Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sen. Clinton Wins Rights to HillaryClinton.com

Posted by timothy on from the also-interns-are-skanks.com dept.

SteveBlink writes "The National Arbitration Forum announced today that a ruling has been issued in favor of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton regarding rights to the Internet domain name hillaryclinton.com. A quick search of the Yahoo! phone book reveals at least 3 other people sharing the name Hillary Clinton living Ohio, California, and Delaware, respectively. It's curious to note that Sen. Clinton's full legal name isn't "Hillary Clinton," and the website itself is a generic link farm that makes no overt reference to the senator."

7 of 47 comments (clear)

  1. Doesn't matter that it doesn't reference her by etymxris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The very act of using a popular domain to set up a link farm is cybersquatting at its finest. I've seen some bad domain handovers, but this isn't one of them.

  2. Re:Not quite as the submitter suggests by Sancho · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm glad that it's one less sleezy domain, but I don't particularly care for the precedent that a person (or probably more accurately, a celebrity) can yank a domain from someone just because they have a piece of the name. I imagine that if one of the other Hillary Clintons had tried this tactic, they would have been laughed out of court.

  3. easy victory, not much of a story by FidelCatsro · · Score: 3, Insightful

    She forced a cybersquater off a page , fair enough plenty other people may also have rights to this domain , but she is the one that sought it first .
    Im sick fed up of these domain farmers , They obviously just bought up this domain in hopes of making a bit of cash off the name , which is in clearly wrong .Hell i would have suported Anyone (nearly) in a case like this, the sooner we get better regulation in to stop the domain farmers , the better our web experiance shall be.

    --
    The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    1. Re:easy victory, not much of a story by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Real land doesn't cost 20 bucks for 2 years, real land owners pay property taxes, real land isn't unique, and if you put up a building with a sign that says "Hillary Clinton Inside", no one is going to believe you, and if they did believe you and Hillary Clinton found out about it, she'd sue you, and she'd win.

  4. and anyone is suprised because? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Interesting dilemna here though... What if I start a company called hillary clinton, inc. (saying theoretically my name was hillary clinton)... so based on past domain cases... can i now take it from her?

  5. Re:Not quite as the submitter suggests by Seumas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly. I don't think that Mrs. Clinton should be given ANY priority to the ownership of the domain over anyone else with that name. However, anyone with that name should be given priority over someone who doesn't have that name and is not acting in good faith with the domain.

    In other words, if another Hilary Clinton wanted the domain, they should have just as much right to it as the Senator (after all, she already has a .gov or .us domain in her state by nature of her office). But some guy using it to redirect to porn or host whatever else (unless it is specifically related to Mrs. Clinton) should should not have priority over any of the Hilary Clintons.

    I don't like her either. I'm just saying, as someone with a domain name of his own name (and I know other people want it as they've emailed me asking for it over the last decade), I feel that I have a right to it more than someone just grabbing domains - but as far as anyone else with the same name as myself - I'd consider "First come first serve" very acceptable.

  6. This should pay for the legal bills by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Post a link from /. directly to a spam site. I'm sure they appreciate the traffic.