It depends on what you are trying to accomplish.
In either case, you are squatting plain and simple. If you need to feel better by choosing the lesser of two perceived evils, then nothing I say will help.
In your example, you are attempying to make money off of a TM which you have no rights, both examples are cybersquatting, there is no better or worse, they are equal. Both are subject to a 100,000 max fine. You will be labeled a squatter. Not even Labrocca can help you on this one...
Ok. and if i'm not looking to make $, and just happen to have a 3 character domain that is similar to another? I am looking to buy some 3 character domains as an investment (resale). I was thinking that since domain sponsor pages are automatically created .. it does not necessarily show bad faith. (i may not be aware of the typo).
DNQ is right..I can't help you on this one. No loopholes. :-).
Parking is pretty much the squatters tool of choice. It's almost a prerequisite. If there is anything I deplore about the internet and domaining...it's parked pages. However it might be the only way to monetize a domain like this.
Imho if parking companies didn't exist then all these typo and TM domains most likely would never get snapped up. Oh well...
Don't park it. Build a "search" site or something that allows you to control content. The letters themselves are not the issue, but rather how you use them. There are a number of other companies that use ths same letters, but are in a different business. For example, www.bwmcompany.com & www.bwm.com.au would have no issues using the domain in your example...
In theory it could make a difference in a UDRP. I've seen decisions where a panellist said that it was unclear whether the respondent had any control over the advertising displayed and did not penalise him specifically on this point. However in all the cases I've seen there were other factors that caused the respondent to loose.
For example, if someone had simply registered and parked a bunch of 3 letter names that would be one thing. If someone had only registered and parked the 3 letter names used by Auto mobile makers that would be a different story.
Likewise, if one person registered 100 names and only one of them happened to be a trademark you could believe it was a coincidence. If another regularly registered 100 typos and other extensions of trademarks there's no way anyone would believe he didn't have bad intentions.
So for someone with no other evidence against them it might be a good enough excuse. But in your case it's not going to make a difference...
Thanks for the feedback. and to be clear, I don't own bwm.com. perhaps I should rephrase:.
I am in the market to buy over a hundred 3 character domains for resale and/or development .. not for parking (although I do some parking elsewhere),.
And of course .. it is very possible that some of these domains may be typos of another 3 character domain, as in my example. I suppose if I can show that I own abc.com, abd.com, abe.com, abf.com, etc.. that might help me defend my case that this set of domains was not bought for parking, even if I do have some other domains that are more of the parking type.