimate foresight, we're talking about the act of a premeditated parasite.
Next they will go after apple.co.uk.
The authorities will pretend they do not know what the 'e' in 'email' means next.
Everybody here knows that the prefix 'i' in 'itunes' is for the Internet.
Guess why nobody is allowed to trademark the word 'tunes' or 'music' for the same purpose.
The Patent Office should not have allowed it - they are clearly corrupt.
The evidence of corruption is described on http://wipo.org.uk/
Sure they could. But they don't. After the Sudan 1 scare here in the UK, I tried fsa.gov.uk, only to find it was the wrong one (should have gone to "food.gov.uk").
The point I was (half) making was that sometimes it's hard to spot any intelligence in government, when two arms both go for the same abbreviation at around the same time.
I'll get me coat.
"She's furniture with a pulse"
Apple are now offcially litigious bastards in my book. They'll just have to share the title with the other litigious bastards. I wonder how long before they start claiming to own KDE and Gnome.