I will concede that the plan assists in making money off a domain without content. But i do not view it as too evil.
After more thoroughly reviewing the DomainPark service, i would venture to say it may be evil, but i feel it is ‘less evil’ than current common practices. While the DomainPark service may slightly increase the domain squatting industry, it could possibly have a sanitizing effect.
Related example: You mentioned google AdSense. While I dislike being subjected to advertising in general, google-type text ads annoy much less than traditional banner ads. This may be similar.
Question #9 of the Domain Park FAQ addresses restrictions related with the DomainPark service. I view these restrictions as an effort to ‘not be evil’, or at least “don’t be evil” relative to other services or practices.
I see how it may be viewed as “being evil” to some extent. But I would never equivocate it to the same evil that is SPAM e-mail. The erroneous domain is requested by the user, and if the domain name is something like http://www.IWannaCar.com or http://www.FindMeACar.com , it isn’t too far-fetched to assume the browser is interested in deals on cars.
(Amusing post-note: I just tried those two domains, and they exists. The first is a motor company; the second is a squatter/parked domain. Can buy it for only $750.00 😉 … it would make more sense for that domain to show car advertisements than gift baskets and gardening)
I still prefer domains to have content, though i would never get beind regulations to enforce that.