08|04|2007 01:19 pm EDT
With a stronger opposition against large domain portfolio holders, especially from the corporate world, domain investors need to make sure to fight for their turf. The times where staying underground and under the radar were the best thing to do, are over. In order to secure our rights as a legitimate owner of generic domains, we will have to participate in the political process that decides what those rights are.
One possible step in this direction is a code of rights and responsibilities, as proposed by Robert A. Connor.
The Registrantâ€™s Code was born out of frustration with polarized views on domain related issues. For example, letâ€™s take the issue of trademarks. On the one hand, there is classic cybersquatting wherein someone registers a domain that is a trademarked term and tries to sell it to the trademark holder. This is wrong. On the other hand, there is classic trademark over-reaching wherein someone with a trademark on a phrase (letâ€™s sayâ€”â€œJoeâ€™s Cars”) uses legal threats to try to hijack a generic sub-string domain (letâ€™s sayâ€”â€œCars.com”). This is also wrong. A balanced Registrantâ€™s Code of Rights and Responsibilities should say that registrants should not infringe trademarks by cybersquatting domains and trademark holders should not try to hijack domains by over-reaching trademarks.
For more information, visit the Domain Registrantâ€™s Code of Rights and Responsibilities.