Re: the cybersquatting bill (was: Don't Split the List etc.)

["Me Uh, K." <pram512@yahoo.com>]

[: hacktivism :]


--- Lizzie Borden <lizbor@hotmail.com> wrote:
> [: hacktivism :]
> 
> 
> From: Chuck0 <chuck@tao.ca>
> >
> > I like the idea of creating critical sites like
> GWbush.com or
> > Yesrudy.com. I think what the McLibel folks did
> with their site also
> > ties into this thread. The ruling class really
> crapped in their pants
> > about that website. I even found a book on web
> marketing aimed at
> > business types that used the McLibel website as a
> case example of how
> > lawyers can screw up a company's image.
> 
> This is why I thought the cybersquatting bill might
> be significant as a
> target for hacktivists. The bill would give rights
> to entities such as
> McDonalds and George Bush Jr. to claim relative
> parody domain names without
> recompense to the originator. An example: George
> Bush Jr. could confiscate
> the domain www.gwbush.com  simply because it is his
> name, and the parody is
> about him, and the original domain owner couldn't do
> anything about it. In
> effect, it undermines free speech and gives more
> power to those who have the
> most money and corporate clout. It seems to me that
> this is something
> hacktivists would be interested in subverting.
> However, I wouldn't know
> exactly where or how to start such subversion, so I
> was hoping there was
> something already in the works. If not, then perhaps
> someone can direct me
> as to what sorts of hacktivist efforts could be
> accomplished to protest this
> action - with that knowledge I might be willing to
> organize such an effort.
> 
> Liz

As I understand it, the law currently stands with an
allowance for parody.  It's all right to make fun of
someone, so long as it doesn't look like you're trying
to re-direct/hijack their traffic.  (generally, I
think it's best, in the eyes of the law, to link to
the origonal site, in little letters, way down at the
bottom of your page :) - I want to say the guy who has
gwbush.com did this, until Bush tried to obtain a
cease and desist order, which upset him enough to take
it off)

But I'm probably wrong - there are a lot of <hazy> law
about domain names/registration, and they seem to
change with whoever is reporting them.
(I believe it's currently legal to buy a corporate
website with the intention of selling it to them for a
huge profit, or to run a parody site with a similar
name, but if you use the similar name to
redirect/hijack traffic (http://www.whitehouse.com :)
you stand to lose a lawsuit)

I'm curious about the specifics of proving you tried
to contact the owners of the offending site.  Every
one of my experiences with Network Solutions has been
fuckin' 'orrible, and I'd hate to see those guys end
up with more power over the web than they already
have.

-mia k.  (who onced moved a small porno site's traffic
to geocities by pretending to be thier corporate
contact and calling Network Solutions, and is now
afraid for her homepage because that worked so easily)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

[: hacktivism :]
[: for unsubscribe instructions or list info consult the list FAQ :]
[: http://hacktivism.tao.ca/ :]