Would the internet be better if domain squatting was made illegal?

Think like a herder, you have 10,000 cows = feed/milk/clean = time and $$, now you have a game with 10,000 virtual cows and each cow costs $2-3/year to pasture. So you want to sell one a year = sale price of $30K to break even. Ask the cowherd about the next cow = also $30K. To change this you have to change the basis of the game. What if it cost $500 for each virtual cow/year for virtual vet fees. So hos 10,000 cows now cost $500 each. I know we speak of cows, but we have now tossed a cat among his chickens = a huge ruckus will occur. His former model is broken, with annual vet bills for his 10,000 coes of $500 each = $5 million a year in vet fees. So this is the squatter game, it has been made dirt cheap to lock up domains for small annual fees. The way to change it is to make domains 'eat' Same thing in houses as rates went up, people who bought for 5% down with 1.5% corporate $$ and now stuck with 5-6% money = their morgtages are eating them alive.

Will changes occure? I hope so. The current squatterverse rewards the worst of people.

How do you identify who is squatting and who isn't?

IMO, this opens up a real bad can of worms regarding property rights where rich/powerful organizations are going to be able to bully individuals much easier to seize domains they want.

Imagine you have some snazzy domain for a project, but all of a sudden Coca-Cola or McDonald's marketing team wants to use it for some Super Bowl promotion next year. If they apply their full weight and pressure on both the "independent governing board" that determines disputes, as well as on you ("Better accept this one-time offer of $500 for your domain now or who knows what the board will decide?"), essentially you've really disadvantaged individuals.

No that won't do anything for the Internet at large