The Trademark Cyberpiracy Act and the seminal opinion in the Umbro litigation both reinforce the notion that a domain name is a form of property that can be subject to an in rem action or seized to satisfy an outstanding judgment at the request of a judgment creditor 16 . Other courts may hold different opinions , but pressure from mergers, acquisitions, auctions, dispute settlements, marriage dissolutions, and estate liquidations may forge a new system of property rights in domain names. In rem litigation is a powerful tool for trademark owners who have been unable to obtain jurisdiction over bad faith registrants whose whereabouts are unknown. Under the Trademark Cyberpiracy Act, the property of an in rem defendant can be in the judicial district where the domain name registrar, registry, or other domain name authority is located. Even .COM registrants who reside outside the United States can be brought to court in Herndon, Virginia, the domicile of the .COM, .NET and .ORG registry.
Court opinions trail society's changes and conundrums resulting from technology of recent vintage.
If domain names are property, then existing contracts such as NSI's harsh Service Agreement must be rewritten. Although the implications of the Umbro decision are yet to be fully assessed, and NSI's appeal remains to be heard, the magistrate recognized that each knotty domain name dispute before the court may be breaking new legal ground. A domain name with significant value on the open market certainly would be an attractive, arguably appropriate target for a judgment creditor seeking to satisfy a judgment from a wayward debtor. Umbro, op. cit. Also reference Daniel J. Meador, ed.