Why did the gaming company waited so long before slamming the user with such a big bill, and allowing him to continue playing the game for over six months? No doubt the company waited for the fruit to ripen before cutting it. Web Coherence warns its readers to be even more cautious as the predators are now actively using legal powers to bail out themselves out of the recession!

So Facebook has joined Myspace and Twitter in enabling personalized web-addresses, with half a million addresses grabbed within minutes of the scheme going live. According to the Sunday Times www.facebook.com/princecharles went to a guy in Hawaii. Surprise, surprise, the cyber-squatters have moved in. Girls Aloud, Rolls-Royce, Waitrose, Morrisons and thousands more celebrity and company names have all gone to hijackers.

No doubt these cyber-squatters think they can sell back the addresses to legitimate owners wanting to reclaim their own names. These fast-acting squatters think they’re so clever with their extortion racket (because that’s what it is). What they don’t realize is that they are about to lose out big time. The world has moved on since cybersquatting was profitable in the early days of the internet. Numerous missives from WIPO (the World Intellectual Property Organization) have ruled that such actions are in breach of intellectual property rights (IPR). If you use Marks & Spencer’s name to attract visitors to your site, then their lawyers will take you down – not for extortion, but for breach of IPR, which is much easier to prove.

The extortionists think they are cleverly playing the Deep Pockets game – believing large organizations will pay up to retrieve their names. There’s no point in stealing from poor people. But Deep Pockets can also operate in reverse – they can afford to defend themselves.

What is more, companies and celebrities are being helped by new sharks on the block. Now there are groups of lawyers who specialize in going after IPR infringers on behalf of these companies. It’s an open and shut case, and they have the resources to bankrupt the squatters. If your name isn’t Harrod then mere ownership of www.facebook.com/harrods is a slam dunk for the opposition – who with malice aforethought will grind you into the dirt.

Of course Facebook could stop all this nonsense. They reserve the right to close accounts. If they made it a condition that names cannot be transferred for payment, then any evidence of a demand for money could lead to closedown.

All the while the sharks are circling. My advice to cyber-squatters is to give up these addresses immediately. I already smell blood on the water.