About cybersquat ... oooo ...
I was inspired to write about cybersquatting by the topic of the chicago2016.com domain and even more comments in it.
I want us to try again to streamline some ideas about cybersquatting, and most importantly get rid of some erroneous stereotypes associated with cybersquatting.
I just want to warn you that I will not touch the legal side of the issue at all, because no one sent us absolutely fair laws and infallible justice. Laws are created by people and reflect the norms of morality, culture and common sense that dominate society. They change in accordance with the maturation of society. That is why let the horned animal rest with its horn on the phrase “what is not forbidden is allowed”. We, as intelligent people, will argue from the positions of at least some validity.
')
Of course, Lenya Golubkov, the Westernization of lifestyle and culture have done their work, and now many are falling into awe comparable to the religious from the word "business" alone. However, business and business are different. Business can be socially useful, socially useless and socially harmful. Failing to understand this means stepping on the rakes of crises and troubled life again and again without the slightest idea of ​​wealth and happiness.
The fact that cybersquatting is a business does not mean that it is good
Labor, like business (an interesting coincidence, isn’t it?) Is useful, useless and harmful. If you drag 2 tons of bricks from the road to the construction site per day, this will be useful. If you drag the same 10 bricks from the road to the construction site and back - it will be useless work. If you drag bricks from the construction site to the road, it will be harmful work. Note that fatigue will always be the same, and the external effect is different. Why should society pay for someone who gets very tired while engaging in useless or harmful activities? The same with risks. Industrial climber risks mounting a cell tower at high altitude. Someone who decided to walk on the eaves also risks. But you do not think to pay him for the risk? You will not pay more to a programmer who programs while sitting in shorts outside in the cold? Yes, he risks, but his risk does not apply at all to the product being produced, therefore there is nothing to pay for.
And who said that other speculations are good and socially harmless? By the way, it is precisely because of exchange speculations that once again shakes the US economy, because it turned out that a significant (up to 90%) part of the value of their flagship corporations is speculative. That is, quite simply, a bubble. And bubbles are very harmful for the economy (but this can be discussed separately).
When you create something, you really create something. You convert some resources into others, and the result is what you wouldn’t have appeared without.
In the case of the domain there is none. Squatters are absolutely not involved in the enormous mass of social labor, the forces that have invested in it over the past 30 years, who have made the Internet what it is now, and the domain that resells the squatter could well be registered without it.
This is called "dog in the hay." Humanity has created the Internet. Along with him appeared and all the many possible names. And then squatters begin to register domains that they obviously do not need, but obviously need someone else.
... You come (a healthy person) to the pharmacy, and then a person comes in with an asthma attack. There is only one inhaler left in the pharmacy. You buy it and start jumping around the dying person, waving an inhaler, offering to buy it 100 times more expensive. This is no longer just a dog in the manger, this is already the case called " Eric Cartman"
Summarize. I repeat, now there are almost no legal restrictions on cybersquatting, but in my deep conviction the society should ripen to understand the harmfulness of this phenomenon and move on to a more thoughtful regulatory policy. For this I wrote this note.
I want us to try again to streamline some ideas about cybersquatting, and most importantly get rid of some erroneous stereotypes associated with cybersquatting.
I just want to warn you that I will not touch the legal side of the issue at all, because no one sent us absolutely fair laws and infallible justice. Laws are created by people and reflect the norms of morality, culture and common sense that dominate society. They change in accordance with the maturation of society. That is why let the horned animal rest with its horn on the phrase “what is not forbidden is allowed”. We, as intelligent people, will argue from the positions of at least some validity.
')
Stereotype 1. It's a business!
Of course, Lenya Golubkov, the Westernization of lifestyle and culture have done their work, and now many are falling into awe comparable to the religious from the word "business" alone. However, business and business are different. Business can be socially useful, socially useless and socially harmful. Failing to understand this means stepping on the rakes of crises and troubled life again and again without the slightest idea of ​​wealth and happiness.
The fact that cybersquatting is a business does not mean that it is good
Stereotype 2a. Cybersquatter carries risks. They need to be compensated!
Stereotype 2b. The cyberswatter must be paid
Labor, like business (an interesting coincidence, isn’t it?) Is useful, useless and harmful. If you drag 2 tons of bricks from the road to the construction site per day, this will be useful. If you drag the same 10 bricks from the road to the construction site and back - it will be useless work. If you drag bricks from the construction site to the road, it will be harmful work. Note that fatigue will always be the same, and the external effect is different. Why should society pay for someone who gets very tired while engaging in useless or harmful activities? The same with risks. Industrial climber risks mounting a cell tower at high altitude. Someone who decided to walk on the eaves also risks. But you do not think to pay him for the risk? You will not pay more to a programmer who programs while sitting in shorts outside in the cold? Yes, he risks, but his risk does not apply at all to the product being produced, therefore there is nothing to pay for.
Stereotype 3. This is just like any other speculation.
And who said that other speculations are good and socially harmless? By the way, it is precisely because of exchange speculations that once again shakes the US economy, because it turned out that a significant (up to 90%) part of the value of their flagship corporations is speculative. That is, quite simply, a bubble. And bubbles are very harmful for the economy (but this can be discussed separately).
Stereotype 4. So I registered a domain and therefore I did a good job (I CREATED it!)
When you create something, you really create something. You convert some resources into others, and the result is what you wouldn’t have appeared without.
In the case of the domain there is none. Squatters are absolutely not involved in the enormous mass of social labor, the forces that have invested in it over the past 30 years, who have made the Internet what it is now, and the domain that resells the squatter could well be registered without it.
Stereotype 5. And I cho, I am nothing!
This is called "dog in the hay." Humanity has created the Internet. Along with him appeared and all the many possible names. And then squatters begin to register domains that they obviously do not need, but obviously need someone else.
... You come (a healthy person) to the pharmacy, and then a person comes in with an asthma attack. There is only one inhaler left in the pharmacy. You buy it and start jumping around the dying person, waving an inhaler, offering to buy it 100 times more expensive. This is no longer just a dog in the manger, this is already the case called " Eric Cartman"
Summarize. I repeat, now there are almost no legal restrictions on cybersquatting, but in my deep conviction the society should ripen to understand the harmfulness of this phenomenon and move on to a more thoughtful regulatory policy. For this I wrote this note.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/40852/
All Articles