Cybersquatting question

[Designer]

Is it cybersquatting in Australia to own domains with same name as fictional movie characters?

 

[neddy]

Is it cybersquatting in Australia to own domains with same name as fictional movie characters?

Depends on a few things I suppose. If you used the domain as a fan or information site you may be ok (and I stress may).

If you just had the name and didn't have a site up, then that wouldn't look particularly good.

I would be interested in Cooper Mills general thoughts.

But personally, I wouldn't touch it.

P.S. I have moved this to its own thread - it didn't belong in other one.
.

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

firstly, lets not use the term cyber squatting, it has a legal meaning (despite what you read there are some Federal Court authorities on this definition and it doesn't match common perceptions)

secondly, can you elaborate a little further on 'fictional movie characters' and what you would do with the domain name

 

[Shane]

I would simply avoid domains in that category.

Something like 'jamesbond.com.au' or whatever may sound cool, but how are you going to make money out of it? The only likely end-user is the trademark owner, and they'll be lodging a UDRP rather than making you a big offer.

 

[neddy]

firstly, lets not use the term cyber squatting, it has a legal meaning (despite what you read there are some Federal Court authorities on this definition and it doesn't match common perceptions)

Erhan - can you please elaborate on this as it applies to the Australian domain name space (in general terms at least)?

That would be so helpful as I'm sure there are many people who have incorrect perceptions. Particularly those newcomers to our marketplace.

One thing I found in my searching was this article on auDA's blog:

http://blog.auda.org.au/2010/09/20/audrpe/

The first paragraph contains a fairly good summation.
.

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

Thanks Ned

There are a number of cases which deal with what cyber-squatting is for example CSR Limited v Resource Capital Australia Pty Limited [2003] FCA 279 - it is basically where someone registers a domain name, having no entitlement to register it, for the sole purpose of selling the domain name to (or otherwise extracting money from) the trademark owner. This is an article topic, which I will try and write at some stage.

This type of behaviour is what lead to the introduction of the UDRP and then the auDRP.

While is still occurs, it is nothing like it used to be

 

[snoopy]

Is it cybersquatting in Australia to own domains with same name as fictional movie characters?

Likely to lead to legal problems, sometimes the name will be trademarked in Australia, like the James Bond example, even if it isn't they probably got a good budget to come after you if the site ever amounts to anything. Don't really see the upside for this type of registration. Traffic volume is likely to be low, as well as traffic value.

 

[Designer]

@Shane and @snoopy - jamesbond.com.au was one of the domains that my question was based on. Purchased on drops and parked.

 

[Shane]

Well that's quite a coincidence!

Yeah, if it was me I wouldn't touch anything like that. A quick search on ATMOSS shows that the term 'James Bond' is a registered trademark...