Slashdot Mirror
Graduate Student Defends Right To Own Chicago2016.com
An anonymous reader points to a story in the Chicago Tribune about another domain-name battle. Quoting the article: "As Chicago wages its battle to host the 2016 Olympics, it also finds itself scrapping over a valuable piece of cyberspace: the domain name of Chicago2016.com. The bid team along with the U.S. Olympic Committee are trying to wrest that online address from Stephen Frayne Jr., a 29-year-old MBA student. Frayne snagged it back in 2004, about two years before the bid was launched. ... 'We certainly see Chicago2016.com as the logical default domain for our site, and we believe having someone else control it is misleading for people seeking information about Chicago's bid,' said Patrick Sandusky, a spokesman for Chicago 2016, a moniker protected by trademark."
It looks semi-legit. While it's a discussion site on the Olympics, it appears that he intentionally intercepted the domain by registering a bunch of <city><year> combos that happen to match Olympic years. Coincidence? I think not.
Generally speaking, ICANN tends to frown on such speculators. The originating entity has a right to their trademarks. Just because someone is crafty enough to beat you to it doesn't mean they should be rewarded.
This is quite different than someone like MikeRoweSoft.com; a domain registered with the guy's actual name to perform his own business.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
The originating entity has a right to their trademarks.
And exactly where is this trademark that is infringed by this domain? If it was chicagoolympics2016.com, they might have an argument.
It doesn't matter. The Chicago 2016 Olympic organising committee sought their trademark 2 years after the domain name was awarded and put into use.
McDonald's have a pattern of naming burgers with a Mc-prefix. If I started a domain named 'www.mcchocolatecake.com', and McDonald's started to offer, two years later, a McChocolate Cake, they wouldn't have a right to seize my domain. Same deal.
"Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
ICANN frowns on it, but doesn't do shit about it. I HATE cybersquatters. My own domain was stolen in my opinion due to a glitch on Network Solutions part which allowed it to lapse before they even removed my name servers from the root servers, for this I am very mad. Even worse is that it is now parked, by some jackass who refuses to sell it back to me at a reasonable price. Feel free to mailbomb him, the domain is schizo.com and his information is accurate in the whois records ...
The point to my rant anyway is that, while squatting pisses me off, it would appear that this (and other domains like it) were registered by someone who thought ahead, more than 12 years ahead in fact. He IS using the domain, and what he's using it for doesn't matter. The fact that its used for Olympic discussion doesn't matter either. He had the forsight to register it before they did. Business is all about getting the right idea before someone else, and the name really is essientially a vanity domain, they can come up with plenty of other names to use.
So ... he's not really squatting, he's using it, and for a good purpose I think.
To me, the name isn't something that can be considered a trademark or any thing, I can't see how a city name can be considered property and more than the word 'shoes'. A post below this as I write says 'if it was chicagoolympics2016.com they might have an argument' ... I can't see how any of the parts of the name can possibly be considered a registerable trademark, I'm not saying they aren't, I don't know, they probably are.
But they olympics have been around far longer than trademarks and copyrights. If anything Chicago should be considered public property at best.
While he might be taking advantage of the situation, thats all the Olympic committee does anyway, they pull shit like deals with Visa so no other cards work, which is just ridiculous and in no way something that can be considered for the good of the sport, spectators or anyone other than those who get paid by the Olympic organization.
So in short, as someone who has been screwed out of his own domain, I cant' really say I'm sorry they were screwed out of it. He took a gamble on many names, if they really were concerned they should have registered the possiblities themselves long in advance like everyone else does. Google owns wwwgoogle.com, microsoft owns wwwmicrosoft.com, many companies have the insight to think ahead on things like this. They didn't, fuck'em.
And really, I can't imagine they can't afford to buy it from him, they'd just rather try to strong arm him into losing it rather than dealing with the fact that they weren't planning far enough ahead.
Evolution, business, and pretty much everything else in nature disagrees with you. Craftiness is a very GOOD reason to be rewarded, its part of what drives innovation. Next you'll be telling us that the runner who is faster in a race than everyone else shouldn't be the winner, because its not fair to the slower people.
I'm tired of all this 'its not fair' crap. Lifes not fair and no one even cheated the system on this one.
Good for him. I hope he makes a fortune from it.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
So if McDonalds named a product the McHammer, they get to forcibly take MCHammer.com on the basis of they own mc*?
And when Apple gets to forcibly take www.ink.com, and any other site that begins with "i" just by introducing a product with that name, since they introduce i* naming.
Here's an idea... perhaps I can trademark ".COM" and forcibly seize any domain ending in ".COM" since it contains something that looks like part of my mark.
What the heck is more generic than a random city name followed by 4 digits?
If I ever lived in Chicago; I might want Chicago2016.com. Perhaps to plan a party, unveiling of a new project, or event of some sort in the year 2016.
The Olympics are not the only event of interest to a city. City names and year numbers definitely shouldn't belong to the IOC.
Now if you created a parody site called "mcchocolatecake.com" and testified that you had used the term with the belief that it was so outlandish that McDonald's would never use it AND that any onlooker would see the name as a parody rather than a legitimate name, then you might have a case. But if McDonald's did come out with a McChocolateCake, you might be screwed anyway. It would be up to the ICANN panel to decide.
Not necessarily.
There was a very similar situation with Malcolm McBratney, who's nickname is McBrat. He sponsored a Rugby team an put his nickname on the shorts. McDonalds tried to sue him, partially based on their plans for a childrens clothing range. Although their planned name was McKids, NOT McBrats.
Anyway, they lost. It probably didn't help them that Malcom is an IP lawyer.
You can read more at: http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/articles/McBrats-wins-in-IP-lawyer-vs-Maccas-case_z68530.htm
Ever stop to think