Is it proper to sue someone for squatting a domain name?

[JacobGalt]

Suppose there's a celebrity named David Watson and someone buys davidwatson.com and tries to sell it to Watson. Is it proper for him to use the courts to get the domain name from the squatter?

[DavidOdden]

You ought to be able to figure this one.

[Iudicious]

Oh sure, he can try.

But in a proper legal system, he wouldn't get the domain name.

[DavidV]

There is not a simple answer to this question. Morally, the celebrity creates the value of his name. The squatter is just trying to ride on his coattails. However there’s no easy way to measure the value of a name versus the value of the alternative usage of the domain. There have been many cases of a large corporation trying to seize the domain of a small business that was legitimately using it. The simplest answer I can give is that the domain owner and the buyer should try to negotiate a deal. If the owner refuses to sell it, but continues to profit from the value of name that someone else knows, the courts may get involved.

Note that under a fully-capitalist society, the domain name system itself would be privately owned (currently its effectively owned by the U.S. government) and the owning organization would set these rules. There does not necessarily have to be a single domain name system.

Edited July 17, 2010 by GreedyCapitalist

[JASKN]

There is not a simple answer to this question. Morally, the celebrity creates the value of his name. The squatter is just trying to ride on his coattails.

How can a celebrity make claim to any old benefit someone gains as a result of his popularity? By that logic I can see a blogger claiming a portion of a celebrity's paycheck because the blog helped make him famous.

[DavidV]

How can a celebrity make claim to any old benefit someone gains as a result of his popularity? By that logic I can see a blogger claiming a portion of a celebrity's paycheck because the blog helped make him famous.

I think the relevant context here is that the purpose of a domain name is to be a unique identifier for an entity. If you have a domain name that people assume belongs to a celebrity, there is an element of impersonation.

[D'kian]

Suppose there's a celebrity named David Watson and someone buys davidwatson.com and tries to sell it to Watson. Is it proper for him to use the courts to get the domain name from the squatter?

What if the original domain buyer's name is David Watson? Names are kind of generic that way.

If you were to buy a domain using the name of a registered trademark (ie microsoft.com) or copyrighted material (ie atlasshrugged.com), then I can see the plaintiff might have a case.

[Zip]

Most names are not unique however. I knew a guy named Michael Jackson he had as much of a right to the domain name michaeljackson.com as anyone else regardless of how many other people thought of the Michael Jackson when they thought of his domain name.

Or to turn your question on its head if there were some celebrity making a Mel Gibson style ass out of himself named Martin Gasser who owned the domain name martingasser.com then I should be able to sue for that ownership if I don't like what he is doing to my good name.

The person who buys a piece of property owns that property regardless of who wants to own it later. If that isn't the case you are arguing for some sort of eminent domain and property rights are moot.

Yes, the owner and the person who wants to be the owner can surely negotiate to see if they can come to a deal but there should be no expectation on the part of the purchaser that he can force another person to give up his legal property rights to anything just because the purchaser happens to be famous, and wants it.

Edited July 17, 2010 by Zip

[The Collector]

Most names are not unique however. I knew a guy named Michael Jackson he had as much of a right to the domain name michaeljackson.com as anyone else regardless of how many other people thought of the Michael Jackson when they thought of his domain name.

Or to turn your question on its head if there were some celebrity making a Mel Gibson style ass out of himself named Martin Gasser who owned the domain name martingasser.com then I should be able to sue for that ownership if I don't like what he is doing to my good name.

The person who buys a piece of property owns that property regardless of who wants to own it later. If that isn't the case you are arguing for some sort of eminent domain and property rights are moot.

Yes, the owner and the person who wants to be the owner can surely negotiate to see if they can come to a deal but there should be no expectation on the part of the purchaser that he can force another person to give up his legal property rights to anything just because the purchaser happens to be famous, and wants it.

Agreed.

Case in point: http://www.nissan.com/ VS. http://www.nissanusa.com/

The full story behind the similar names can be found here.

[Mindy]

Agreed.

Case in point: http://www.nissan.com/ VS. http://www.nissanusa.com/

The full story behind the similar names can be found here.

To me it is clear that it is not someone's name that is claimed, but their name as part of a web address. Without the .com, etc., it doesn't work. As such, the named celeb. has no claim to it.

-- Mindy