Quote:
Originally Posted by
Methos07 
Makes me wonder when Nissan is going to take nissan.com. They totally got shafted out of that domain.
Did you read the case of Nissan Motor vs. Nissan Computer on
digest.com ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Deacon
Domain wars are a common thing, but what annoys me is this big companies that get their lawyers up and running and try to take by force certain domains, I mean if someone buys a piece of land, your not gonna force that person out of there just because you want that land, if you want it pay up, I know theres allot of ppl making a living out of domain trolling, but hey they are just being smart, its not like these companies can't afford it.
In this case tho apple seems to have done the right thing negotiated and payed to get the domain.
Exactly, and interestingly, in the case of Nissan, from reading digest.com (link above), it seems it got the Mississippi state to do what you describe:
Quote:
In another example of Nissan Motor's flexing its corporate might, age old eminent domain laws have been rewritten in Mississippi allowing the State to take land and homes from local landowners for the sole private benefit of Nissan Motor. How the State of Mississippi was "convinced" to change these laws is unclear, but it is clear that local individuals are being deprived of their property rights so Nissan Motor can build its own plant.
All in all companies are many times at fault for being late to the game and then try to illegitimately gain access to these domains. I don't agree with Apple on many occasions, but it seems they did the right thing on this occasion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mach 5 Quote:
Originally Posted by
Methos07
Makes me wonder when Nissan is going to take nissan.com. They totally got shafted out of that domain.
I hadnt heard of this until now, I just checked nissan.com and it seems its only use is to advertise the fact that Nissan tried, and failed to win it from them...
Actually, they do have a site (links on the left), and all the advertisements in there are probably to cover the costs of defending themselves against Nissan Motor Corporation because
Quote:
The court ordered NMC to pay $58,000 as cost under rule 68, this is less than 2% of what the cost was to defend this case.
I'd say it's fair for them to try to recover the costs of defending themselves by using the legal case and ads.
Edited by tpi2007 - 7/19/12 at 5:48am
