Being part of a community should be about the community, or is it about the individual?

Wikipedia’s community definition is as folows
A community is a social group of organisms sharing an environment, normally with shared interests. In human communities, intent, belief, resources, preferences, needs, risks and a number of other conditions may be present and common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness.

ZDnet is featuring a news item about cybersquatting – which is where an individual takes a corporate or large organization’s web domain and with a bit of a jinx registers a similar domain. They then use their similar domain to publish negative or inflammatory information about the organization

The two examples quoted in the news report are tasmania’s tourist government arm discovertasmania.com.au and Chelsea and Westminster hospital in London. In both cases, disgruntled individuals have taken the time to put together a site and promote the site, in order to have a shot at what ever organization they are unhappy with.

What I found interesting is that both these examples are about individuals targeting services which are primarily community organizations. Granted these services may be able to do a better job then they currently are, but they do offer a service that benefits many people.

The international courts have ruled in favor of these disgruntled webmasters, and I would agree. In keeping the internet a place where we can all have our say I believe that the court came to the correct decision. I do however disagree with the way these webmasters have gone about having their say.

Tell me what you think is the best code of conduct