Nintendo Loses Complaint Against "wiiu.com" Owner

[Kuala BangoDango]

Cybersquatting is actually against the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in the United States, and there have been several high profile cases where squatters have had to relinquish their domain names to the IP holders without getting their big pay day.

Anyone else find it strange that this law which I've only ever seen benefiting large corporations is named after CONSUMER protection?

 

[Strazdas]

That's true for a lot of websites unfortunately.

Indeed it is. but thats often due to google being a very good search engine. though admitedly the search engine here is rather poor.

Too long. WiiU user attention span is not long enough to type it all in.

In fact, Wii U is too long. That's why sales are so bad.

well played, good sir.

I'm really curious to see what back then the term Wii U was even used for(unless it was registered purely at random), if it was right after the Wii was announced to be the name, this would make sense, but for once Nintendo doesn't have much of a case, ah well.

Well that wasn't very nice. ;__;

Wait, what am I crying about?

If you were to read my second reply you would saw me explaining it was a joke.

 

[MrPhyntch]

Cybersquatting is actually against the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in the United States, and there have been several high profile cases where squatters have had to relinquish their domain names to the IP holders without getting their big pay day.

Anyone else find it strange that this law which I've only ever seen benefiting large corporations is named after CONSUMER protection?

Do you even know what a consumer is? A consumer is a person or entity who takes (consumes) something another person or entity (manufacturer, developer, etc) has made.

So while you and I are consumers of, say, video games, Nintendo as a corporation still has to receive goods and services, in this case domain name registration; ergo, they are, in fact, consumers.

 

[Glaice]

I would definitely sell that domain if Nintendo offered me several million dollars for it too.

 

[Kuala BangoDango]

Anyone else find it strange that this law which I've only ever seen benefiting large corporations is named after CONSUMER protection?

Do you even know what a consumer is? A consumer is a person or entity who takes (consumes) something another person or entity (manufacturer, developer, etc) has made.

So while you and I are consumers of, say, video games, Nintendo as a corporation still has to receive goods and services, in this case domain name registration; ergo, they are, in fact, consumers.

Well, yes, in a literal sense big corporations are consumers too and deserve protection just like the oil companies who are consumers of the oil from the ground and banks are consumers of our life-savings. It's just that normally when you hear of consumer protection you normally hear it in reference to the final consumer, at least I do.

And anyway, in your specific example of Nintendo, if Nintendo is a "consumer"
of domain names then you gotta agree that the other guy who had the name first is
ALSO a consumer of domain names and thus deserves that very same protection that
Nintendo gets and in fact deserves it more since he was the first consumer. Taking
it away from the first guy who bought it to give to the Corporation simply because
"in a way it belongs to them" is like the law of Imminent Domain...the government
taking away land a private citizen owns and giving it to a corporation. Sure, it's
legal but it's also downright shady.

Edit: Sorry if my post is spaced strangely. There was a strange advert with no
close option in my reply space and I had to type around it so I could see my text.
space

 

[Innegativeion]

Well that wasn't very nice. ;__;

Wait, what am I crying about?

If you were to read my second reply you would saw me explaining it was a joke.

Reread Hero of Lime's comment.

If I'm not mistaken, he's in on the joke.

 

[Strazdas]

Well that wasn't very nice. ;__;

Wait, what am I crying about?

If you were to read my second reply you would saw me explaining it was a joke.

Reread Hero of Lime's comment.

If I'm not mistaken, he's in on the joke.

yes, he is, but the forum gods (read: moderators) may not be. wouldnt be the first time.