After years of trying, Australian power rockers AC/DC have finally obtained acdc.com from a porn company that used the site to redirect many an unwitting fan to sites offering filthy photos of bondage, water sports and other types of kink. With song titles including "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap," "Sin City" and "Touch Too Much …
I find it particularly annoying when companies make money holding domain names they have no business of holding.... The same irritation that spam would trigger.
The story doesn't say whether ACDC had to chip in to retrieve the domain name (I would think so). If so does anyone know how much they had to cough up?
Since AC/DC is also a commonly used term to refer bisexuality, its use on a porn site would seem to be a legitimate (at least as legitimate as a porn site can be) use of the domain, and would not indicate registration in bad faith. I can easily see an electrical contractor or supplier to also have a legitimate claim to the domain. WIPO is full cybersquatting complaints, it is also full of actions where someone wants a domain that they feel that only they should have and they are slapped down.
Registering domains with the sole intention of selling them to someone else who has a claim on the domain when there is no direct legitimate claim of their own to the domain is cybersquatting, and is illegal in most parts of the globe. Using it for another purpose, such as registering a common term (and AC/DC is a common term in the the electrical engineering field) and directing it to a search engine (or even a porn site) is not cybersquatting. If the term is trademarked, however, it MAY be trademark infringement, but generally only if the site it advertises or sells goods or services that compete with the trademark holder.
If I registered theregister.biz and pointed it to a web site that sold point of sale equipment (cash registers), it would be a legitimate use of the domain. If I pointed it to a news site it would be trademark infringement. If I did it to sell it to the folks that run this site it would be cybersquatting. If I had it pointed to the point of sale equipment and theregister.co.uk asked to buy it from me, it would be a legitimate business transaction. If I had it pointed to the point of sale site and then tried to sell it to the folks here it would be a "gray area" in the law.
Anyway, cybersquatting isn't really a major problem and hasn't been for quite awhile. The real problem that I see these days is "domain tasting" -- upwards of two thirds of all .com domains registered are actually "tasters", not squatters, and they don't stick around long enough for you to file a complaint against them.
I take it you've never been to an AC/DC concert...
Ac/Dc... Ah yeah....
I remember giving em a newspaper ( Sunday Independent) at one of their pub gigs in Cannington ( WA) in 1974 .. They were nobodies then.
Couple of months later they released High Voltage
The rest is history.
Yep, I remember AC/DC in 1974, saw them at a school concert, on a tour sponsored by coca-cola! They were pretty famous back then even, first single wasCan I sit next to you girl, and a hit well before High Voltage First live band I saw, and second best ever (After Pink Floyd....). Not the same without Bon though......
ACDC.COM FALL 2007
Are they dispanding?
The kings of double entendres
"With song titles including "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap," "Sin City" and "Touch Too Much," the band's lineup is hardly one to blush at a little skin."
What about Sink The Pink? Giving The Dog A Bone? The Jack? Big Balls?
Perhaps they should make it into a themed porn site instead.
Before, whenever I wanted to look up info on AC/DC, I always ended up with hours of fun browsing porn sites instead. What am I supposed to do now? You bastards ruined my porn!
Re: Re: Cybersquatting
Thanks for the clarifications Anonymous. Makes sense, just out of curiosity what are domain tasters?
I believe it refers to people/registrars mass registering domain names for a grace period (5 days) before deleting the ones that get very few hits (for a refund) and keeping those with a lot of traffic.
Every time you make a typo and end up at one of those "search" sites full of ads, that'd be the work of "tasters".
re: domain "tasters"
System is pretty much correct there. Domain Registrars typically allow a couple of days grace period when a domain is registered, usually to allow for corrections of typo's etc, whereby you can get a refund on a domain.
You'll increasingly find that recently expired domain names - especially dot coms - will be automatically registered for this grace period and set up on a 'search site'. If any traffic hits the site in the couple of days they're allowed to own it within the free-refund grace period, they'll keep it...if not, they'll refund it.
I know this happens - because of a problem swapping registrars, I lost a couple of domain names recently - both were instantly re-registered, but only the busy one stayed registered - I was able to re-register the other myself once they found out it generated no traffic.
The only thing wrong with System's explanation is that it's not usually typo domain names that will encounter the search site - these particular sites are purposefully registered - usually as soon as the correct and legitimate spelling is - to effectively capture all those with fat fingers and/or bad spelling. For the most part, it's automated and speculative 'recently expired' domains at suffer the grace period registrations.
Personally, I think there shouldn't be such an easy way to 'taste' domains - most reputable registrars ask you to confirm your purchases at least once before you buy a domain, so an easy commit / uncommit procedure only leads to a flurry of pointless registrations - it only really benefits those who want to see what will make a quick profit for them without the commitment.
- 20 Freescale staff on vanished Malaysia Airlines flight MH370
- Neil Young touts MP3 player that's no Piece of Crap
- Review Distro diaspora: Four flavours of Ubuntu unpacked
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Sysadmins and devs: Do these job descriptions make any sense?