Entrepreneur and Investor with 20 years of experience in setting up and incubating start-ups the world over. With a keen interest in technology enabled business, I am an enabler of entrepreneurship initiatives in emerging markets. I have also been a proponent of women in business. In my other life, I am a daredevil Skydiver, aspiring pilot and an adventure addict.
Someone else got your domain name?
Registering a name on the World
Wide Web comes with rules which are not very clear, hence innocent and new
business owners become vulnerable to law suits. Cybersquatting is one such
issue. It’s when a domain name is purposely registered to gain profit off
ICANN, which is a California-based
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, takes care of all types of
domain name system management. When an issue of Cybersquatting arises, the
complaining party takes ICANN’s special aid. ICANN accredits four different
domain name dispute resolution services which handle the disputes effectively
without having to take the dispute to court.
Usually the resolution takes place
online and the entire process takes less than 45 days to come up with a
decision. What is good about this system is that, even after the decision has
been taken, if the company is still not satisfied with the results, it can take
the matter to court. To further the process after the complaint, the defendant
has to produce documents which can verify if the trademark is legit.
Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) authorizes a trademark owner
to sue an alleged cybersquatter in federal court and obtain a court order
transferring the domain name back to the trademark owner. In some cases, the
cybersquatter must pay money damages.
prevail in a domain name dispute, the complainant must prove
that the disputed domain name "has been registered and is being used in
bad faith." The below lists
four circumstances as evidence of bad faith:
the domain was registered primarily for the purpose of selling it to the
complainant or a competitor for more than the documented out-of-pocket expenses
related to the name; or
the domain was registered in order to prevent the mark owner from using it,
provided that the registrant has engaged in a pattern of such registration; or
the domain was registered primarily to disrupt the business of a competitor; or
by using the domain, the registrant has intentionally attempted to attract
users for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion as to source or
factors, however, are non-exclusive, and panels have applied them rather
loosely, finding bad faith in activities beyond those enumerated in the list.
order to stop a cybersquatter, the trademark owner must prove all of the
·the domain name registrant had a bad-faith intent to profit from
·the trademark was distinctive at the time the domain name was
·the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the
·the trademark qualifies for protection under federal trademark
laws -- that is, the trademark is distinctive and its owner was the first to
use the trademark in commerce.
the accused cybersquatter demonstrates that he had a reason to register the
domain name other than to sell it back to the trademark owner for a profit,
then a court will probably allow him to keep the domain name.
examples of bad faith registration are not hard to come by. More interesting are the
less clear cases, in which panels go beyond the enumerated factors in reaching
penalties for cybersquatting are
Three times the value of harm actually suffered
Any profits realized by the cyber squatter
Possible legal fees
However, if you are Brittany Spears and cannot sing; the courts will award the rights to your domain to the Brittany Spears who can sing. She deserves that name more apparently.
In 2007, while working on a blueprint for the technical deployment of a smart city project in the middle east; the infrastructure was not so complex, we had thought of connected devices but the Internet of Things economy was in its absolute basic infancy so the development of applications was really just reduced to a control platform of data exhibits. In hindsight, we were limited in our vision for the city by the screens and devices we would have to deploy to get mobility incorporated and last mile connectivity ensured.
11 years hence, I am excited to be working on another huge project for a citywide deployment. Assessing the deployment in terms of readiness of the city technology base, its use in the creation of a suite of smart city applications and adoption by the residents; there seem to be a myriad possibility if only the right model for the right city be deployed.
The most significant barrier, however, seems to the sensorization of the city infrastructure. Something that was co…
When you express a strong or a divergent opinion, your listeners may use cognitive distortions to interpret your opinion.
The fact of our lives is that what you say will go through the mental filters of those you are saying it to- their experiences, their rules, their upbringing, their culture and their disposition before being parsed and understood by them. You are in no control of how they will understand what you say but you can mitigate the erosion of the message by creating a safe environment for them to understand it.
Here are a few recommended actions:
Use a Behavior or Value Frame: People build a series of mental "filters" through biological and cultural influences. They then use these filters to make sense of the world. Thoughts become opinions and are affected by attitudes, rules, beliefs, and worldviews The choices they then make are influenced by their creation of a frame. Framing selects certain aspects of an issue and makes them more prominent in order to elicit ce…
Ciphertrace just reported that more than $700M was stolen from Crypto Exchanges in the first six months of 2018. The current market cap of the top 100 cryptocurrencies globally is around $250 Billion. With a thousand plus of cryptocurrencies and globally distributed exchanges; a new crop of cybercriminals is emerging - The Exchange CyberCrims.
Most exchanges and startups issuing new coins are not regulating the identity checks of the users and most of them are represented by anonymous addresses. This is a big loophole in creating trust in the system.
When crypto criminals stole $2000 in coins from me in a transaction a few months back; it was even difficult to trace or enable regulation to trace the transaction. They were gone and the services were never performed. The laws trail behind as always. Cybercriminals 1; You Zero.