> I prefer the following definition:
> Cybersquatting is the act of registering a popular Internet
address--usually a
> company name--with the intent of selling it to its rightful owner.

That's fine.


> The Internet address may be a company name, it may be a trademark or it
may be
> a more generic word, the rightful owner is someone who intends to develop
the
> name in conjunction with a close and substantial connection to themselves,
> their interests or business.

That's rubbish, there can be no rightful owner of a generic word.

>
> As such, domain speculation falls under the definition I use for
> cybersquatting.

You are wrong.


> I would prefer not to see anyone allowed to register a domain name they
don't
> intend to use at some point.

that's you preferance, and it's an idiotic one.


> Domain speculation has the same kind of victims as does cybersquatting,
even
> more actually, cybersquatting is targetted whilst speculation throws a net

Excuse me, are you telling me that someone registering your name or your
company name and then forcing you to buy it from them by possibly puting up
defamatory content or pointing it to a competitor of yours is just as bad as
someone registering a generic domain like fancycars.com without any
intention of using it?

How unbelievably ridiculous!

Bennett.