(A) in the case of a mark that is distinctive at the time of registration of the domain name, is identical or confusingly similar to the mark (ii) for any length of time registers, acquires, traffics in, or uses a domain name in, or belonging to, any person in this state that: (i) has a bad faith intent to profit from the mark, including a personal name and “A person is liable in a civil action by the owner of a mark, including a personal name, which is a mark for purposes of this section, if, without regard to the goods or services of the person or the mark’s owner, the person: The bill as a whole is similar to the Snowe Bill introduced in 2008 into the US Senate which seeks to prohibit and provide penalties for phishing, pharming, spyware, and cybersquatting.Īs all bills this one is long full of legalese but regarding Cybersquatting the bill states in part as follows: The bill among other things “prohibits the registration of domain names under certain circumstances, commonly referred to as cybersquatting and provides civil and criminal penalties for violation. Well now that the bill has passed both the House and Senate of Utah and just awaits the governors Signature to become law, you might want to take a second look. Sine then, the Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse (CADNA) has been lobbying very hard to get this bill passed, even holding a meeting in Washington in support of the bill and to get the ball rolling for a national bill along the same lines. When I first wrote about this bill in December, it was meet with the usual domainer apathy I see when I write about something that can have huge negative effects on their holdings. The “UTAH E-COMMERCE INTEGRITY ACT” which was just introduced in December of 2009, passed the Utah Senate last month, was voted into law by the Utah House today.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |