What about carlyfiorina.sucks?
Uncle Joe thinks Scary Fiorina has little chance of winning.
Didn’t we have this same story last week, but a different Republican?
EDIT: I remember - Rick Perry! (Has it already been three years?)
I was working at Compaq when it merged with HP. I found the new corporate culture very depressing, especially when Carly came in. At the campus in Houston we were required to line the raised, pedestrian walkway and cheer as Carly passed by in a golf cart, waving like some sort of Queen and then When she was ‘dismissed’ people literally spilled out into the halls singing Ding Dong the Witch is Dead. I will always treasure the former memory. She is poisonous.
Can .ORG domains get taken away under domain squatting rules? Or is that limited to .COMs? I wonder how long this will last.
Does it count as “domain squatting” if you’re actively using it, as the owner of this domain is?
That depends on how the patriot act continues to be interpreted. For instance, said domain owner could be a terrorist trying to disrupt America’s elections. Indefinite detention, puhleez.
Exactly why is she running? Even if everybody else died, she wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of being elected. Well, shucky ducky!
Like many 3rd-tier GOP candidates, it’s a safe bet that she’s largely in it to boost her book sales (she’s got two out right now) as well as auditioning for a host/pundit job at Fox News.
This is the most likely impetus I can think of.
C.R.E.A.M. is forever.
I have a recollection of more than one domain squatter who was using their site for something else entirely, and just banking on the popular domain name for traffic. I can’t recall any cases where it was used for criticism of the brand/trademark in question (which this one is being used for), but I have a feeling it would still get taken away, regardless. Especially in this case, because in general they don’t seem to be too sympathetic if you’re “squatting” on a domain using the name of somebody/some organization that has a lot of power.
As one of those frowny faces, I don’t know who is behind this site, but I would like to shake their hand, buy them a beer, playfully mess up their hair, give them a little back rub, gently lick their earlobe, caress their…
wait, where was I?
Anyway. I’d also kick in some $ for bandwidth costs.
She should have registered the .org first.
And so far, she’s my favorite Republican candidate, which considering how much I dislike her (both for her time at HP and her previous Senate race), says I really don’t like any of the other Republicans as well.
I wouldn’t want to go up against some white shoe law firm’s crack team of flesh eating attack lawyers over the issue; but ‘domain squatting’ rules are focused pretty heavily on trademark protection and commercial interests.
In this case, the holder of the domain name should have a pretty ironclad case; so long as they don’t pull a ‘this isn’t extortion but for the modest price of $$$ this embarrassing little domain can be yours…’ move. That would probably put them straight into the ‘bad faith’ section. Aside from that, noncommercial political speech, consisting of true statements and definitely not calculated to deceive anyone into thinking they’d arrived at the official site, should be in pretty solid territory.
That would be news to me. Not saying it’s not true, just that it would be news.
Compare with http://www.martinlutherking.org/, which is run by StormFront, a white supremacist organization.
Of course, no self-respecting politician would ever sell their services.
I remember when she was at Lucent (remember them) and what she did to bell labs, what she then did to HP came as no surprise.
The sad thing is that layoffs are a legitimate business practice and aren’t even nearly the worst of what she did at HP. At least those serve a theoretical ethics goal if needed. Hacking other board members voice mail and phone records by hiring pis to pretend to be them is not legit or ethical ever.
Well yeah look at the photo on her main web page.