|
The essay expands a cooperative solution to third-party use of brands in domain names. Like any approach that depends on cooperation, the solution will require both sides to change behavior but also allow both sides to take credit for the resulting benefits, i.e. a triangular solution. If not immediately addressed, the problem of third-party use can become a major threat to the industry. But we already know one thing: when it comes to this issue, legal action and bullying don’t work.
Introduction
The mere word “cybersquatting” stirs up emotions in all of us. The term was first used to mean the simple act of registering a domain name for investment purposes. We have anecdotal evidence that anyone who wants a given name, and who finds it already taken, becomes eager to lay the cybersquatter label on all domainers everywhere and especially on the registrant. The media also sprays the term about quite freely. But a more precise meaning has won acceptance, and that’s the one I use here. Currently, it typically refers to the use and registration of domain names that include someone else’s brand or a typo version of said brand.
As far as brand owners are concerned, such behavior counts as breach of trust (intentional or not) by the name owner in particular and the domainer community in general. The domainers, meanwhile, resent the tone taken by brand owners and the media, and they have their guard up because of the techniques some brand owners have used in trying to gain control of a given domain name. Too often, domainers feel, brand owners have ignored clear evidence that a domain name represented fair use and was therefore legal.
Our community resents criticism and resents it fiercely. Anybody who has ever written about the domain name industry tells the same story—introducing even a hint of negativity into an article creates intense negative emotions against the author and the publishing site. One reason, no doubt, is our abundant experience with biased media coverage. But there’s another. At Stanford University, the psychologists Robert P. Vallone, Lee Ross, and Mark R. Lepper studied perceptions of media bias regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They found that people with strong opinions on the conflict were more likely to perceive bias in news accounts. Pro-Palestinian subjects saw a pro-Israel bias, and vice versa. The same could well be true in our case. Polarization creates an abiding sense of unfairness.
To reach beyond the polarization mindset, to restore trust, we must set aside litigation and any attempts to broaden the relevant laws (See Philip S Corwin, “ICA Posts Position Paper and Analysis of Snowe ‘Anti-Phishing’ Legislation,” CircleID). A new approach is needed, one that allows both sides to change behavior and brag about it.
Solution Components
The first step is relabeling. Domain name owners should be seen as brand complementors because, when the names are used cooperatively, they create value for both sides.
Next, brand owners should:
Now for our side. Owners of domain names—that is, of complementors—should:
We’ll know the new approach is working when both sides can boast about how well they’re making out. Brand owners will point to the foresight and the courage to work for Me Inc., the shareholders, and the domain name ecosystem. Complementors will point to higher legitimate returns and lower risk. Even the third side of the triangle benefits, because what better place to boast than starting with the media?
Sponsored byIPv4.Global
Sponsored byDNIB.com
Sponsored byVerisign
Sponsored byCSC
Sponsored byRadix
Sponsored byWhoisXML API
Sponsored byVerisign