In a Press release, the Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse (CADNA) announced today the addition of Hewlett-Packard and InterContinental Hotels as new members.
Here is a look at their agenda for 2009:
“””””CADNA has been working diligently to further international and national policies that combat the practice of cybersquatting, and has gained a reputation as a committed public interest watchdog. Its growing influence is fueled by the principled goals of its members, who are dedicated to protecting their brands and their customers. As brands continue to learn about the prevalence and practice of online criminal activities, CADNA finds companies increasingly eager and motivated to join the coalition’s fight against online trademark infringement.”””””
“”””In line with its work to promote awareness about the practice of cybersquatting and the extent of its effects, CADNA has built an interactive calculator that brand owners can use to estimate how much revenue they are currently losing as a result of this criminal practice. By answering a few simple questions, brands can instantly receive an estimate of the costs of cybersquatting under the current governing system and a comparative estimate of the costs of cybersquatting under a system that has been reshaped through CADNA’s efforts. To use this calculator and learn more about how you can get involved in combating online fraud, visit www.cadna.org.”””””
Once again they are referring to the practice of cybersquatting” as a “criminal practice”.
Once again they label cybersquatting as fraud.
Of course currently cybersquatting is not criminal.
Cybersquatting It a civil matter.
It subjects violators to civil fines, damages and loss of domains.
However I am not aware of any criminal penalties for engaging in this behavor.
Yet.
However, have no doubt that this is a continuing effort on CADNA to take cybersquatting issue and asking congress to make it a criminal violation in 2009.
All this will lead to an increase of reserve high jacking cases, as you will be threatened not only with $100K fine (look for this number to be increased into the seven figures in 2009), but jail time as well.
Time for ICA to start rebutting these press releases.
The ICA cannot let this categorization of criminalization just hang out there and become fixed as truth in people’s mind.
Whatever your politics you will have to admit we are entering into a new era of more governmental regulation.
CADNA is coming and they are coming after domain owners.
IMO I think we should refer to Cadna as a CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION that looks like it is run by THUGS for trying to paint a civil matter as some type of criminal activity.
Too many people/companies are making too much money profiting from trademark squatting and typo squatting. The industry refuses to clean itself up so CADNA will get the ear of politicians. In addition, I suspect trademark owners will move away from UDRP filings and bring some big headline civil suits for willful trademark infringement against some very high profile companies. If it’s not from a large company I expect it will take the form of a class action suit where a nobody plaintiff will lead the class and a group of lawyers will make a huge windfall off the settlement. CADNA may even coordinate the class action!
I agree 100% with Rick Schwartz – I have been watching this CADNA for a while from a distance.
Why Park
Those engaging in the wide spread practice of trademark infringement are not part of the industry.
They are rouge operators.
Trademark holders have already filed big civil suits against companies including Google.
All I’m saying is they are moving in the clear direction of not increased civil actions, but criminal actions.
And where is the ICA on this?!!
CANDA is a threat, but ICA is a joke when it comes to doing anything productive. Fucking up their Kentucky reply is a prime example of their incompetence.
Hi MHB:
I take issue with your statement that “those engaged in wide spread practice of trademark infringement are not part of the industry.”
Case in point, I own the trademark Corky & Company, for childrens coats. CorkyCoats.com is owned by a Texas company that owns 600,000 other domains, is parked at HitFarm, serves Yahoo ads and was registered by Compana. So this company that owns 600,000 domains is a rouge operator as well as HitFarm, Yahoo and Compana. I don’t think so, they’re our peers and until the neighborhood gets cleaned up we’ll all be associated with people/companies that think its okay to profit from other people/companies intellectual property.
I agree many in the industry are clean operators, but there are also many in this industry that only care about the money and could care less about infringing trademarks if the only penalty is to lose a name.
There are many actions that can be litigated in both civil and criminal court. For instance simply write a check on a frozen bank account and you can be sued in civil court as well as charged criminally. I just filed a small claims case for a $390 check written on closed account and the local DA is pursing the mater criminally. Knowingly taking someones intellectual property is stealing and should carry penalties accordingly.
Alan
WPI, writing a bad check is fraud, selling fake goods is fraud. Cybeosquating is not fraud or criminal. Next thing you gonna tell me copyright infringement or plagiarism is criminal too.
In a county where half the states have decriminalized marijuana, is gonna criminalize fat fingers ?
Fat fingers lawsuits have been dealt with in the 80s with phone text industry, now its time for them to be adopted into the 21st century.
FX, So profiting from PPC revenue on CorkyCoats.com is not a theft? 15 years and about $5 million in marketing expenses to build a brand to have someone dilute the value of the brand so they can make a few pennies everyday. Give me a break. This is stealing and stealing is a crime. The only reason why CorkyCoats.com is registered by God knows who is because there are 5,000 searches each month for Corky Coats!
I don’t understand your analogy of marijuana and fat fingers. Where is the stealing?
Is this stealing? Buy the domain name TheRedCross.com, develop it and collected money from people. Sure sounds criminal to me and it’s just about equivalent to typo squatting.
Alan
Holy crap! I just went to CorkyCoats.com to see if one of my Yahoo PPC campaign was being displayed on the domain and the domain is now disabled. WTF happened?
Hmm, I gather from the comments above mine that some people aren’t really aware of the differences between a civil and a criminal offense. While not authoritative, these should give some ideas:
target=”_new”>http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_civil_and_criminal_law
I gather from those that civil offenses don’t carry the same “moral weight” as criminal offenses do. Not that it won’t stop people from having their own opinions about what should be civil or criminal, much more campaign to get them changed to meet their desires.
Alan
If CADNA get’s there way, many more domains are going to be treated as trademarking infringing that are under current law.
Let not let our enemys write laws to govern us.
I assure you they will be stricter and harsher than you can image.
Let’s not forget that under the Snowe Bill more than federally registered trademarks were made illegal including Geo domains and generic domains
Mike, I’m a newbie domainer talking from my heart. I respect the points you make.
I just visited the CADNA site. I found it hilarious that WIPO.com is an intellectual property themed parked site. Its a private registration so maybe its owned by WIPO LOL.
Alan
Please also note that the term “CADNA” is a trademarked term (not belonging to this organization) and therefore this organization is in fact engaging in the same conduct it seeks to make criminal