Typosquatting

plashdoy writes: "Oh what a tangled Web we weave: ZDNN article on Typosquatting. Don't you hate it when stuff like this is more profitable than your honest efforts?" I have no problem with typo squatting as a whole, but there are a dozen Slashdot typo sites, one of which frames Slashdot with a 2nd banner ad. Now I don't care ... but this fools about 1 person every 2-3 days, and they flame me for selling out and doing something so horrible as framing Slashdot for extra ad space. So I guess typo sites that frame the site are pretty slimey, but as long as the typo site provides a link to the correct site, I'm totally cool with 'em.

Comments

Kills frame-squatting dead.

[e_n_d_o]

setTimeout ("changePage()", 10);
function changePage()
{
if(self.parent.frames.length != 0)
self.parent.location="/index.html";
}

Re:Kills frame-squatting dead.

[Haight6716]

A cleaner version of this:

<script language="JavaScript"><!--
// Break out of frames! I'm the tops!
if (window.location != window.parent.location) {
window.parent.location = window.location;
}
//--></script>

If you want a nav-bar, that's why your browser has that little toolbar at the top of the screen. Or you can implement a floating bar that sits in it's own trimmed-down browser window. Then you won't run afoul of frame-busting scripts.

-=Julian=-

Re:Kills frame-squatting dead.

[TrevorB]

CNN.com does this, and it's bloddy annoying... :)

I actually have a page on my own web site (not for external browsing, www.arbutus.cx/navbar/) that has a narrow (75px) left sidebar frame where I can navigate between my favorites. Easier for me that having to drag around my favorites whereever I go.

CNN likes to kill my happy little side frame, which is a reason why I usually go to it last. But I guess CNN would have more "frame linking" problems (especially linking directly to articles). I wouldn't be happy is Slashdot did this (the first link on my side navbar), but I guess I could live with it.

New TLDs...

[the_tsi]

Won't it be great when we can register .cmo domains? The number of times I've tried surfing to yahoo.cmo can't even be counted in binary on two hands and two feet.

-Chris

So how would you fix it?

[Twid]

OK, assuming the problem of "typosquatting" is a real one that needs to be dealt with, how would you create an enforcable rule?

For example, if I owned frito.com and you owned fritto.com, a perfectly legitimate word (maybe a chef's site, for example), is that a violation?

How would you quantify this in a way NSI and others could enforce? It seems like any solution would require subjective review by a committee, and that means that it would be political, capricious, and subject to manipulation like the WTO.

Personally, I think the internet advertising market will change in coming years, and just serving up a banner won't make you the 5 cents a click that people claim to receive now. This will make running a "typosquatting" site less lucrative. I also see no difference between "typosquatting" and perfume knockoffs, rolex watch knockoffs, kit cars, and other sorts of ways of leeching off a major brand name. It's a healthy part of how capitalism works.

The only big problem I see is intentional deceit, such as the recent problem with bank of america where someone was trying to deceive people into sending in personal info. We have existing fraud laws to cover that.

So, unless someone is trying to trick you into thinking that they are really bankofamerica.com or slashdot.org, I don't have a problem with "typosquatting".

ICANN?

[Masem]

Unless there's a beef with ICANN that you refuse to use their arbitration services, this sounds like an ideal case of cybersquatting (I've seen ICANN rulings where typo sites have lost on trademarks). Unfortunately, there's a somewhat signifigent fee involved ($500) to start arbitration, but particularly for the site that frames you, there's the cybersquatting (and making money issue), and that framing other sites intentionally has been considered somewhat iffy by the courts in the past. IANAL, of course.

Making bucks off someone else's rep

[warpeightbot]

I don't agree, Taco. Someone else is making bucks off your good rep, for $15 worth of capital. At best, somebody owes you a cut of the proceeds for your blood, sweat, and tears spent making a site yonder doofus could exploit.

I have a feeling that if I went out on the street, put up a green sign with silver arches, and called it MacDonalds and started selling chicken sandwiches, that the company that has sold Billions and Billions would have proper recourse to land on me with a ton of lawyers. But here in cyberspace, it's *just* a typo?

I don't think so. And even if it is, when folks like the 800 pound gorilla from Redmond get into the act, it won't stay that way long, DOJ lawsuits aside. And for once, I think that's as it should be. www.whitehouse.com indeed, don't try that not-a-link unless you're 18.....

--
That Isaac Hayes, he's one baaaad mutha...(Hush yo mouth!)
I'm just talkin' 'bout Chef! (We can dig it!)

I hate that

[clinko]

I mean, i own donkeyhumper.com and would ya know it, someone bought donkeeyhumper.com. And would you belive it, the guy has the nerves to make donkeeyhumper.com a porn site! I cry myself to sleep just thinking about the people who accidentally go on that other site instead of quality donkey-humping action at donkeyhumper.com.

What is this world coming to?

Re:What typo site?

[lar]

www.salshdot.org frames slashdot...... see?

==