Domain Social  about domain social  contact domain social     join domain social  domain social forum    domain social store   
FAQ  |   MEMBERS LIST  |   SEARCH  |   TODAY'S POSTS  |   MARK FORUM READ  |  

Welcome to Domain Social, a domain forum where people sell domains and buy domains,
talk about domain name registration and help others when buying and selling domains.

Want full access? Click here to register

What you get:
Join in on Discussions on domains
Buy domains in the market place
Sell domains in the market place

and its free! Register now!
Reply
 
Trackback Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 07-21-2006, 06:41 PM   #1 (permalink)
llegent llegent is offline
Senior Member
 
llegent's Avatar
 

Posts: 199
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Online
Number of Domains: 40+
Trader Rating: (0)
Default Potential Legal Issues for Typo Squats?

While researching for some nice domain with potential type-in traffic, I bumped into some typo error domains. Well, we all know that domain investors are using many way to draw traffic to their domains especially parked domain in order to earn cool nice revenue from PPC.

One of the common way is grabbing those typo errors domain names, which traffic would likely to incurred due to people typing in the wrong url address or simply not sure of the correct spelling so they'll type in what they "think" should be.

Looking at this, let's take an example :- yahooo.com (extra "h") which is a parked domain currently (not mine...but I wish is mine). Would it possibly invite legal dispute??
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2006, 02:34 PM   #2 (permalink)
Grace Grace is offline
Senior Member
 
Grace's Avatar
 

Posts: 482
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Virginia
Number of Domains: 0
Trader Rating: (0)
Send a message via MSN to Grace
Default

What would the legal dispute be? You can't buy domain with names close to another such as yahoo.com.
  Reply With Quote

Remove these by Registering

Old 07-22-2006, 06:53 PM   #3 (permalink)
llegent llegent is offline
Senior Member
 
llegent's Avatar
 

Posts: 199
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Online
Number of Domains: 40+
Trader Rating: (0)
Default

That's what I would like to find out further too! For example:-
1. yahooo.com (extra "o") is currently directed to yahoo.com, so I guess they owned it!
2. gooogle.com (extra "o" too) is also directed to google.com.

What about this domain "goooogle.com" ? It is a parked domain currently which I guess is not owned by google.com. Would google.com tries to dispute about it?? We know google disputed about booble.com (in another thread http://www.domainsocial.com/showthread.php?t=69)

Scratching my head...

Last edited by llegent : 07-22-2006 at 07:12 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2006, 08:10 PM   #4 (permalink)
zach zach is offline
Administrator
 
zach's Avatar
 

Posts: 872
Join Date: Jun 2006
Number of Domains: hundreds
Trader Rating: (3)
Send a message via MSN to zach
Default

It is definatly grounds for a court case (or now a domain dispute), and Yahoo or Google could probably win. Of course, their company size and importance is enough to justify them winning the case (alas, this is how it seems to work in the legal world), but I know that is not what you are asking.

The domains sound sufficiently familar to the original mark. This could be considered 'bad faith' if no disclaimer is issued on the site, as it might be deemed that it confuses visitors (yes, they arent always all that intelligent). It could also be considered as trademark dillution.

I know that it dosent really seem fair, and this has drawn a lot of criticism, but in the end, it's the policy which was adopted and so its how it works.
__________________
Sig: Before I post on Domain Social, I read the rules!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-31-2006, 09:32 PM   #5 (permalink)
Grace Grace is offline
Senior Member
 
Grace's Avatar
 

Posts: 482
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Virginia
Number of Domains: 0
Trader Rating: (0)
Send a message via MSN to Grace
Default

This seems purposely confusing and taking advantage of that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006, 11:04 PM   #6 (permalink)
Plumley Plumley is offline
Member
 
Plumley's Avatar
 

Posts: 97
Join Date: Aug 2006
Number of Domains:
Trader Rating: (0)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zach
I know that it dosent really seem fair, and this has drawn a lot of criticism, but in the end, it's the policy which was adopted and so its how it works.

I dunno, seems reasonable to me. I can't think of a motive for registering a typo of a big name brand other than to misguide surfers. I know the big fish have a great advantage in terms of resources but this isn't like some little guy like Adsense getting screwed, this is someone who deliberately set out to misdirect not being allowed to do it. Not a lot of skin off anyone's nose if it doesn't pan out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-2006, 10:46 PM   #7 (permalink)
Hoosierhunter Hoosierhunter is offline
Member
 
Hoosierhunter's Avatar
 

Posts: 94
Join Date: Sep 2006
Number of Domains:
Trader Rating: (0)
Default

Nod. I was curious about this too. Personally I'd be worried about a typo site close to the name of a financial institution.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2006, 04:17 PM   #8 (permalink)
technoflutemom technoflutemom is offline
Junior Member
 
technoflutemom's Avatar
 

Posts: 26
Join Date: Sep 2006
Number of Domains:
Trader Rating: (0)
Default

Quote:
I can't think of a motive for registering a typo of a big name brand other than to misguide surfers.

I used to work for a construction company that had the same name as a huge, nationally known construction firm. Thing is, the little guys I worked for had been around for alot longer than the big guys. The big guys had the .com of course, but the little firm had it with a hyphen. They definitely didn't mean to misguide surfers, but they needed a web presence. Since they were both in the same industry, thought, they may have gotten a few contracts that would have went to the large company
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-02-2006, 01:55 PM   #9 (permalink)
Dave Zan Dave Zan is offline
Member
 
Dave Zan's Avatar
 

Posts: 89
Join Date: Oct 2006
Number of Domains:
Trader Rating: (0)
Default

There are indeed cases of domain names allegedly infringing trademarks
because they're supposedly typos. Many have actually been resolved thru
an administrative procedure called UDRP (just google it) because it's more
convenient than going thru Court.

Note there's no black or white answer to it. UDRPs, just like court cases,
are fact-intensive.

IANAL, BTW.
__________________
Vidi, Vici, Veni!
www.DaveZan.com - My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-07-2006, 04:45 AM   #10 (permalink)
shaunapple shaunapple is offline
Junior Member
 
shaunapple's Avatar
 

Posts: 24
Join Date: Oct 2006
Number of Domains:
Trader Rating: (0)
Default

Perhaps the registrar could decide to take the name.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 06:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC3 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.