He doesn't deserve £50,000, imo.
Nope but that might be your only option :/
He doesn't deserve £50,000, imo.
Exactly, this is no way cyber squatting bearing in mind its been there for 10 years.
He may have bought legitimately in the 90's, no longer provides web services, and held onto the domain for profit. He is squatting. Note the difference between now and ten years ago? Absolutely none.Blatent squat?
http://web.archive.org/web/19961230152807/http://www.webmart.com/
Same page was there in 1996!
Not changed much since tho http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.webmart.com/
WEBMART is a registered trademark
It's not like it's your own personal money anyway.

He may have bought legitimately in the 90's, no longer provides web services, and held onto the domain for profit. He is squatting. Note the difference between now and ten years ago? Absolutely none.
this guy is just wasting a good domain name in order to try make a stupid amount of money.
What if he still uses the domain for email and just doesnt use the site as many have already suggested?

then £50,000 is not worth it. Cheeky little **** if that is the case!![]()
And what do you want it for? To make money.

My company owns trademarks and registration for the name of the company, it's quite large now (Turnover of £27million) and we own lots of IP in the forms of domain names and several online operations.
However, the one we want www.example.com is registered to some nobody who has some rubbish website up (rubbish being a white page with a paragraph and some links) which hasn't been updated since 1996.
He is holding on to it and we loose lots and lots of referals because we have to use NAMEuk.com. We are willing to pay to get an official .com, but this guy now knows it is worth something to us... and want £50,000+ for the name.
Can this be defined as Cyber Squatting?
What can we do about this?
then £50,000 is not worth it. Cheeky little **** if that is the case!![]()
1. How do you know it is not worth it? He may run his business through that domain.
2. Who is cheekier? Him for merely owning a website and not rolling over for the first little company that happens along, or you for trying to force his hand?
Don't think we are prepared to pay for it!
But it's not really capitalism....fair enough if they were a small printing firm and we bought it over etc etc... but he isn't making money out of it (quite obviously) and is just trying to rip us off... which means he will get nothing for it. There is profit, then there is greed.
Yet you don't know that.1.) he may, but I highly doubt that he would make the same amount of money that we are prepared to pay for simply the website name.
That is right, I'm glad you rescind your earlier post. You're still being cheeky though, even if he is not.2.) It's not cheeky, it's business.