Chinese lower protection of brandnames in domainnames The registry for .CN, China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC), is amending its rules for domain name dispute resolutions. The new rules, which take effect March 17, may leave trademark owners without claim over some domain names. The new rules will provide a narrower definition of cybersquatting, and will now use the term only to refer to people who register domain names and sell them to rivals of a company that owns the rights to the name instead of anyone who registers a domain name for the purpose of renting or selling it. An English-language version of the new rules is expected to be available soon on the CNNIC Web site. While .CN domain names were primarily used by international companies in the past, small and mid-sized companies in China are also starting to adopt them. According to CNNIC, there are about one million registered .CN domain names now. Sources: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-02/21/content_4207861.htm
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2006-02/21/content_522266.htm solution : if you have the cash, buy whatever name and variant you can think off. Or just do not buy any .cn domain and declare everywhere such domainnames as phishing and fraud. You can easily make a subdomain http://cn.domainname.com or .com/cn But at the other hand, they try to defend the domainnames of their own Olympics The organisation committee for the 2008 Beijing Olympics has issued a statement warning companies and individuals not to attempt to typosquat
www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/ room/view_category.asp?catcode=42

It discusses how proposed rules would allow Whois to list only a technical contact for each domain name. A technical contact could be a web hosting company rather than an individual owner. This would make it difficult for trademark owners to send cease and desist letters to people they think are cybersquatting. Trademark owners would have to skip this step and go directly to a UDRP or get a subpoena. This could be bad for domainers, as typically the issue can be worked out at the cease and desist stage
http://domainnamewire.com/2006/04/27/wall-street-journal-article-on-whois-privacy/
The article focuses on another revenue source — revenue from parked domains. In this case it’s domains registered at GoDaddythat the owners aren’t doing anything with. These domains resolve to GoDaddy parking pages fed by Google ads.
http://domainnamewire.com/2006/04/25/forbes-article-about-godaddy/