Domain names are not mere names.  Domain names are the unique addresses address in the virtual world for pages on the internet. The domain name plays a significant role in identifying the importance/significance of the content of the webpage. Usually, it is presumed that a trademark owner shall possess the domain name which contains his trademark in it. The consumers go by that belief while browsing the internet, looking for information or even while purchasing some product online. If the trademark owner has failed to own the domain name with his trademark, he is bound to expose himself to innumerable legal and economic complications which is bound to work against the trademark owner.

A Domain name theft/cyber squatting leaves behind a distorted image of the brand attached to the domain name.  The trademark owner is exposing himself to serious risks where not only the brand image is tarnished, but also legal battles needs to be faced by the trademark owner. In every case, it is not an option for the trademark owner to own his domain, but is a duty bounded upon him for a peaceful business. It is lest that can be expected out of serious business, to at least own the domain name which is attached to the trademark owned by him so that the sincere consumers are not conned for no wrong of theirs.

Trademark owner who fail to own their domain names face brimming legal issues -

(a) Attack on faithful consumer: Any domain name comes with itself an identity in the online world and includes advantages such as easy identity of a trademark and Search Engine Optimization. A domain name with a prominent trademark sounds familiar and attractive. It will easier for the cyber-squatter to develop any website with such products he may like, and be assured that the website scores a decent ranking in the search engines. A faithful consumer of that trademark might be attracted to that trademark. In such cases, it is important that the trademark owner gets back his domain name prohibiting a faithful consumer of that product to fall into the clutches of the cybersquatter.

(b) Repeated attacks from cyber squatter: A trademark owner who notices cyberquatting activity with his trademark has two options. The first option is to approach a domain name lawyer and have the action taken for getting back of the domain names, thereby enforcing his legal right. The second option is to satisfy the demands of an unscrupulous cyber-squatter by purchasing the domain name from the cyber-squatter for several multiples of the original cost. This option is usually given serious consideration by the trademark owner as it is considered as an easy way of settling of the domain name dispute. A trademark owner who once succumbs to such demands of a cyber-squatter would find himself being exposed to more such domain name theft. The reason behind this is that the cyber-squatter would feel comfortable to attack a proven target than hunt for a new one. Once a trademark owner adheres to the demands of the unscrupulous cyber squatter, the cyber squatter would not only benefit from one such transaction but he would actually be motivated to attack the same trademark owner again.  It is always recommended that the trademark owner adopts the legal mechanism provided under the UDRP or INDRP at least to dampen the spirits of an unscrupulous cyber squatter. Purchase of a domain name from a cyber-squatter equates purchasing a property for which you are already the owner.

(c) Impersonation: A cyber squatter might not stop with merely illegally usurping your domain name.  Cyber squatters have been profiteering regularly by building a website similar to the original trademark owners and by making representations that the site is owned by the trademark owner.

(d) Dilution of trademark: The cyber squatters who have set up websites misrepresent that they are the original website of the brand and start selling cheap quality goods online which has no connection with the original trademark holder.  Such goods tarnish the brand image and cause an incurable effect in the minds of the faithful consumer.

(e) Fraud: Cyber squatter build websites as though belonging to the original TM Owner.  The website promises certain services/products from the trademark owner at a cost.  A faithful consumer of that brand signs up for the product/service by paying the amount of money as found in the website, believing that the website is actually owned by brand projected in the website.  A communication is sent from the website receiving the sum and things seem normal as usual.  After a few days of waiting, the consumer receives no response from the website and also does not receive any product.  After a good amount of research, he would find the contacts of the trademark owner and question his integrity. The innocent Trade mark owner who has no idea about any of the happenings and plead complete ignorance.  However, the trademark owner in most of the cases would be required to explain his carelessness in allowing a domain name to function in his name. Such disputes would turn complex and in many of the cases the trademark owner would be required to compensate the innocent purchaser. This not only amounts to dilution of the trademark but also results in fraud against a bonafide trademark holder and a faithful consumer.

(f) Cybersquatters eye domain names which are not renewed by the trade mark owner so that the TM owner would have no option but to get back his domain name. It is always suggested that the trademarks are purchased for a longer period.

The duty of a trademark owner does not limit with being a good seller of services/good. The duty goes to an extent where the trademark owner is required to protect his trademark rigorously by taking all such legal measures possible. Brand is the only kind of property who’s value increases when put to greater use. Such brands cannot be afforded to be left carelessly in the hands of illegal cyber-squatters. A trademark owner who fights cyber squatting does not merely fights for trademark name