Mikki,
Another observation might be that the much maligned and
disliked NSI dispute policy might actually discourage
cybersqatters from going after trademarked names because
they know the mark holders can invoke the policy. If this
is true, it could possibly be concluded that cybersquatters
are focusing more on non-trademarked names.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Mikki Barry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 7:17 PM
To: IFWP Discussion List
Cc: IFWP Discussion List; Chuck Gomes
Subject: Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats
At 6:56 PM -0500 2/1/99, Michael Sondow wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] a �crit:
>>
>> Per the request of Michael Sondow, the following data is
>> provided in response to the question "how many times did
NSI
>> invoke its Domain Name Dispute Policy?"
>>
>> During the slightly more than 5 months between the end of
>> July 1995 and the end of the year, we invoked the Policy
166
>> times.
>> During 1996 we invoked the Policy 745 times.
>> During 1997 we invoked the Policy 905 times
>> During 1998 we invoked the Policy 838 times.
>
>Thanks for the info, Chuck. Very interesting, really.
Considering the large
>increase over time in registrations, it's surprising that
the policy hasn't
>been invoked ever more frequently as well. Any explanation
for this? Two
>that could be suggested are: 1) The policy has tended to
discourage people;
>2) The number of free domains of any value to resellers has
diminished.
>Somehow, I don't think either of these is the answer. Any
ideas?
you think maybe, JUST maybe....cybersquatting isn't such a
huge issue as
some would have you believe? If cybersquatting, by
definition, is the
taking of a trademarked name as a domain name, and if the
"squatee" can
just invoke this policy and get the domain name......one
would think that
such a terrible and widespread problem as cybersquatting
would show a
marked increase in disputes, no?
I mean, if it's THAT easy to get the domain name and it
isn't being used
very much, then how can one possibly advocate other extra
legal approaches
that are touted to be more "fair" than the NSI policy?
