I appreciate the time you have put in your reply.
If you scroll a few centimeters up, you will see some domains I pointed Mr Jon Green to.
Do you think then that this highly reputable company is practising cybersquatting?
(If you think so, why not sue them!)
Let me ask you this way...
Would you not like to own a piece of land in LA, central London, Tokyo or New York?
If you would like to own one, would you not prefer to buy it NOW that the market has crashed and the prices are at their lowest?
I am expecting you to answer NO to all these questions above. Why? Because answering Yes would make you a hypocrite or ...a squatter (in YOUR understanding!!).
With all due respect, domaining is virtual real estate. A domainer is a virtual property developer.
And according to you, a property developer is a squatter, if I follow your logic.
I presume you are smart enough to understand the metaphor/comparison.
Regarding the example you used (theRegister.ru), if the Register holds an international trademark, then the person who registers trademark names is in the wrong. (I am repeating myself here). I cannot stress enough that this is the BIG difference between a domainer and a cybersquatter. A cybersquatter is doing an illegal act, a Domainer is not.
You also seem to forget that the internet is still very young! You cannot expect every domain to be giving you great websites like cars.com or business.com .
The time for Electronics.com to bear a stunning website will come too.
(Does every piece of land on earth have a state-of-the-art multi-storey building on it??) Patience, my dear, is a virtue!
But now, Would you rather have electronics.com resolving to an Error 404 "Page not found" or rather to a page with some links that still have some relation to electronics?
On a side note, I just thought I'd let you know, you will soon see more websites coming online soon. Parking is on the decline, and PPC revenues have taken a downward slope, which (as I mentioned in another comment above) is a good thing, since this will force (lazy?) domainers to develop.
You seem to hold a grudge with pages that serve adverts. Advertising is wrong according to you? How do you think Google or Yahoo! generates the main core of their profits?
"the person who 'should own' a domain name is the person who has the best use for that domain name."
What is best use according to you?
Isn't one man's Morris Minor another man's Lamborghini? Or... what would be 'best use' for polo.com ? Ralph Lauren? Volkswagen? The sport played on horseback ? Can you tell me which one? I can't.
I'm sorry to hear that 'your interests' that you feel you can talk authoritatively about came to you a bit late. Late enough for you to miss the chance of registering the perfect domain name. But you see, that's precisely (maybe!) what some people tried to avoid when they have registered domains a long time ago.
Congratulations on being able to settle on a different TLD. Don't worry, if your content is exteremely good, you will get the visitors you are after! Remember, Google didn't mean anything 10 years ago. Flikr.com is not even english!
So you have built a site on a domain, but let it go because the site flopped. Great, it's Your choice! But you can't impose that on other more perseverant people.
Do you know how many versions business.com went through from 1996 to how it looks today in 2008? Have a look for yourself with the WayBackMachine at www.archive.org . At one point it was even simply serving ads.
I am sad to see how sour you are towards people who have a vision.
Some people see small things, some people see big.
Some see the glass half empty, others half full.
That's how the world goes I'm afraid.