Anticybersquatting Act: Web Domain Name Sold for Millions
Introduction
Entrepreneurs have lost substantial share of their enterprises to cunning characters in the techno-modern market environment. Cybersquatting has been established as one of the most harmful and complex technological trick used in the modern day market to rob entrepreneurs of the exclusive fruits of their hard work (Ramirez, 3). It refers to the act of registering, selling or making use of a particular domain name with the objective of acquiring financial gains from the goodwill created out of a specific trademark.
The concept dates back to the ancient era that lacked technology hence businesses never explored the business opportunities available in the technological world. The shrewd entrepreneurs of this age registered their respective businesses with an objective of maximizing the profits accrued from the operations of their entity.
The introduction of technology came with its dire consequences. It set in as a major challenge for the entities as well as an opportunity for the techno-savvy characters. After realization of the fair share of profits that enterprises lost courtesy of technology; entrepreneurs then involved in a legal battle with the techno-savvy characters with an objective of owning all the profits accrued from their respective enterprises (Samson).
Anticybersquatting
Every company has a unique domain name that controls the operations of the company on the internet platform (Martin, 4). The internet platform is undoubtedly one of the most productive and competitive environment that any entity can operate in. The domain name of an entity controls the rights of sale under a particular company name. The ownership of the company domain name is basically an exclusive control of the company right from in the virtual world (Ramirez, 5).
Anticybersquatting act is a regulatory measure that organizations seek to control the exclusive rights of the products and services manufactured under the company name. This piece of legislation was a genuine act of legality aimed at acquiring the ultimate control of the products and services offered by under a particular company name.
Consumers are exposed to higher risks of exploitation resultant from Cybersquatting. When a foreign party controls the virtual rights and authority of a particular entity; the consumer is exposed to a greater risk than the business owners (Martin, 11). Consumer exploitation has hence been an ancient risk that the consumer populace has suffered greatly from its unscrupulous manipulation of the price index levels of particular commodities and services. The legislative act therefore was an exclusive and proactive mitigation strategy that sought to cancel the negative leverage instigated by the fraudulent lot in a world of naive consumers and entrepreneurs (Martin, 12).
The interweb world is a very competitive and rapidly changing world. The frequency of changes in the technological world exposes companies to real threat of extortion from the fraudulent technologists in the market. Domain names can easily be compromised without raising an alarm to the management of an organization. The promulgation of the legal regulations was a prudent venture to indentify the technological discrepancies that provided relatively rich opportunities to the cunning lot of the technological dispensation (Samson).
Deliberate ‘typo’ eras, fancy changes of the authentic company name among other deliberate changes is indeed a real challenge even in the modern day world. Modern Cybersquatting has developed into a complex technological problem primarily due to the incessant technological developments experienced across the different dispensations. Anticybersquatting is basically a regulatory measure that seeks to create equilibrium in the perfectly competitive market environment (Mercer, 5). The web domain names of different companies are closely related.
In web design, domain names are created by using closely related characters to come up with a unique combination of standardized characters to generate the web interface required between the company and its prospective clients. The creation of a company website is a standardized procedure hence creating the perfect opportunity to technocrats to understand the technological ways of controlling the authority of an entity via control exclusive control of the company domain names (Mercer, 5).
Upon realization that the managerial studies expelled the aspect of technological intelligence; the malicious technological geniuses took maximum advantage to rob some of the most successful entities in the global market of their exclusive profits. Panasonic, Avon and Hertz are three global entities that have lost massive income from an obsolete management strategy from the technological angle (Martin, 11). Lack of exclusive training in technology has exposed a large number of entities to the risk of Cybersquatting.
The complexity of the technological world is an advantage to the techno-modern characters out to exploit the naivety of the short stretched management strategies. Web domain control relinquishes the control of all the operations of an entity to the people controlling the domain name particularly in the techno-modern world (Scarturro, 13). The act has been the long awaited sobriety move from a management standpoint aimed at maximizing the profitability of the operations of an enterprise by understanding the technological variables in the modern day environment.
Technology is undoubtedly an important requirement in the modern day world. Every company has channelled substantial amount of its income to the new variable that has the ability to amplify the profits of an organization substantially. These developments certainly avails the different players in the global economy with an extended range of opportunities and an increased consumer populace (Mercer, 12). Nonetheless, these opportunities and developments have been accompanied with a substantial amount of challenges. In fact; Cybersquatting can be classified as a form of hacking. It is indeed a reality that haunts the development of the enterprises in the market environment. Unfortunately, the consumers suffer the greatest share of the uncertainties in the business world.
It is such challenges affecting the consumer populace negatively that pressed the market regulatory authorities to develop specific security measures to mitigate the adverse effects of exploitation. Anticybersquatting is now a global basic requirement for every entity in order to salvage the exhausted clientele populace forms the hands of unscrupulous characters in the market environment (Ramirez, 14).
It is a responsibility of the different managements of different companies to ensure that their consumers are protected from the exploitation risk posed by the unscrupulous technologist whose level of technology develops parallel to the developments experienced in the technology world (Samson). The policies formulated across the globe have been established as part of a proactive management strategy that aims at minimizing the exploitation of the consumers and the entrepreneurs.
The reality in the business world is that; companies have lost huge amounts of income courtesy of the incessant technological developments experienced in the highly competitive world. Despite the massive opportunities that technology avails; it is a development that has come with its exclusive challenges. The law is a prudent approach aimed to mitigate the negative impacts of technology in a world where technology has become the real deal (Martin, 19).
The law is indeed a prudent mitigation policy that maintains a close examination of the new variables in an incessantly developing world of technology. In the 21st century for instance; the level of technology has been a subject to complex and incessant developments in the technological dispensation (Samson).
Consumers are the most important assets in any business. It is their demand for products and services that determine the profitability of a firm. The security of these important assets is however under massive risk under the ownership of the domain names of different companies on the internet platforms. Ownership of the domain name means that an individual will illegally gains from the operations of an entity by selling the domain name to either competitors or manipulating the domain name is a particular way such that they illegally receive undue credit form the operations of entity (Ramirez, 18).
Anticybersquatting act has therefore been formulated to aid organizations identify, secure and manage their domain name in such a way that the fraudulent characters in the market environment do not illegally gain from the operations of a particular firm. It is also a proactive management move to ensure that the clientele populace is protected from the fraudulent technologists out in the market to exploit the naivety of the clientele populace (Samson).
In a nutshell, the law is a prudent protection measures aimed at ironing out the complexity in the technological world. It is a prudent measure that mitigates the threat of extorting to substantial standards. It is an act of regulatory protection that holds every entrepreneurs responsible to the security of their respective entities in such a way that the important information specifically regarding the clientele populace.
Works cited
Mercer, John. (n.d). Cybersquatting on the information superhighway.
Ramirez, Natalia. Will the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act Create more problems than it solves? Washington University Journal of Law & Policy. Print. 2002. Vol. 8. Grode, Susan. The Anticybersquatting consumer protection act: old protections in a new medium. Los Angeles Business Journal. Print. 2000.
Samson, Martin. Internet library of law and court decisions: The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act: Key Information. Web <http://www.internetlibrary.com/publications/anticybsquattSamson9-05_art.cfm> . Accessed. 23rd March 2015.
Scaturro, Tenesa. THE ANTICYBERSQUATTING CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT AND THE UNIFORM DOMAIN NAME DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY THE FIRST DECADE: LOOKING BACK AND ADAPTING FORWARD. Nevada Law Journal. Print 2011. Vol. 11
