Bureaucrats, staff, Administrators
8,157
edits
Changes
Added content from DNSSeal.wiki to create a fuller article.
# A registration which the registrant has no rights to, or legitimate interests in, with respect to the domain name.
# A registration which the registrant has no rights to, or legitimate interests in, with respect to the domain name.
# Wherein the domain name has been registered and is used in bad faith.<ref>[http://www.domainhandbook.com/gloss.html Domain Name Handbook]</ref>
# Wherein the domain name has been registered and is used in bad faith.<ref>[http://www.domainhandbook.com/gloss.html Domain Name Handbook]</ref>
==Historical Use==
Cybersquatting originated in the late 1990s when many companies did not necessarily use the Internet for marketing purposes and did not understand the value of registering their own trademark domain names.<ref name="faculty">[http://faculty.ist.psu.edu/bagby/Fall05/346F05T8/history.htm History of Cyber Squatting]</ref> Others saw the potential profit and registered these valuable domain names in order to sell them back to the companies with a significant mark-up.<ref name="faculty"/> Cybersquatting continues to be an issue for many businesses online today, and there is speculation that new gTLDs may cause a spike in cybersquatting complaints.<ref name="uk">[http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d4d9f66-2ce4-11e3-8281-00144feab7de.html#axzz2nsAV0r1E UK complaints over cyber squatting hit record and face increase] by Jeevan Vasagar</ref> As of 2012, a total of 2,884 complaints have been filed involving "domain name squatting".<ref name="uk"/>
== ICANN and its UDRP ==
== ICANN and its UDRP ==
===Phishing===
===Phishing===
According to [[APWG|The Anti-Phishing Working Group]], the number of cybersquatted domain names used in conjunction with [[phishing]] has fallen to only 2% of attacks in 2012. A report identified 64,204 phishing domains in total, of which only 12% is suspected by APWG as being registered by the phishers. The rest were compromised accounts owned by third parties. More than half of phisher-owned domains were in [[.tk]], a registry that offers free registration.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10861-only-2-of-phishing-attacks-use-cybersquatted-domain-names Only 2% of phishing attacks use cybersquatted domain names]. Published 2012 October 25. Retrieved 2012 November 13.</ref>
According to [[APWG|The Anti-Phishing Working Group]], the number of cybersquatted domain names used in conjunction with [[phishing]] has fallen to only 2% of attacks in 2012. A report identified 64,204 phishing domains in total, of which only 12% is suspected by APWG as being registered by the phishers. The rest were compromised accounts owned by third parties. More than half of phisher-owned domains were in [[.tk]], a registry that offers free registration.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10861-only-2-of-phishing-attacks-use-cybersquatted-domain-names Only 2% of phishing attacks use cybersquatted domain names]. Published 2012 October 25. Retrieved 2012 November 13.</ref>
==Legislation==
*[[Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act]] of 1999 (ACPA): This law makes "the bad faith, abusive registration and use of the distinctive trademarks of others as Internet domain names, with the intent to profit from the goodwill associated with those trademarks" illegal.<ref name=Samson>[http://www.internetlibrary.com/publications/anticybsquattSamson9-05_art.cfm The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act: Key Information] by Martin Samson (as originally cited in ''Shields v. Zuccarini'', 254 F3d 476 - 3d Cir. 2001), Internet Library of Law and Court Decisions</ref>
**Under ACPA, a company can seek money damages and the transfer or termination of the offending domain name.<ref name=Samson/>
**For example, in May 2013, Facebook was awarded 2.8 million dollars in an ACPA lawsuit against typosquatters and cybersquatters in addition to gaining control of the offending domain names.<ref>[http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7088bf09-8a9e-4449-a179-d90bdfad3310 Cybersquatting; typosquatting – Facebook’s $2.8 million in damages and domain names] by Christy Roth, Marianne Dunham and Jason Watson (May 10, 2013), Lexology</ref>
*Additionally, if a cybersquatting offense misleads Internet users by directing them to sites with pornographic or explicit content, the cybersquatter can be charged under the [[Truth in Domain Names Act]] of 2003.<ref name="cyber">[http://www.cybertelecom.org/dns/truth.htm Truth in Domain Names Act of 2003], Cybertelecom</ref><ref name="cornell">[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2252B 18 U.S. Code § 2252B - Misleading domain names on the Internet], Legal Information Institute</ref>
==Legal Recourse==
==Legal Recourse==