I don't think this makes squatting any easier than the existing tools to sell domains. I'm giving the creator the benefit of the doubt and assume they did this because, like me, they probably have tens of domains they don't plan on ever using.
It's not squatting. Squatting is registering a domain for its own sake. Sometimes you register domains for projects and then those projects never get off the ground. I have a dozen domains (I defensively registered all the top TLDs) expiring in 4 days for just that reason.
Squatting is squatting is squatting. You may have registered with the intent to use it but now that you are not using it you think you deserve money for the ability to rent it?
Do you deserve money for your old car that you are putting up for sale? You obviously don't use it anymore. Or renting out that extra room in your apartment? Why do you deserve money for that?
The person owns the domain, they can do with it as they please. So if they want to rent it out, then they can ask money for it... It's your choice if you agree to their terms and make any exchange.
All in all, drawing comparisons between something like a domain and real world objects are disingenuous at best. I'm not going to detail how apple.com is different from your Ford Pinto.
You do not own a domain. That is false right off the bat. And no, you cannot do with it as you please. For example, buying a trademarked name and then trying to extort money out of the owner of said trademark is not allowed.
If you are renting a domain with the sole intent to deprive someone else the ability to use it unless they pay an extortionist fee, that is wrong. It goes against the free spirit that the internet was built on. The fee charged is at least in part to prevent a massive "land grab" of domains that are to be sold off at absurd prices.
I disagree; I have a handful of domains without active sites on them as well, for projects that I still want to do but haven't gotten to yet.
I've had experiences in the past of letting a domain expire and then being "ready" to use it a few years down the line. Of course, it was invariably squatted, and had been since I'd let it go, and would cost more than I was able to justify paying to get it back.
On the other hand, I actually had a working project running on wishmash.com that wasn't getting enough traffic to make it worthwhile, so I sold the domain when I got a reasonable offer. If I hadn't sold it, though, would that have have been "squatting is squatting is squatting" as well? I could put up forums and/or tiny sites on all domains I have -- then it wouldn't be squatting either?
There's a whole range of possible levels of domain usage. I don't have any domain that I haven't spend at least a few hours researching the space & competitors, documenting implementation (and sometimes starting it), and so on.
I'm sure I won't actually build some of these projects. But I don't know which. Of course from the outside this can look the same as a simple squatter hoping for a big payout; but that doesn't mean it is the same.
I think there is a misunderstanding of my point. I'm trying to say that at the point that you list your domain that you intended to use but do not for a crazy sum, that is when you become a squatter. Simply holding onto a site with the intent to use it for a few years isn't. It's all about the spirit and intention.
"Squatting is registering a domain for its own sake."
Actually no.
The closest true definition I [1] can come up with for "squatting" [2] would be defined as such (from wikipedia):
--------------
"Cybersquatting (also known as domain squatting), according to the United States federal law known as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, is registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else. The cybersquatter then offers to sell the domain to the person or company who owns a trademark contained within the name at an inflated price."
--------------
So to clear up any misconception there is no problem registering a domain that a) you don't intend to use or b) you plan to sell or c) being in the business of buying and selling domains as long as you don't break any existing laws around trademarks (as only one example). Of course there are also issues with UDRP's and law firms reverse hijacking domains but that's an entirely different subject.
Lastly of course people who can't get the domain they want always will throw around the "c" word as if it's simply not fair that they can't have what they want when they want it. In a similar vein people are also opposing legitimate real estate and other property transactions if it personally effects them.
[1] I operate an ICANN registrar and I've been in this business since 1996. I've been quoted in the NY Times on domains and many other places. I'm one of the people asked about this type of thing and consult on the subject.
I think conflating the issue with trademarks narrows my definition. "For its own sake" means registering a domain for no incentive beyond the status or vanity of holding that name, i.e. just because it looks cool or it's short, funny or memorable.
I still think it's squatting if I registered yoursurname.com, even though it's not a trademark and wouldn't meet your definition under the ACPA.
I still think it's squatting if I have no intention of ragging you in to buying yoursurname.com from me. Maybe I just derive satisfaction from having something you want?
What about those of us that have domains in use but would be willing to part with for a certain amount? I have a game-server that resulted from some hacking network traffic of an old Wii game.
I still have that system up today, but if someone came along and offered me $1,000,000 dollars for the domain(dontrush.me) I'd give up that domain with no regrets and just buy some other one. I didn't buy it as part of some ingenious marketing strategy, I just thought it was kinda cute and was surprised it wasn't taken already - though this was like the first day .me TLD was made available when I got it.
I highly dislike this negative attitude towards domain name trading and ownership.
You are absolutely right when it comes down to trademarked names or typos when somebody's rights are getting abused. But other than that banning the ownership of domains which one doesn't use is just ludicrous.
It is almost like arguing that any real estate ownership should be forbidden that goes beyond the personal use. A deeply anti-free market attitude that has in my view no place in reality.
Like you say, there are egregious examples out there which clearly fall under squatting, but I think there's also the sentiment that domains are a tool and identity. The idea that someone thought up a really clever name and then do nothing with it but sit on it for sale tends to stir up the same emotions people have toward patent trolls.
"Yeah, they own the patent, but it's obvious! And they're not even using it to make stuff!" ... or the like.
I have a mixed position on this. I do get annoyed by squatters who have no intention of building. I also have domains that I want to build on eventually, but I can't do it yet; so to other people it looks like I'm squatting.
I'm not waiting for cash, I'm waiting for time. Every now & then I do get to one of them.
Though -- I don't often get requests to purchase (except for the domain that has a working business... I get requests for that all the time). But do people not approach me because they're sure I'll try to squeeze out every possible penny from them?
It's not a great situation, though I'm happy to hear suggestions.
"I also have domains that I want to build on eventually, but I can't do it yet; so to other people it looks like I'm squatting."
This is a the biggest problem I have too. I think to myself, I'm going to build something with this eventually, but "eventually" never comes since spare time has been transformed into Unobtanium. Plus the motivation necessariy to start a project and see through to fruition is very hard to come by and I don't feel like starting if it seems I won't be able to finish.
If the name is interesting enough, I can guarantee that they think they'll get squeezed. The only offers I do get are for things that are live, but look (or genuinely are) underutilized.
