People who lawfully own a domain -- even if in a speculative fashion -- are not domain squatters.
If you had a hot new product called CyberTrk and someone ran and registered cybertrk.com, that is arguably squatting and can be legally enforced as such.
If you have what you think is a great new online notepad and notes.com is sitting registered but dormant, the inelegant but reasonable way to respond to your situation is "tough shit". Keep looking.
99% of the time that people rant about "squatting" they're talking about the latter case. Yet they are not entitled to a domain because of some imagined better use for it.
Sorry for the rant, but misclaims about "Squatting" lead to an iffy area where people have a profound misunderstanding about property rights. I have zero "parked" domains, but contemplating the issue long ago made me less outraged when I lazily searched for the most blatantly obvious domains.
If you had a hot new product called CyberTrk and someone ran and registered cybertrk.com, that is arguably squatting and can be legally enforced as such.
If you have what you think is a great new online notepad and notes.com is sitting registered but dormant, the inelegant but reasonable way to respond to your situation is "tough shit". Keep looking.
99% of the time that people rant about "squatting" they're talking about the latter case. Yet they are not entitled to a domain because of some imagined better use for it.
Sorry for the rant, but misclaims about "Squatting" lead to an iffy area where people have a profound misunderstanding about property rights. I have zero "parked" domains, but contemplating the issue long ago made me less outraged when I lazily searched for the most blatantly obvious domains.