One reason I rather don't like arguing about whether something is unethical or
not is because it's pretty much subjective, and everyone has their own views
of what constitutes such. But I nonetheless answered grey area because it's
pretty much a grey area, depending on the
intent behind the action.
However, I can safely say it can be taken action against depending on certain
facts. Intent, content at the time, any applicable laws or policies tackling 'em,
etc.
For instance:
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview/index.html#16
1.6 Can a complainant show rights in a personal name?
Consensus view: While the UDRP does not specifically protect personal names, in situations where an unregistered personal name is being used for trade or commerce, the complainant can establish common law trademark rights in the name. Reference can be made to the test required for the common law action of passing off. Personal names that have been trademarked are protected under the UDRP.
Relevant decisions:
Julia Fiona Roberts v. Russell Boyd D2000-0210, Transfer
Jeanette Winterson v. Mark Hogarth D2000-0235 among others, Transfer
Dr. Michael Crichton v. In Stealth Mode D2002-0874, Transfer
However: The name in question should be actually used in trade or commerce to establish unregistered trademark rights. Merely having a famous name (such as a businessman, or religious leader) is not necessarily sufficient to show unregistered trademark rights.
Relevant decisions:
Israel Harold Asper v. Communication X Inc. D2001-0540 among others, Denied
Chinmoy Kumar Ghose v. ICDSoft.com and Maria Sliwa D2003-0248, Transfer
Note: this applies only to the extensions their respective Registries agreed to
handle such disputes. Others, especially country codes, can have their own
specific rules how to handle specific issues involving personal names.
OTOH, the U.S. has a few laws dealing with personal domain names as well:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001125----000-.html
(d) Cyberpiracy prevention
(1)
(A) A person shall be liable in a civil action by the owner of a mark, including a personal name which is protected as a mark under this section
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001129----000-.html
(A) Civil liability
Any person who registers a domain name that consists of the name of another living person, or a name substantially and confusingly similar thereto, without that personโs consent, with the specific intent to profit from such name by selling the domain name for financial gain to that person or any third party, shall be liable in a civil action by such person.
(B) Exception
A person who in good faith registers a domain name consisting of the name of another living person, or a name substantially and confusingly similar thereto, shall not be liable under this paragraph if such name is used in, affiliated with, or related to a work of authorship protected under title 17, including a work made for hire as defined in section 101 of title 17, and if the person registering the domain name is the copyright owner or licensee of the work, the person intends to sell the domain name in conjunction with the lawful exploitation of the work, and such registration is not prohibited by a contract between the registrant and the named person. The exception under this subparagraph shall apply only to a civil action brought under paragraph (1) and shall in no manner limit the protections afforded under the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.) or other provision of Federal or State law.
And that's not even tackling U.S. State laws like New York, which happens to
also have a law dealing with personal names, and other applicable ones like, in
some cases, right to publicity.
