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."

20 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What's the big deal? by rokzy · · Score: 3, Funny

    yeah and if a guy steals your bank info that's fair play too - he worked harder at getting it than you worked at protecting it so he really deserves the money more than you do.

    let's just get rid of all anti-fraud laws and let 'the market' decide!

  2. Re:What's the big deal? by vandon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You didn't do your research....
    Apple has been awarded control of the domain iTunes.co.uk, even though it was registered before the Mac maker announced its online music service.

    This would be the person that stole your identity suing you because you made him bounce a bad check.

  3. The Stupid People by TheSeventh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:The Stupid People by MoneyT · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you use or build on the domain, no it doesn't. But consider this guy registerd the domain after Apple applied for the iTunes patent and years after they registered iTunes.com Furthermore, there's nothing at the domain name except redirects. He's clearly sitting on the name, using it's likeness to generate traffic.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    2. Re:The Stupid People by pete6677 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      This is a fairly extreme exaggeration, even for Slashdot. It's a bit ridiculous to claim that Apple is going to start shutting down sites like infinity.com (whoever owns that). There's a big difference between owning a domain name that just happens to become some company's product name some day and buying a domain right after a company publically announces a new product by that name. And it's not like the process of taking someone's domain name is instantaneous, right after a corporation sends a letter. This case has been going through hearings for about a year now, the purpose being that the registrant is entitled to the site unless it can be proven that he/she took it maliciously as it was in this case. This is hardly a situation where some company victimized the little guy with their expensive lawyers.

    3. Re:The Stupid People by corporatemutantninja · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think a more fair analogy would be: what if you waited until somebody got famous who had a name that wasn't anything like yours, then bought a domain name with their name and used it to sell vi@gra?

      It's not like this guy's name is "Padraic iTunes" and he's been using the site to post pictures of his kid, iPaddy. He's obviously just a parasite on Apple's marketing efforts.

      In lots of these domain fights it's easy to side with the little guy, but this is pretty blatant squatting. Rather than use a simple formula like "corporation == bad, unknown person == good" let's try using our brains a little on a case-by-case basis.

      --
      Actually, I was trying to be Insightful, not Funny.
  4. Re:How long? by xpccx · · Score: 4, Informative
    The linked /. story says:

    He registered ITunes.co.uk on Nov. 7 2000, and Apple trademarked ITunes on Dec. 8, 2000.

  5. Looks pretty junk to me by BeerCat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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"
    1. Re:Looks pretty junk to me by amichalo · · Score: 4, Informative

      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/

      But both may have their respective www.FoodStandarsAgency.gov.uk and www.FinancialServicesAuthority.gov.uk sites if they wish.

      "itunes" on the other hand is a brand name - it isn't short for anything - and like you said, this guy is certainly using their reputation and marketing dollars for his own gain.

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  6. Re:All your domains belong to Corporate America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    yes. all your domains are belong to US.

  7. Re:How long? by Ayaress · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apple registered itunes.com in August 1998, though. Over two years before Cohen's domain.

  8. Read the whole discussion by Ixitar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Apple applied for the trademark on October 24, 2000.

  9. itunes.com.au by BenJamin.G · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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"
  10. Re:What's the big deal? by Ayaress · · Score: 4, Informative

    He registered it before they trademarked iTunes, not before they announced it. Furthur, he registered it over two years after Apple registered itunes.com (link is to whois data).

  11. Re:These stories always piss me off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, there's two reasons:

    1. Domain main names are not property.
    2. iTunes is a trademark.

    Put simply, this phisher is playing off surfers trying to use someone else's trademark as a domain name. Not complicated.

  12. Re:These stories always piss me off by CrackerJack9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    with an open mind, follow me on this one...i have a sole proprietership with a long name. the acronym for this name (4 letters) has been registered to a company using a p.o. box in taiwan. the site, as it is now, is completely useless and irrelevant to the domain name.

    In order for me to do what iTunes did, I would have to pay over a grand in lawyer's fees to have my case heard.

    My only other option would be to pay them around $1300 (proving they are only 'squatting' it for profit in potential resale--also against ICANN's guidelines.

    So spend a grand and gamble on my case being upheld, or just pay these guys to continue in their infesting of the internet.

    Seriously, is it so hard to see that these types of things are worse than spammers and the like? At least spam can be deleted or blocked, these people are using valuable resources indefinitely (what cybersquatter doesn't use domain locking)....so before you think this is just a case of corporate guy vs. little guy, think of a few other situations that might happen to exist in this place called the internet

  13. Re:All your domains belong to Corporate America by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Informative

    No; just the ones that are blatant attempts to capitalize on the popularity of one of their trademarks.

  14. Re:These stories always piss me off by CrackerJack9 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I never said it was default. What i was saying is that they were in violation of ICANN's policies. Please go read the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy before you type about something you obviously don't understand.

  15. Cybersquatters are the scum of the Earth by joetheappleguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  16. apple.co.uk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Next they will go after apple.co.uk.