If someone owns a domain, such as www.example.com, purchased in 2000
(which is a very popular website and has over one million members),
and someone else owns www.example.org purchased in 2004, but with only
an intention to create a 'fan' website of example.com, but then the
person resells the example.org at an auction website for the
originally purchased price (which is usually ~$10 USD/year) then is
this considered cybersquatting?

Hello garyking,

Perhaps a broad interpretation of the term "cybersquatting" would
cover this situation.  But I believe that the typical meaning of
"cybersquatting" requires that the person try to make a significant
profit by selling the domain name.  (If the person was trying to make
a significant profit by using www.example.org to confuse users into
believing it was associated with www.example.com, that might also be
cybersquatting.  But that's not the case if your hypothetical
situation.)

"cybersquatting"
Answers.com
http://www.answers.com/cybersquatting

"cybersquatting"
Webopedia
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/C/cybersquatting.html

"Cybersquatting: What It Is and What Can Be Done About It"
Nolo
http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectID/60EC3491-B4B5-4A98-BB6E6632A2FA0CB2/111/228/195/ART/

Please let me know if you need clarification of this answer.  (Also
please note the disclaimer at the bottom of this page; this answer
does not constitute professional legal advice.)

- justaskscott


Search strategy --

Searched on Google and Answers.com for:

cybersquatting

---

Request for Answer Clarification by garyking-ga on 12 Jul 2005 07:31 PDT

When you say significant profit... what if the example.org owner sells
it on eBay, with a starting bid of, say, $0.01 or $7.99 (original
purchased price) and eventually the domain jumps to $1,000? Would that
be considered cybersquatting, even though the final cost was not
forced in any way by the domain owner?

---

Clarification of Answer by justaskscott-ga on 12 Jul 2005 18:05 PDT

According to the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (or at
least a version available online), it appears that the key to
cybersquatting is "bad faith intent."

"TITLE 15 > CHAPTER 22 > SUBCHAPTER III > § 1125" [subsection (d)]
(Release date: 2004-05-18)
Legal Information Institute: US Code
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001125----000-.html

Could a lawyer for www.example.com argue that the person who put
www.example.org up for auction acted with "bad faith intent"?  I
suppose so.  Would a jury find that the person had "bad faith intent"?
 I doubt it (though perhaps the lawyer would feel differently).  You
can examine the criteria in subsection (d)(1)(B)(i) of this statute --
especially (d)(1)(B)(i)(VI) -- to see whether you agree.

Whether the domain contains a trademarked name would also be a consideration.