CFO
|
| chahsiubow wrote: | | It is absurd sometimes though when a movie star sues to get their name website and get it for free off some squatter. That's tantamount to Walmart bulldozing your home and setting up shop using the new supreme court ruling. |
No, I don't think it is.  If someone is actively using a web site then they're not a squatter. As I mentioned earlier in this topic, the site of casper.com was being used for a family web site, and Warner Brothers was not able to "sue" to get the domain turned over to them. But on the other hand, if someone had purchased casper.com and was sitting on it without developing it / using it for any appropriate purpose, then WB could have a legitimate chance of getting the domain turned over due to copyright issues.
If you own property and build a house and live in it, then you're making use of the property. You have "developed" the property. If you own a domain name and have developed it, then different rules apply. Squatters do not have the same protection, as they are simply speculating or attempting to extort the trademark holder into paying an exhorbitant price for something. |
|
stock market game on the web. At eInvesting you compete for monthly cash prizes while you interact, make virtual dollars, purchase items, and trade in the realistic stock market simulator. We make investing FUN!
