At 09:50 AM 2/2/99 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I would say yes. Cybersquating restricted to trademarked >names only? I think not. There are some very desirable >names that are too generic to trademark but they could still >have high value. Maybe my definition of cybersquating is >broader than most. > >Chuck Okay, let's get this straight -- somebody might have a desirable name that is too generic to trademark, yet that still has high value. Somebody registers, say, "veronica.org" because she is named "Veronica". Yet NSI would still cut off the domain name if somebody with a trademark (the comic book company) presented it to NSI for a challenge? No need to answer, we know the answer is yes, NSI would cut it off. Yes, your (NSI's) definition of cybersquatting is indeed broader than most.
- Way off topic Martin B. Schwimmer
- Re: A little off topic Craig Simon
- Re: A little off topic Greg Skinner
- Re: A little off topic Michael Dillon
- Re: A little off topic: was ... Greg Skinner
- Re: A little off topic: was ... Roeland M.J. Meyer
- Re: A little off topic: was ... Greg Skinner
- Re: A little off topic: was ... jeff Williams
- Re: A little off topic: was NSI ... Michael Sondow
- ...it would be better if the... Bob Allisat
- RE: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Carl Oppedahl
- RE: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Mikki Barry
- Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Martin B. Schwimmer
- Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Michael Sondow
- Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Milton Mueller
- Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Martin B. Schwimmer
- No drastic changes in DNS needed? (was Re: [i... Carl Oppedahl
- RE: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats cgomes
- RE: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Bill Lovell
- Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Michael Sondow
- Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats Dave Crocker