Buying Domain Names

[RonMA68]

Question here... Does anyone know the rules for buying domain names of famous people? In other words, let's say that www.davidletterman.com was availble (it's not, but just for the sake of argument).. If I bought it in an effort to later sell it to the celebrity is that legal?

I could put up a simple web site at davidletterman.com and claim that I was developing it, right? I mean, you can't copyright the name of a person with an everyday name, right?

Incidentally, if you go to davidletterman.com you get some kind of weird site for buying different items, but it's obvious that the owner is just trying to sell the name.

Yes.. this is a loaded question because I have bought a couple of names of up and coming stars that are probably going to be huge in the next few months and I'm now wondering what to do with them now that I own them. I bought the .com and .net names for a couple of people.

[FireCracker37]

What you are talking about used to be a major business, before every company was on the web, a bunch of people started registering names like ibm.com, apple.com, and even microsoft.com, and then just waiting for the company to shell out the cash for it.

Now, most companies register the domain name before the business name, so it is a tougher game to play, and I wouldn't be surprised if the up-and-commings didn't even try to register their name. I would do something with them like what tons of other sites have done (check out http://www.abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz.com ), just those dumb little add pages. Worst that could happen is you are out 10 bucks for the name.

[LeeU]

You would have to prove what your connection to the name is. The courts have ruled several times that, without any connection, you have no other purpose than to domain squat for the purpose of making money off of someone else's name, literally. If David Lettermen wanted to press the issue, there's a very good chance you would lose. (I can't think of the person, but the courts just ruled in favor of the actor/performer and he/she received the domain name, free and clear.) As I said, you have no connection; he does. It's not just his name, it's his business also. If you were to register something like business.com (it's taken but just for argument sake), then that is a different story.

However, if the name were yours, then it's a different story. Check out the case of Don Henley (http://www.don-henley.com/domain/dispute.htm) whose trying to sue a disabled vet for using his own name. On the other hand, MacDonald's sued someone for using their domain name (or something like it, I forget) and easily won.

If you search the Internet for domain squatting issues you will find it's really a waste of time.

[KRILEE]

its not illegal.


i do it a lot. although most of it is for ****s and giggles.

[KDLA]

You would have to prove what your connection to the name is. The courts have ruled several times that, without any connection, you have no other purpose than to domain squat for the purpose of making money off of someone else's name, literally. If David Lettermen wanted to press the issue, there's a very good chance you would lose. (I can't think of the person, but the courts just ruled in favor of the actor/performer and he/she received the domain name, free and clear.) As I said, you have no connection; he does. It's not just his name, it's his business also. If you were to register something like business.com (it's taken but just for argument sake), then that is a different story.

However, if the name were yours, then it's a different story. Check out the case of Don Henley (http://www.don-henley.com/domain/dispute.htm) whose trying to sue a disabled vet for using his own name. On the other hand, MacDonald's sued someone for using their domain name (or something like it, I forget) and easily won.

If you search the Internet for domain squatting issues you will find it's really a waste of time.

He's right. Most cases filed are ruled in favor of the celebrity or organization based on the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, Paragraph 4 given these circumstances:

- that the domain name in dispute is identical to or confusingly similar with the trade mark comprising the celebrity's given name;

- that the domain user has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of that domain name; and

- that it has been registered and is being used in bad faith

KDLA