I'm a little confused by this

[Badger]

"Tennis Australia" buy tennis.com.au and say they bought the domain from a cybersquatter.... Come on, do me a favour...

Tennis Australia has admitted it paid a "hefty fee" to a scalper of the domain name kind in order to obtain the Web address it wanted as part of a rebranding campaign.

Australian tennis's governing body this month launched tennis.com.au as part of a marketing campaign. Speaking at the Australian Open yesterday, Tennis Australia CEO Steve Wood revealed the organisation purchased the domain name from a cyber-squatter after a couple of years of negotiations.

"We bought it from a friendly cyber-squatter. We've been trying for a couple of years to convince this group that we were better with that site than them and they weren't doing much work with it," he said.

Tennis Australia paid a "hefty fee" to the Sydney-based group, but less than a six-figure sum, said Wood. He would not reveal the group's identity other than to say they were not sport-related.

Here's the link.

 

[Keynes]

A lot of people still use "cyber squatter" synonymously with domain speculator -- those who buy with intention of parking/selling rather than developing. In fact, that was the original use before cited in the first court use of the term (termatic, Inc. v. Toeppen, 947 F. Supp. 1227 (N.D. Ill. 1996) defined the term as we know it today: an individual who “attempt to profit from the Internet by reserving and later reselling or licensing domain names back to the companies
that spent millions of dollars developing the goodwill of the trademark.”

 

[Damion]

It's misguided articles like these that give the domaining industry a bad name.

 

[Badger]

reselling or licensing domain names back to the companies
that spent millions of dollars developing the goodwill of the trademark.”

Cheers for the capsule history lesson Rocket, but since when did Tennis Australia own the trademark of "tennis"..??

 

[shockie]

since when did Tennis Australia own the trademark of "tennis"..??

i was thinking the same thing... it's not even a .au or anything either...

 

[Kate]

The domain in question is a .com.au so it is subject to Australian rules.
And the Australian registry (AUDA) does not like parking, actually .au has traditionally been a tightly regulated, domainer-adverse TLD...

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2006/march2006.htm:

The Australian Domain Authority (auDA.org) is about to make an important decision on how that country's com.au country code can be used and you can have a say in the outcome (regardless of whether you are Australian or not). The extension has been heavily restricted in the past, with registrations limited to those who use the domains for approved business purposes. The issue now is whether monetizing domains via PPC (pay per click) advertising is a legitimate business purpose. In October 2005 auDA warned those who had registered multiple .com.au domains for PPC purposes that their names could be deleted and in fact that has happened to some domain owners. In the face of challenges from those who lost domains, auDA has decided to solicit public comment to determine whether their rules should be relaxed to allow PPC use. You can post your opinion and read the comments others have left on this page at auda.org.

 

[Badger]

The domain in question is a .com.au so it is subject to Australian rules.
And the Australian registry (AUDA) does not like parking, actually .au has traditionally been a tightly regulated, domainer-adverse TLD...

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2006/march2006.htm:

Way to go Kate..

 

[jimmeh]

i was thinking the same thing... it's not even a .au or anything either...

You cannot register something.au... it'd have to be either something.com.au, something.net.au, something.org.au, something.edu.au, something.gov.au etc...

 

[Keynes]

Cheers for the capsule history lesson Rocket, but since when did Tennis Australia own the trademark of "tennis"..??

They don't, and I imagine nobody could. My point is that people are confusing the original use of the term "cybersquatter" with its current, legal definition. In this case, they were confusing a domain investor with a "squatter".

 

[dna]

Face it....we are all squatters.

 

[whitebark]

An Aussie on the board should write a letter to the editor explaining why the article is wrong.

If it is done well they will print it.