WHOIS databases often contain valuable information including the contact information for a registrant of a domain name. Although private registrations are increasingly more popular, and hide the name and location of a registrant, such private registration services nonetheless are required to provide an e-mail address for a registrant, which effectively allows the public to correspond with a registrant.

Rather than choosing to utilize a private registration service, some registrants choose instead to provide false WHOIS information in an effort to mask their true identity and to prevent consumers from contacting them. However, all accredited registrars have agreed with ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) to obtain contact information from registrants, to provide it publicly by a WHOIS service, and to take reasonable steps to investigate and correct any reported inaccuracies in contact information for domain names registered through them.

Many registrars have provided mechanisms for the reporting cases of invalid WHOIS information, which are then investigated by the registrar, and updated with valid information in appropriate cases. The registrar GoDaddy.com, for example, provides a form for reporting invalid WHOIS information at the following web address:

http://who.godaddy.com/ReportInvalidWhois.aspx?k=FV7XH2u6rpuEgY6i18fBGg==&domain=choruss.com&prog_id=godaddy

Consumers who are initially unsuccessful in submitting invalid WHOIS notifications directly to a registrar, may also try submitting such notifications through ICANN as well at the following web address:

http://wdprs.internic.net/

Never underestimate the value of a good domain name! As any website owner will tell you, http://www.rose.com, by any other name, is likely to lose customers.

About a week ago, my colleague’s nephew, Kevin Bortnick, found himself in a domain name predicament. His plight is interesting and he has graciously permitted us to blog about his situation, which provides some useful context for a discussion about domain name disputes.   

Kevin is a talented website developer who used the name “KBortnick” or “KB” for his internet business. In November of 2005, he registered the domain name kbortnick.com for a period of four years, at a cost of about $10 per year. Although the domain name expired in November, 2009, he explained that “I was moving out & had a bit of a money crunch, so I figured I’d renew it in about a month, because it really wasn’t worth anything & I figured it would be fine….”   

A couple of weeks ago, he attempted to re-register the name, only to discover that someone else had purchased it. That unknown ‘someone’ had immediately put it up for sale on a website that auctions off domain names, http://seto.com, subject to a minimum bid of $480. As you can imagine, Kevin was livid. “The highest I’ve ever seen my domain name appraised at was about $30”, he exclaimed, “and most places didn’t even give it that!”   

(I empathized with Kevin’s situation. Over Canadian Thanksgiving, while I was sitting before the computer in a state of turkey-induced lethargy, I was suddenly roused from my stupor by the discovery that the domain name “pamelapengelley.com” could be registered for the low, low price of just $10 a year. I may soon write a post that is entitled “How I learned the hard way that just because you can make a hideously tacky personal flash website dedicated to your glorious self doesn’t mean that you should make one.” But I digress…)   

Kevin’s dilemma got me thinking –  is this what is known as “cybersquatting”?  Is there any remedy for this sort of thing? Does Kevin have any recourse?

In fact, there are a couple of different mechanisms for resolving a cybersquatting dispute, and my understanding of them was greatly assisted by some basic knowledge about the development of the Internet and some tech-related acronyms like “DNS”, “IP” and “ccTLD”. If these terms are unfamiliar to you, then I ask for your indulgence while I lay out some of the basic IT background. It’s a bit lengthy so if you are computer-savvy, you may just want to skip part 1. Read the rest of this entry »