Is it legal to have a domain name like this?

Should some of you still think Mr. Nissan is right and the car company is plain
wrong, read the "last" decision and take note of all facts presented:

http://www.citizen.org/documents/CourtofAppealsRulingNissanMotorvNissanComputer.pdf

Currently Mr. Nissan is allowed to retain the domain name...with a condition. If
he breaks it, then he'll surely lose the name with good reason.

 

There's an even better story - read


Google Has No Adsense.com <---- Article on wired.com

An earlier thread here on Digitalpoint discussing the story

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=107722

 

It might interest you to know that Google has finally acquired adsense.com:

http://www.iwhois.com/index.php?domain=adsense&tld=com&lookup=Lookup&clean=1

 

I just picked up GoogleIsStupid.com. Trying to just make it into a forum where people can complain about Google and their products. In the end, I think that Google would benefit from it because they would be able to address the issues that are discussed there. As you can see...very few posts at the moment...

So the consensus here is that, if I don't sell anything on this site then it is okay for me to run? What about placing AdSense on it? Oh, the irony...

 

Also i found this: http://collectdolls.about.com/b/a/086852.htm

I want it, lol

Rob

 

they are a sue happy bunch - they have a lawyer whose job it is too search the internet and send out settlement notices.

 

I remember Adam Curry the MTV VeeJay was really into the Internet and kept trying to get MTV into it. They ignored him and he went out and registered MTV.com himself. Then the Internet got really popular and they strong armed him into giving the domain over to them or something.

I couldn't find a version of his site in Archive but this was pretty funny. You'll need Netscape 3.0 and "Javascript" to view this site:

http://web.archive.org/web/19970412193038/http://www.mtv.com/

 

There are several cases where it has been decided that a person's right to free speech within the content of the site supercedes any claims based on commercial gain. So basically, if the content of your site is legit, its not bad faith for you to have ads. I don't know the actual cases though, but it may be worth looking up. I believe it was on paypalsucks.com where I read about this in a letter their lawyer sent to paypal, citing the different cases.