Slashdot Mirror


100,000 Domains Sold for $164 Million

miller60 writes "Here's a news item that puts some hard data on the domain typo millionaires post from a couple weeks back. Marchex Inc. just paid $164 million to buy Name Development Ltd., an obscure company that displays pay-per-click keyword ads on 100,000 domains. It's not a stock swap, either, as $155 million of that was in cash. The seller reportedly built the portfolio by scarfing up expiring domains (including hardware-update.com, previously owned by Microsoft and linked from within the Windows 2000 OS) and replacing the content with pay-per-click ads."

287 comments

  1. 1640 Per Domain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or is there something else regarding their business?

    1. Re:1640 Per Domain? by shufler · · Score: 1

      It's not uncommon for particular domain names to fetch tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    2. Re:1640 Per Domain? by yelvington · · Score: 1

      It's not the domain name. It's the traffic, the audience that potentially would click on CPC ads.

    3. Re:1640 Per Domain? by blogeasy · · Score: 1

      In fact, the www.whatismup.com domain just sold for $386,100 yesterday. That's a lot of money for such a simple website, but it gets millions of hits a month. Not sure how long it will take to get a decent return on investment even with millions of hits a month at that price.

      --

      Browse the Information Directory
    4. Re:1640 Per Domain? by blogeasy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Internet domain names are a lot like commercial real estate. The value is based on traffic count much like the number of cars that pass by a retail shopping center. Real estate investors also use solid investment analysis when considering the purchase of properties which makes the sale of these domains interesting.

      It was noted on NetCraft that these domains get about 17 million unique visitors a month and at a $5.00 CPM (which is quite generous) that would be $85,000 a month ($1.02 million a year) in revenue. Consequently, the ROI (Return on Investment) would be 0.622% which is a very poor rate to receive.

      In order to get a decent ROI, the new owners are going to have to increase traffic, create better content for higher paying ads, or provide some upsell item with a high profit margin and conversion rate. If this were a real estate property, this rate of return would definately make this property a "don't wanter".

      --

      Browse the Information Directory
    5. Re:1640 Per Domain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      at a $5.00 CPM (which is quite generous) that would be

      I think they get more, because most sites of this kind also carry sponsored or affiliates links.

    6. Re:1640 Per Domain? by blogeasy · · Score: 1

      Even with a $15.00 CPM that will still equate to a 1.866% ROI which is still pretty bad. It just seems like they overpaid for this Internet "property" unless they come up with some other angle to use the traffic to sell higher margin products or advertisements.

      --

      Browse the Information Directory
  2. Aggghh the pain. by essreenim · · Score: 1
    It's like "legitimate?" spam ??

    1. Re:Aggghh the pain. by NurseMaximum · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It's like "legitimate?" spam ??

      This isn't spam - you request a page, you see an advert, it's not forced into your inbox.

      This is seeing an opportunity and using it, and they deserve a bit of success from that. Whether they deserve $164m worth of success is another matter.

      --
      Who meta-moderates the meta-moderators?
    2. Re:Aggghh the pain. by essreenim · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      Well it's spam to me!!

      Maybe not for allot of Ameicans who are used to spelling google googil because they are not intelligent enough to understand the sublety of spelling a word with 'le' at the end that is pronounced 'el'?

      http://www.googil.com

    3. Re:Aggghh the pain. by fuzzybunny · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What a lot of the "this isn't fair, this is criminal, this is predatory" posts seem to be predicated around is the mistaken belief that life is fair and that the stupid should have the same good life as the intelligent.

      This is not a life insurance-selling shill forcing his way into some poor ignorant grandma's house, putting pressure tactics on her to buy into scam xyz. Much like people caught up in ponzi scams, Tom Vu seminars, what have you, it is entirely up to the user what he sees. Remember that truism about lotteries being a tax on people who're bad at math? Well there you go.

      Nor are these guys pushing (for the most part) spyware, trojans, credit card theft, viruses, what-have-you, on unsuspecting PC users who've taken all reasonable precautions. I understand that your post is facetious (at least I hope it is) but referring to what I wrote above, the stupid, ignorant and lazy have exactly the same chances as everyone else. What they make of them is entirely up to them, including learning how to spell slsahdot.

      --
      Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
    4. Re:Aggghh the pain. by stupidfoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, the number is actually spelled "googol" and not google (which was an accidental misspelling of googol) or googil. Googil is actually closer to the real spelling.

    5. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't accidental.

    6. Re:Aggghh the pain. by tverbeek · · Score: 1
      This is seeing an opportunity and using it, and they deserve a bit of success from that.

      No, they do not.

      Maybe they "deserve" a pat on the back for their ingenuity or whatever. But they deserve no "success"* for it.

      *Apparently you're one of the people who uses the word "success" as a synonym for wealth. Some of us define "success" and "deserve" based on less... mercantile standards.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    7. Re:Aggghh the pain. by essreenim · · Score: 1
      Point taken but I make a distinction between a typo like slsahdot and googil. The former is a genuine keyboard slip. The latter is just pure ignorance. All, I'm saying is that these sites that profit from typos through advertisements are profiting on the ignorant. I think this is a problem.

      Wouldn't it be allot better if I mis-typed googil and it opened up a little page saying:

      "No page with that title exists"

      That what happens when you search for 'googil" in Wikipedia

      I just think this typo exploitation is greared towards allowing the ignorant to keep misspelling (like I probaly am now) and rewarding them by still opening up the correct page they were looking for, whilst simultaneously exploiting them with advertisements, and rewarding the vultures that create the typo sites. Sorry, that's how I feel.

    8. Re:Aggghh the pain. by StyroCupMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't mind if I happen to type in the wrong page and see a bunch of useless ads. What irks me is when I am trying to do a search and all it returns are links to those ad pages.

      --
      If I may say so, life is a game, and there's so much to do and so few turns.
      -Reiner Knizia
    9. Re:Aggghh the pain. by essreenim · · Score: 1
      It wasn't accidental I think and anyway that is not my point at all.

      I know googol is a 1 with a hundred zeros after it but the site is officially called "google" not "googol" not "googil" not gooogle...

      I for one just wanted to make a point that spelling typos should not reward bad grammar OR exploit spelling ignorance, rather a web page that corrects the mistale would be more appropriate in my opinion.

    10. Re:Aggghh the pain. by bigberk · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This isn't spam - you request a page
      Even though I'm a dedicated spam fighter, I'd have to agree with respect to the domains. It really doesn't seem like spam to me by any accepted definition of the word. I am just amazed though that people will start clicking ads when they reach a site which is obviously the wrong one. How does an average person's thought process work?
      • I want to go read my localnewspaper.tld
      • clickety clickety localnewspapper.tld
      • Oh, this is obviously not the newspaper site
      • This strange gentleman is offering me a mortgage! Come to think of it, my pocketbook has been feeling heavy lately. I'll bite!
      I just don't understand how people think, I guess. Neither do they probably. But I guess this is what American style "impulse buying" is all about. The marketing psychologists have trained society so well that all you have to do is show advertising, even out of context, and people bite.
    11. Re:Aggghh the pain. by pizzaman100 · · Score: 0, Redundant
      What irks me is when I am trying to do a search and all it returns are links to those ad pages.

      Yes! Mod parent up! In addition, I would rather come across some annoying ads than a bunch of porn links that open more browser windows.

    12. Re:Aggghh the pain. by koreaman · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, gentooo.org and slsahdot.org both do that.

    13. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      If not criminal, it's certainly an attempt at making money without providing something of value in exchange. Maybe "scavenger" is a better word than "predator".

      Some of these operators, though, have been clearly abusive. A friend of mine ran a web filtering company and at one point they discovered some scumbag had registered "disnie.com" and put a porn site on it. I don't know what happened to that scumbag, but he's one of the few people I'd willingly see eaten by Disney lawyers.

    14. Re:Aggghh the pain. by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A lot depends on how they use they typo page.
      If they are clearly the wrong page then I see no harm in it. If they try to look like the typo page then that is wrong.
      The best of them even put up a link to the correct page.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    15. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Amen.

      And just yesterday the slashdot groupthink was bashing France's scocialist/protectiontist policies.

      Today, we come across something we deem immoral and start crying "oh noes!!1!!!1 somebody must put a stop to this"

      Well guess what people, the free market is amoral. You either need to accept the positivies and negatives that come with it, or sart imposing ethically motivated restrictions on it. Guess where that leads?

      For the record, I'm a socialist (with a lower case 's') Each system has its advantages and disadvanteges, but at least be consistent.

    16. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      All, I'm saying is that these sites that profit from typos through advertisements are profiting on the ignorant.
      They aren't profiting on the ignorant. They aren't even profiting from the ignorant. What does it cost me if I type www.slashtod.org and get an ad? No more than if I got a 404 or whatever.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    17. Re:Aggghh the pain. by essreenim · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Oh please it opens up a whole binch of pop-up ads, and though many browsers counter this, that doesn't make it right. The combined amount of home users supplying the domain owners with cash is equivalent to a _fre_ distributed computer (thousands of advertisements links opened). And how much money do the maintainers of this distributed virtual computer get (the home users) - zero. The fat cat domain owners profit from their cpu utilization, badwidth and time. Sorry, no soothing away you consciousness here!! jk

      That's my opinion anyway. I think its wrong. Buying a domain and selling it on at a huge profit however is not the same thing, and I have no problem with this provided the domain wasn't used for the above purpose in between..

    18. Re:Aggghh the pain. by essreenim · · Score: 1
      Thankyou koreaman, I feel better now. Gentoo and /. are setting a good example here. May they prosper..

    19. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Yes - please download our new version of gcc that sends electric shocks through your keyboard when emitting an error message.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    20. Re:Aggghh the pain. by fataugie · · Score: 1
      No, what it really is is Payback from your teachers for not learning how to spell correctly.

      I'm in the same boat, I get punished on a daily basis.

      --

      WTF? Over?

    21. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should learn to spell "a lot".

    22. Re:Aggghh the pain. by aichpvee · · Score: 1

      Also the variant form "alot".

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
    23. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? So like if I say click here to get a free Mac Mini or here for a free iPod it'll work!?!?!

    24. Re:Aggghh the pain. by stupidfoo · · Score: 1

      slsahdot.org is not hosted by slashdot.org

    25. Re:Aggghh the pain. by koreaman · · Score: 1

      And gentooo.org is not hosted by gentoo.org, but that's not the point.

    26. Re:Aggghh the pain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't it be allot better if I mis-typed googil and it opened up a little page saying: It would be better if you didn't actually believe that "allot" is a word

    27. Re:Aggghh the pain. by SecretSqrl · · Score: 0

      This is the sale of likely "wrong turns" on the information superhighway.

    28. Re:Aggghh the pain. by jedinite · · Score: 1
      I am just amazed though that people will start clicking ads when they reach a site which is obviously the wrong one. How does an average person's thought process work?
      Cue appropriate (and timely) Simpson's quote from this week's episode:

      Homer visits the ePISCOPAL CHURCH website and clicks through to become an instant ordained minister (complete with print-out clerical collar)

      Homer: "And now to close out the pop-ups. A talking moose wants my credit card number? Fair enough..." *types*

      I'd imagine its something like that...
      --

      ---------
      There is no try at jedinite.com
    29. Re:Aggghh the pain. by releppes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're right! It's not spam, but to actually credit dirt bags like this for scrafing up domain names as "intellegent" or "opportunits", I think is just wrong.

      I totally hate how expiring domain names are up for grabs the minute they expire, because it creates the very market for nasty tactics like snagging someones domain. Yeah it's legal, but the morality is just wrong.

      I think there should be a waiting period after a domain name expires. Say a company goes out of buisness, decides not to renew, whatever the reason, that domain name should become void for a period of a year. After that point, then it becomes availible for purchase.

      I just think that's the responsible thing to do with respect to the end consumer.

    30. Re:Aggghh the pain. by UTPinky · · Score: 1

      Would that be the same unintelligent people who seem to think its spelled "allot" instead of "a lot"?

      --
      I'm only paranoid because everyone is against me...
    31. Re:Aggghh the pain. by x736e65616b · · Score: 1

      i didn't realize that there were still intelligent comments posted to slashdot.

      amen.

      -j

    32. Re:Aggghh the pain. by essreenim · · Score: 1
      You are paranoid.

    33. Re:Aggghh the pain. by philntc · · Score: 1

      Whether they deserve $164m worth of success is another matter.

      IMHO, and that of the free market too, they deserve precisely $164M (if that is the precise number in the transaction).

      If this is what the market bears for such an "asset" (I won't debate that point), then so be it. What this means is that there were others willing to pay $150M, and $100,000, and $45,000, etc...

      lasaiz-faire... etc. etc.

  3. why pay 1640$ per domain? by niall111 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    when you can buy them for 4.95$ a pop!?

    1. Re:why pay 1640$ per domain? by ghoti · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because you don't just want any old domain, but the ones that are most often visited by mistake.

      --
      EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
    2. Re:why pay 1640$ per domain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because this person is selling something for 164M is in no way related to how often they are clicked on by mistake.

    3. Re:why pay 1640$ per domain? by PoopJuggler · · Score: 0

      All someone has to do is get a list of these domains and build a "spell-check" filter for Firefox or IE, their $164million investment is worthless...

    4. Re:why pay 1640$ per domain? by generic-man · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it'll be as popular as a filter that blocks out advertising, which would render Google financially insolvent if everyone in the world were to install it.

      --
      For more information, click here.
  4. Price not surprising at all. by bigtallmofo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Do a Google search for "web traffic" and look at all the AdWord advertisements. Almost all of them are sites that buy expired domain names or common misspellings of domain names, and for the low-low price of $2 they'll send thousands of people to your web site via such domains.

    Also, for anyone that has used the site... www.whatismyip.com was up for an EBay auction that ended at about 11:00 pm EST last night. Last I checked the bidding was $55,000. Not sure what it ultimately sold for.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:Price not surprising at all. by bigtallmofo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sorry to reply to myself... I just found the EBay auction site again:

      Whatismyip.com Auction

      The final price? $386,100.00.

      --
      I'm a big tall mofo.
    2. Re:Price not surprising at all. by SpongeBobLinuxPants · · Score: 1

      interesting... whatstheip.com, findipnow.com, and findmyipnow.com and for sale on ebay as well advertised as 'like whatismyip.com'

    3. Re:Price not surprising at all. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Informative

      What's horrible is that the guy who sold it was given the site as directed by the pervious owner's Will. He died and left it to this guy who sold it. Isn't that nice?

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    4. Re:Price not surprising at all. by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's horrible is that the guy who sold it was given the site as directed by the pervious owner's Will. He died and left it to this guy who sold it. Isn't that nice?

      That is truly horrible.

      You know, when I die, I think I will put a clause in my will that requires my next of kin to pay the estate taxes themselves, and LIVE in my house, not sell it. I mean, the thought of a next of kin selling something they don't want to maintain is just horrible.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    5. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wouldn't be feasible. Why should people be burdened by possesions you foist upon them? More common is a clause in wills which states that anybody in a list who wants to live in a house gets dibs, but you can't force somebody to keep your house because they might not be able to afford the taxes.
      Kind of a no-revenge beyond the grave thing.

    6. Re:Price not surprising at all. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      If someone leaves you something in their will, they want you to have it.

      The guy trusted him to take care of it when he was gone. And he sold it. I think that's wrong.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    7. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's so silly.

      There is nothing majik about high level domains.

      Of course, there is a big difference between purchasing a name and a name plus business combo.

      Google could easily make a site.

      myip.google.com and folks would have no trouble remembering it. Hell they might run dynamic dns for a token charge or in exchange for placement of a small google advert box. Of course the google guys, if they had any sense, would be beating the bushes for the creators of all those 'effort of love' sites that went away with free hosting and offer the ownere, FREE HOSTING with small google advert sidebar.

      Thinking a bit more 'out there' google might actually run some accounting and reimburse the sites owners for any revenue beyond what would be paid to an independent site minus the cost to google of hosting the site.

    8. Re:Price not surprising at all. by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 1

      It's amazing that someone who also bought THIS has enough brain cells to make 386000$. Life really is unfair.

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    9. Re:Price not surprising at all. by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
      You know, when I die, I think I will put a clause in my will that requires my next of kin to pay the estate taxes themselves, and LIVE in my house, not sell it.

      Unfeasible. I recently went through this, and living in it would have meant moving 400 miles (hey...no job), and taking over another $120,000 mortgage. Not happening. I hated selling it. But financially, there were few options.

    10. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Karl+Tacheron · · Score: 1

      Perhaps he's just independently wealthy?

    11. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Errtu76 · · Score: 1

      I mean, the thought of a next of kin selling something they don't want to maintain is just horrible

      Not to sound very impolite, but: who cares? I mean, you're dead, so obviously you don't care anymore. So what if people sell what you owned in your life? If selling it makes them happy, then by all means let them be happy. Yes, for whatever reason. It's only material stuff anyways. Nothing you can take with you.

      And have you ever thought about the fact that your relatives might not even want to live in your house, because it's too emotional for them? I know that from personal experience. If your relatives think like we did, they'll sell the house very quickly.

    12. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      Unfeasible. I recently went through this, and living in it would have meant moving 400 miles (hey...no job), and taking over another $120,000 mortgage. Not happening. I hated selling it. But financially, there were few options.

      That's exactly the grandparent's point. He was being sarcastic, and being very openly sarcastic. Obviously you wouldn't want to do such a thing in a will.

    13. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Vellmont · · Score: 1

      Where did you get the idea that the original owner trusted the to "take care of it when he was gone?". It's a website, not a child or dog.

      --
      AccountKiller
    14. Re:Price not surprising at all. by jaguar5150 · · Score: 1

      But there is definitely something magic about spelling magic umm... majik... I kid!

    15. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can so many people (including you) miss the sarcasm of the grandparent post completely???!!!!

    16. Re:Price not surprising at all. by TopDawg · · Score: 1

      I've got to reply to this because the other 3 replies just don't seem to get it. He's being sarcastic. Do we all really need to put a tag in our posts so the clueless can see it? Unpossible knows it's a bad idea. Hint: the last part, "...the thought of a next of kin selling something they DON'T WANT TO MAINTAIN is just HORRIBLE." should give you a clue.

    17. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 0
      Personally, I believe there are fake bids here. It jumps from something like 260K to 386K in one bid. Nobody in his right mind will make such a jump.

      Furthermore, why the hell would a site with only a blank page on it be high traffic? No reason at all.

    18. Re:Price not surprising at all. by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Not true. Lets say the bid is at $100 and there is a minimum $2. increment between bids. and I place my max bid at $300. The current bid will be at 102. Now lets say the next person who bids is willing to pay up to $400. If he puts $400, the current bid will be at $302 ($2 above my highest bid.)

      So the bid was at 260k, and the company who made that bid probably placed a max of 380k (or some number), and the next bidding company thinks it is valued more then that. It can be very legit.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    19. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They may be shill bids but you clearly fail to understand how eBay's proxy bidding works.

    20. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Neophytus · · Score: 1

      That just means that the person who "bidded" 260k actually put in a bid of 386k. The next bidder could have, say, bidded 500k and it took it to the previous bidder's maximum putting the new entrant in the lead.

    21. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe he bought the plans because he believed he could make more than $15 a pop off of it.

      -- gid

    22. Re:Price not surprising at all. by xutopia · · Score: 1

      if you are unhappy with whatismyip.com you can always use .org which is cleaner and simpler :)

    23. Re:Price not surprising at all. by StandardDeviant · · Score: 1

      It's possible that the 2-3 hundred thousand usd that the sale generated is letting the will's executor pay off debts that were burdening the family, send a child in the family to college, whatever. You don't know the internal dynamics of the situation, so it's rather impolite to cast aspersions on the actions of a family in the wake of the death of a loved one.

    24. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooh, a sarcasm tag, that's a real good idea.

    25. Re:Price not surprising at all. by bcattwoo · · Score: 1
      If someone leaves you something in their will, they want you to have it.

      Or they have to leave it to somebody, so they figure why not you? I suppose some people might view a web domain as a cherished family heirloom, but a lot of others would view it as just another asset. I mean, if my grandfather left me 5000 shares of M$ stock, would it be wrong for me to sell them? Or do I have to get the paper stock certificates and display them in my house in some way?

    26. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1
      True.

      But that still doesn't explain how anyone would value a domain name that has never displayed anything but a blank page at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Where would the high traffic be coming from? The traffic is obviously faked. Anyone who can cough up 386K is not an idiot (or would have lost the money before this). So where are all these ridiculous bids coming from?

    27. Re:Price not surprising at all. by doombob · · Score: 1

      Doesn't the Ebay terms of service say that you cannot sell domains?

    28. Re:Price not surprising at all. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      Cash, stocks, and the like are one thing. Houses, cars, antiques, and the like are another.

      I guess I just see it differently than everyone else. If someone leaves me something like that, I'm going to take care of it. Not sell it to some spammer who'll load it up with ads and crap.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    29. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Throughout my 5 or 6 years as a working technician, I've probably been to that site a thousand times or more.

      Depending on the situation, it's sometimes quicker to go there than to log into a router and view the external IP there.

    30. Re:Price not surprising at all. by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1

      So, as soon as this site becomes an ad-fest, or turns into a travel agency, you are going to stop visiting, is it not?

    31. Re:Price not surprising at all. by TopDawg · · Score: 1

      I'm not really sure what your point is. If you're saying (with sarcasm) that the sarcasm tag idea isn't new, I agree. Lot's of people put one in their comments to make it obvious that they're being sarcastic. My point was, do we really have to do it everytime? The g-grandparent post was obviously clueless and I was just lamenting that fact. The bottom line is, I guess, before you post trying to correct/inform a poster, read over what you're commenting on a couple of times, just to make sure the poster's not being sarcastic. A sarcasm tag kinda kills the mood. On the other hand, if you're really saying the tag is a good idea, see the previous sentence. But, hey, maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea for some people.

  5. grrr by JeremyALogan · · Score: 1

    I really really hate these people. In my version of the internet these people would be shot. Note that my old domain keeps getting bought by company after company. I intended to buy it back when it expired this past June, but another domain hijaker got to it first. It's really pathatic.

    1. Re:grrr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I just clicked on that link of yours, and suddenly my virus scanner poped up, saying a trojan was being downloaded into firefox cached pages.

      The Trojan horse TR/StartPage.ES

      WHY? ohw god why? does this shit happen all the time? why are we as humans so stupid that we can fuck up each others and our own lives?

      [wdw]

    2. Re:grrr by just_von · · Score: 1

      Yeah mine: http://www.von.com/ keeps getting renewed by some stupid company that uses my name as an acronym. Bastards!

    3. Re:grrr by meheler · · Score: 1

      That's the worst. How many people have a use for the domain that is your name? My own domain was near expiration when I received an e-mail from a hijacker offering to sell it to me for 10x what it would cost normally.

      I guess he jumped the gun or something, because I was able to renew the domain through my ISP anyway. It was probably a domain transfer scheme. Had I let it expire, though, I have no doubt that he would have picked it up and probably upped the price even more.

    4. Re:grrr by onepoint · · Score: 1

      what would make this investment worthless is if the major search engines, blacklisted those domains.

      Onepoint

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    5. Re:grrr by JeremyALogan · · Score: 1

      it's actually a good idea... if I were in charge of google I'd definately do it. maybe it'd even put enough of a dent in their pocketbook that they'd lay off it some (yeah right).

    6. Re:grrr by nightsweat · · Score: 1

      I think the point is you go to yaho.com by accident of fat fingers, not that its picked up by search engines.

      --

      the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    7. Re:grrr by Mantorp · · Score: 2, Funny

      I was going to suggest you get definately.com but it's been taken as well.

    8. Re:grrr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they? They make money with "parked domains".

    9. Re:grrr by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      You know, if you keep sending traffic to that site (by posting a link on /.), it'll be that much longer before they stop passing it around and let you get it back. ;)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    10. Re:grrr by rush22 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Happend to me too. I decided not to renew my domain name (thinking it was too obscure, and noone would buy it off me). I hadn't updated in a long time and was quite bored with it, and especially having it hanging over my head. I did have really good traffic for a while.

      Long story short: A day or two after I let it expire it became a porn portal, then a redirect to a different porn portal. Then about 2 years later, a "search engine". Now it's that same porn portal again. 4 years and counting.

      What I want to know is who the hell was giving out my traffic information and who the hell let these ***holes know that I hadn't renewed it?

      What do they do? Search google for URLs randomly all day? Or randomly type in names into networksolutions to see if they're available??

      I'm not pissed someone took it, that's fine. What I am pissed about is that now people think I turned my site into some junk spam porno crap. They even kept my folder names!

    11. Re:grrr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you wanted the domain you should not have let it expire. This is kind of like complaining that the guy that bought your car keeps selling it. People that let domain names they want to keep exprire, are dumb.

    12. Re:grrr by WickedClean · · Score: 1

      I had one of mine get nabbed up. Wickedclean.com. To be honest, I was kind of honored by the idea that somebody wanted it that bad.

      --
      ...All I can say is that my life is pretty strange...
    13. Re:grrr by dantheman82 · · Score: 1

      Well, it's good to know that at www.definitely.com, the real page, the following is listed:

      Definitely.com

      This page left intentionally blank.

      --
      This sig donated to Pater. Long live /.
    14. Re:grrr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are many sits where you can see expiring and recently expired domains. Google "expired domain search" or something simular

    15. Re:grrr by Storlek · · Score: 1
      Strange. They got "definitely" right, but misspelled "verdana":
      <style>
      h1 {font-face: verdanna, arial; color:#ffffff;}
      p {font-face: verdanna, arial; color:#999999;}
      </style>
      --
      Bears don't normally eat things that talk and move backwards.
    16. Re:grrr by Storlek · · Score: 1

      ... and I got everything else right, but misspelled "<" and ">".

      --
      Bears don't normally eat things that talk and move backwards.
    17. Re:grrr by JeremyALogan · · Score: 1

      The point was that I didn't want it, at the time. I later decided that I would like it again though... how the hell was I (several years ago) supposed to figure that anyone else would want a domain that was MY name.

    18. Re:grrr by rush22 · · Score: 1

      There are many sits where you can see expiring and recently expired domains. Google "expired domain search" or something simular

      But the question is: Where do they get this information? Is my registrar giving out my information to third parties--maybe I didn't read the TOS carefully enough? How do these people know what is and what is not going to expire?

  6. If you can't spell, support'em. by purduephotog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Visit the wrong domain and never click the ads.

    Bandwidth costs eat up profit margins.

    I've mistyped a few (slickdeals.com instead of .net, bensbargains.com instead of .net...) but as long as you don't click, there isn't any profit to be had.

    Of course, if you're like my fiancee and have trouble spelling any word... well, I can only hope those sites are limited to advertising only (and not phishing)...

    1. Re:If you can't spell, support'em. by Ucklak · · Score: 1

      The problem is that people DO click the ads thereby countering any bandwidth leeching that could be done.

      You should try spamvampire.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    2. Re:If you can't spell, support'em. by betelgeuse-4 · · Score: 1

      "... but as long as you don't click, there isn't any profit to be had." That's only true if they're using pay-per-click ads (or something similar). Some advertisers will pay for each impression.

    3. Re:If you can't spell, support'em. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried spamvampire, but the spam sites configured off that site were all in the process of being slashdotted... As in they had no upstream left for me to constantly releoad thier images Also, firefox managed to exceed my physical ram while loading that site ^^;;.. I guess 'configuring' it for your own needs is more useful?

    4. Re:If you can't spell, support'em. by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 1

      Firefox with disabled Images/Javascript... is your friend ;)

      --
      Have a nice day!
    5. Re:If you can't spell, support'em. by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      You know... I bet you could make a script to do this for you...

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    6. Re:If you can't spell, support'em. by justin12345 · · Score: 1

      They will just start using those pop-ups that can defeat modern pop-up blockers. Pop ups are almost always per impression I think. For every domain name typo, you have 30 pop-ups.

      It will be like the late 90's all over again (except without the jobs or money).

      --
      Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
    7. Re:If you can't spell, support'em. by jschottm · · Score: 1

      Bandwidth costs eat up profit margins.

      That's also true for your ISP as well. Wasting bandwidth drives up your costs and slows down everyone who uses your local branch of the ISP.

  7. THANK YOU! by Quasar1999 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Now I remember who the hell it was that stole my domain from me... 3 years ago I was late renewing by one single damned day, and lost my domain to that damned company... and ain't a damn thing I could do about it... although now that I was reminded of the name, I have this need for revenge... who's with me?

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    1. Re:THANK YOU! by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Not to be a bitch but why were you late renewing your domain? My domainhost sends me multiple reminders and even after the expiration date of .com domains you have a very long time (2 months if I remember correctly) in which only the last owner can register it again.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:THANK YOU! by meheler · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not to be a bitch to a bitch, but sometimes e-mail addresses go defunct and one doesn't think to update the domain record because one doesn't realise that one needs that particular e-mail address to renew an expired domain. How many people have stopped using the e-mail address on their domain record because it was inundated with spam, or just registered with a temporary address? What happens if your e-mail address goes bad (i.e. a former free web email service decides to start charging, or an ISP goes under, or in a fit of rage you cancel all association with your ISP) and you forget your domain password? There are ways around it, but unless you've had to deal with it before, most people won't know what to do.

      Please think.

    3. Re:THANK YOU! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, all your fault then?

      Honestly, if you're either a) Using a host so lame they don't give you at least two months notice or b) Too lame to keep obviously vital records such as your contact details upto date, you deserve what you get and lose all right to bitch about it.

    4. Re:THANK YOU! by drewzhrodague · · Score: 1

      Actually, no. Since spammers harvest my domain email account, I get TONS of spam every day to that account. PLUS, Verisign send spam, and it's nearly impossible to pick-out the proper messages.

      I lost TONS of domains to this, and to being unemployed for so long. Went from 140 domains down to 6!

      --
      Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
    5. Re:THANK YOU! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please think.

      You're the one that lost the domain because you screwed up.

    6. Re:THANK YOU! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People can also snag up your house if you stop paying property taxes.

      You can make excuses all day, but It is YOUR responsibility to pay your debts, nobody else's. If you don't you'll have to deal with the consequences. The free market in action. Consider it a learning experience.

    7. Re:THANK YOU! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posted as AC so I'm not karma whoring... As much as people here on /. have bitched about Network Solutions in the past, their policy since I started dealing with them 15+ years ago has always been to hold an expired domain in a limbo state for 6-8 weeks after the official expiration date to account for just these kinds of circumstances. Frankly, if you don't have your shit together to the point where you are actively keeping track od domains that you're responsible for, maybe you're in the wrong line of work. I maintain 200+ domains for customers and refer to my handy-dandy printed list every few days to see which ones are getting close to being renewed. This really isn't rocket science..

    8. Re:THANK YOU! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      People can also snag up your house if you stop paying property taxes.

      Yesss, but it's harder to have an invalid contact address in that case.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    9. Re:THANK YOU! by 0racle · · Score: 1

      What on earth were you doing with 140 domains?

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
  8. Microsoft got pwned by Daedalon · · Score: 0

    How about microsoft.co.uk?

  9. Incredible by wintaki · · Score: 1
    Incredible... I remember back when the net was young, before all the commercialism, and to think the amount of money these guys made simply collecting and selling domain names.

    I guess part of it is they probably were making a decent amount of money from the ad revenue as well.

    Sure wish I thought of it :-( Not claiming that I could have done the same thing, but lots of things you think about, I never would have thought would have been so popular... like free web-mail - but that was before everyone and their grandmother had net access.

  10. Astonished by mertner · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm just astonished that this kind of thing actually works. Does *anyone* ever click on any of the ads when you arrive at one of these hijacked places?

    For me, it's ctrl-W or backspace, every time.

    --
    -- As long as the answer is right, who cares if the question is wrong?
    1. Re:Astonished by jfried · · Score: 1

      What happens is you get Joe User, he spells the url wrong, he ends up on a site that pop-up like 30 other site. There you go automatic clicks.

    2. Re:Astonished by generic-man · · Score: 1, Funny

      Clearly someone must click on text ads, or Overture and Google wouldn't have an advertising-centered business model to uphold.

      I usually click on five or six of them just to find out what I have won as a special prize as the 865,239nd visitor to that web site!

      --
      For more information, click here.
    3. Re:Astonished by Steinfiend · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hate to admit it but I had never come across Ctrl+W as a command, so I tried it. I should have guessed it wouldn't be the shortcut for "give me a latte and a back rub please".

      Boy I have some off days!

    4. Re:Astonished by Momoru · · Score: 1

      People in "the know" like us dont click them, but when grandma or mom and dad type www.dotyahoo.com or www.yahho.com or whatever and see a search box, the really don't know to even think its illegitimate.

    5. Re:Astonished by Taladar · · Score: 1

      That might be more the fault of Yahoo looking like a random ad-host and less the fault of grandma or mom and dad.

    6. Re:Astonished by tehshen · · Score: 1

      No good advertiser would put *random* ads on those pages - they are made to be similar to those on the page it's trying to imitate.

      Example - go to yahho.com and you'll find things like Yahoo Personals (which links to a different Personals site), Dating Service (ditto), Games, Search and Engines, etc. If someone heard about a search site, "yahoo or something", Yahho has enough links to bring more gullible users to their sites.

      Similarly, Slahsdot.org contains links to hacking, apple, hotels, and for some reason, wrestling women.

      --
      Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
    7. Re:Astonished by AllUsernamesAreGone · · Score: 1

      Run a rewriting proxy with a blacklist of domain typos, that way attempts to access them get silently redirected to the correct page. I use squid and squirm, but something like Proxomitron on a parent's/grandparent's windows box will do it.

    8. Re:Astonished by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

      Plus, it depends on how well they go about presenting the page you arrive at. Take a look at whatsmyip.com (notice that this one lacks an "i" ie. not "what is my IP" but "what's my IP"). Prettly slick page, context sensitive and all. I bet this one gets more clicks on those links all over the place than that single hosting ad that runs on whatismyip.com.

      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    9. Re:Astonished by generic-man · · Score: 1

      True. The only possible downside is that whatsmyip.com doesn't tell me what my IP address is -- and neither do any of the sponsored links on that page!

      The people who run whatsmyip.com are simply geniuses. Get users to flail around by clicking all the slickly-packaged ads in search of one bit of information. At ten cents per click (which is being hugely generous) they could make a buck or more off of an average visitor.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    10. Re:Astonished by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Some of them try malware exploits. Perhaps not this bunch, but a few months ago, I did see a group picking up expired domains and directing to a site that would try to load a relative of CoolWeb.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  11. $257,000.00 by Mz6 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just cheked eBay and the final bid ended up at $257,000. Not bad for a site doing 3GB/day of bandwidth.

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:$257,000.00 by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      wow - that many people dont know ifconfig/ipconfig, that know about ip addresses. im amazed.

      Its not exactly full of 1024x768 tiff images either.

    2. Re:$257,000.00 by Dave2+Wickham · · Score: 1

      That doesn't help you when you're behind NAT, as many people are.

    3. Re:$257,000.00 by Aliencow · · Score: 1

      It's useful when you want someone's internet IP and they don't know anything about their router. I personally have my own page setup for that, but telling a clueless user "Go to whatismyip.com" is always easier than "Ok, first, let's find your default gateway, then type this IP in your web browser, remember the password, now go into WAN, see if there's an IP address in there not starting with 192.168.x.x"

    4. Re:$257,000.00 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't work behind NAT, you'll only see your private IP. And it also doesn't work when your computer illiterate parents need you to log into their machine remotely and fix something (and your dyndns updater is broken).

    5. Re:$257,000.00 by onepoint · · Score: 1

      Something that might be of interest about that site is the ability to develope a very targeted geo based ip list.

      now that's worth a ton of money, Advertisers love knowing that they can focus to a specific area.

      Onepoint

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    6. Re:$257,000.00 by mistered · · Score: 1
      Look on the the auction FAQs page -- 2.4 million wget hits in January?!

      --
      Enjoy your job, make lots of money, work within the law. Choose any two.
    7. Re:$257,000.00 by magefile · · Score: 1

      Some of us don't have many privileges on the computers we use at work/school.

    8. Re:$257,000.00 by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 1
      --
      Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
    9. Re:$257,000.00 by jafiwam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hey, Tardmo. You the stupid inexperinced one.

      Whatismyip.com and other similar sites are a great tool for any network admin that deals with lusers from other companies.

      I can't count how many times I have said "ok, what's the address of the mail server" and gotten something like "10.0.0.200" or "198.168.1.3". Sure, _I_ know what my machine IP is (most of the others on the network for that matter), and I know what my WAN IP is and the DMZ IPs of my servers. However, my customers dont... likewise even if they do know ipconfig and can do it on their machine, it is a local network IP that doesn't do any good when looking for the WAN IP. For that, you need to know it, get it from the ISP (good fucking luck with that) or have them log into a router... (if they know what a router IS.)

      What IP points to the outside world on any given network probably escapes the average "comptuer guy" at small companies.

      Rather than getting the clueless to figure out or find out the IP from their ISP, it is a lot easier just to send them to one of those sites and have them read off the number. Most of them are not too numb to read a number out loud, though having them cut and paste it into an email can catch the ones that are dislexic.

      I use some of the sites listed at "traceroute.org" rather than the other ones... no confusing flashy ads, just the start IP of the trace.

    10. Re:$257,000.00 by XorNand · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are some dynmaic dns utilities that automatically poll and screen scrape IP addresses off pages such as this. A client that I use polls every minute, cycling through about 15 different sites. This means that I myself am accounting for a hit every 15 mins to whatismyip.com. Yet, I never see the content on the page and rarely even think about it. Not exactly making the ideal situation for those bidding on the domain. Plus, add in the number of techies who aren't inclined to click on banner ads when they're actively trying to troubleshoot (the most likely use of the site), and the extreme ease of setting up a competing service. Nah... the winning bidder isn't getting much of a deal here.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    11. Re:$257,000.00 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it irony to be rude about people who suffer from dyslexia and then spell dyslexic wrong?

    12. Re:$257,000.00 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's my IP?

      Not exactly $386,000-worth...

    13. Re:$257,000.00 by assassinator42 · · Score: 0

      Yeah. Also, it's just convenient to go there, and copy/paste your ip where you need it. NATed or unNATed.

  12. Sigh. by Willeh · · Score: 0, Redundant
    For how long will bottom-feeders like this be able to profit off of laziness of others? I'm sure most of these domains are semi-hijacked (even hotmail was sort of in danger of expiring once) when the owner forgets to renew such things for even a few days.

    But hey, i'm sure users who go to hardwareinfo.com or any of the other "hijacked" sites will be more than happy to click on a few porn banners like a caffeine addled squirrel.

    --
    Will wank off Linus Torvalds for fame.
    1. Re:Sigh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never knew caffeine-addled squirrels suffered from this particular neurosis. How are they when they are not on caffeine? This dangerous substance may need to be banned in order to keep God's country good, clean, and wholesome. What if little Bobby or Suzy were to come into the den to find a local "squirrel" snorting lines of pure caffeine off the table while a raunchy German smut video is playing? What if they're tempted to do the same?

      Your post disturbs me greatly.

  13. So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by caryw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work at an ISP. If all these domains point to the same class C or something I'll just block it at the router if it's purely advertising junk.
    Anyone know details? Thanks.
    - Cary
    --Fairfax Underground: Where Fairfax County comes out to play

    1. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by mjfrazer · · Score: 5, Informative
      careerinfo.com has address 83.138.187.18
      rentguide.com has address 83.138.187.18
      hardware-update.com has address 83.138.187.18

      So, i'd say yes...

    2. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      suprise suprise its on rackspace servers, that domain provider has so many spammers on its networks its beyond a joke, perhaps rackspace are THE spammers front

      83.138.128.0 - 83.138.191.255

    3. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you selling internet service, or managed security networking service? Does maintaining "common carrier" status hold any meaning for you?

      If I'm buying access to the whole internet (and not to a managed content-provider) I want the whole internet, not your filtered version of it. I'm a big boy and I'll protect my network and hosts from Bad Things(c) without your blackbox filtering TYVM.

    4. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by caryw · · Score: 1

      I'm glad that you're a big boy and can handle your computer all by yourself. However, that fact that you're reading Slashdot means you're in the great minority. We blackhole very little traffic. Hell, we don't even block any TCP ports! However if there's a class C out there that does nothing but spam/advertise/distribute spyware we're going to block it. Nothing serious, just a puny little block on 253 hosts. If you were one of our customers you could always ask us to add you to the allow-all access list. But you use AOL or Verizon DSL or comcast cable now don't you. Good luck getting them to unblock port 80 even though CodeRed/Nimda has long passed. www.patriot.net
      --Fairfax Underground: Where Fairfax County comes out to play

    5. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      Better Idea, just write a program that constantly accesses the links and doesn't do anything. pay per click becomes useless due tot he number of false clicks generated. distribute program on slashdot to drive them into the red permanently.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    6. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by zardo · · Score: 1

      Hah, they probably operate one little celeron box with steam shooting out of it.

      On a different note, I used to own wirehead.com (which I was very fond of) until some guy bought it off me for $2500, anybody think that was a lousy sell? This was in 1997/1998. The guy who bought it still has it, but I'm sure he has probably gotten better offers. Not sure if he is partial to it or not.

      Looking back I wish I still had it when I consider that I can make $2500 in two weeks, and at the time I sold it I spent all the money on parties and liquor and stuff (I was 17 give me a break).

      Feel free to post your domain and how much you sold it for.

    7. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by strAtEdgE · · Score: 1

      On windows:

      route add 83.138.187.18 mask 255.255.255.255 ... or just block this address on your firewall (much better).

      --
      ----- sXe
    8. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by PhraudulentOne · · Score: 1

      You have to remember, some (legit) pages might link to these domains to load up images or something. They will try to contact these domains BEFORE loading the page you are trying to see, so if you block it, the page may not be displayed (or it may just take a long time to load). A lot of ad.doubleclick.com sites do this. This is why it would be nice to take ALL sites like this and route them to a webserver on your local network that just serves up a blank page. Boom, just white where the real ad would be. Also, it if you just blocked access to those domains at the router, it may take longer for IE to come up with an error, and be more confusing to the user than if you just let it bring up the ads... don't get me wrong though... I dislike the way the internet has evolved too (in the sleazy businessman sense).

      --
      You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.
    9. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by Big_Al_B · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't know if the AC poster has a PC, a home network, a LAN, or is an SP too. Regardless, he/she had a point.

      I do know that as a senior network engineer/planner for an ISP averaging about 500Mbps transit, I fully encourage my competitors[1] to by default block any traffic they unilaterally deem "undesirable" and force their customers to "opt out" of such filtering reactively. It can only be good for my business.

      [1] Paraphrasing a well known NANOGer

    10. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, you suck at classful network math.

      For a Class C: .0 == Netname .255 == broadcast .1 - .25_4_ == host addresses

    11. Re:So do all of these domains point to one subnet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shit you're right. my bad. anonymous post to save karma

  14. Slashdot by prakslash · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wonder how much this will sell for? :-)

    http://slsahdot.org

    1. Re:Slashdot by jstave · · Score: 1, Funny

      Cool. Now, lets see if http://slsahdot.org will be slashdotted -- excuse me -- slsahdotted.

    2. Re:Slashdot by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      an average of "Avg: 23.82 people" a day suffer the slsahdot effect (considering my spelling , its amazing i never encounter these sites), and since you just linked to them , i wonder how long before slsahdot suffers a slashdot

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    3. Re:Slashdot by jfried · · Score: 1

      Do some math:

      A = how much traffic you get in a year
      B = How much a company is willing to pay per click
      C = Number of Banners you will have on the page

      ((A*1/4)*(B*C))*5 = How much you ask for.

      1/4 of the people that come to your site clicking a
      banner is a large percent though.
      5 Years for good messure

    4. Re:Slashdot by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      That 5000 spike was my fault, sorry!

    5. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's exactly why the guy who registered did so -- he didn't want some hijacker to make money off of it. I remember him posting on here a while ago.

      Basically, he mistyped slashdot.org and, to his surprise, found the domain to be unregistered.

    6. Re:Slashdot by JeremyALogan · · Score: 1

      Including you, 542 miscreants have misspelled it today!

      In the time it took me to copy/paste/refresh it had grown to 590.

      For comparrison, all day yesterday ithad only about 60.

    7. Re:Slashdot by stinerman · · Score: 1

      Hopefully no one will attempt to get:

      http:///..org ;-)

    8. Re:Slashdot by Neoncow · · Score: 1

      Seriously though. When was the last time you typed slashdot.com into your browser? I mean, it shows up as the first thing when I type s.

    9. Re:Slashdot by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      Probably about two-fifty. Where the decimal point goes depends on the gullibility of the buyer.

  15. Short answer: yes by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    If they wernt making money they wouldnt be doing it ...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  16. Wow by scenestar · · Score: 0

    i think ill start by gettin micro5oft.com

    --
    perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
  17. Not a new idea. by radiotyler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If it walks and barks like a dog, it's a dog, no matter what you call it.

    Have you ever called 1-800-COL-LECT? Have you ever called 1-800-COL-MECT? Same thing. You get a "collect call long distance provider". Just not the one you wanted. Profiting off of other peoples' errors isn't exactly a new idea. This is just a variation on a theme.

    On a funny note, I originally heard about this 800 number scheme while reading Jenna Jameson's autobiography, "How to Make Love Like a Porn Star: A Cautionary Tale". Her husband apparentally made quite a bit of money in the mistyped 800 number business.

    --
    hi mom!
    1. Re:Not a new idea. by generic-man · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I grew up on Long Island, home of 1-800-FLOWERS (now 1-800-FLOWERS.com) (really), and I saw articles about the company getting pissed off at competitors who did things like this. Some competitors bought 1-800-FL0WERS (with a zero) and 1-800-FLOWER5 (with a 5).

      Ever wonder why 1-800-MATTRESS ends every commercial with people spelling their name melodically? It's because they don't own 1-800-MATRESS -- or at least they didn't years ago.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    2. Re:Not a new idea. by flabbergast · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This reminds me of a 60 Minutes report I saw probably ten years ago. A *ahem* gentleman had setup a whole bunch of long distance companies, with names like "I don't care", "Anyone" or "It doesn't matter." So, back in the day when you dialed the operator to make a long distance collect call from a pay phone, they'd ask you for your LD carrier preference. You say "It doesn't matter" and *boom*! $10 a minute. Argghh!!

    3. Re:Not a new idea. by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Have you ever called 1-800-COL-LECT? Have you ever called 1-800-COL-MECT? Same thing. You get a "collect call long distance provider".

      No, but I often misdial 1-800-COL-KECT, but the phone company is apparently nice enough to connect me to 1-800-COL-LECT. I feel sorry for whoever has the number I misdialed; they must be losing business.

    4. Re:Not a new idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, I would have thought because 1-800-MAT-TRESS (Leave off the last S for "savings!") would have been an invalid number. I'm glad they'd rectified this deceitful business practice by their unscrupulous competitors.

      All of us at slashdot can rest easy now.

    5. Re:Not a new idea. by generic-man · · Score: 1

      I'm glad my ideas intrigued you. Would you like to subscribe to my newsletter?

      --
      For more information, click here.
    6. Re:Not a new idea. by Matt+Perry · · Score: 1
      I grew up on Long Island, home of 1-800-FLOWERS (now 1-800-FLOWERS.com) (really), and I saw articles about the company getting pissed off at competitors who did things like this. Some competitors bought 1-800-FL0WERS (with a zero) and 1-800-FLOWER5 (with a 5).
      1-800-FLOWERS deserves whatever they get. Several years ago a friend of mine ordered flowers for his mom for mother's day. When the flowers arrived they included an AOL CD. My friend was pissed when he found out.
      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    7. Re:Not a new idea. by infinite9 · · Score: 1

      My favorite one is from PT Barnum. In his tents, he would put up a sign that said, "See the fabulous egress!" People had to pay again to get back in.

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    8. Re:Not a new idea. by Megane · · Score: 1

      True story: after AT&T started advertising 1-800-OPERATOR, some obscure office in MCI started getting a lot of wrong number calls. When MCI realized they had 1-800-OPERATER, they quickly forwarded it to 1-800-COLLECT!

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  18. Look No Further by Laurentiu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The fine folks at BuyDomains.com still have the SlashDot.Net for sale, and "The quoted price will be at least $688 and may be over $10,000." Valid business model or what?

    (I intentionally left out all AhRefs, if you really want to see it, type away, I don't endorse domain stealers.)

    --
    Just /. IT
  19. Ferenghi by NardofDoom · · Score: 1
    I always hated the Ferenghi. Profit seeking bunch of idiots who'd step over their own mother for another bar of gold-pressed latinum. There's a reason they look like trolls, because that's what they are on the inside. Well, most of them anyway.

    What does this have to do with these guys? Because they're little better than the Ferenghi, and probably twice as ugly.

    --
    You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    1. Re:Ferenghi by cnettel · · Score: 1
      Profit seeking bunch of idiots who'd step over their own mother for another bar of gold-pressed latinum.
      Only if she's undressed. If she's not, they'll forget all about profit and just moan about her lack of manners.
    2. Re:Ferenghi by mikefe · · Score: 1

      You'd be surprised how many former cheer leaders go into things like sales.

      So, if you like big T and big A, you might want to eat your words.

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
  20. MOD PARENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah i would like to block these cunts at the firewall too, these sites are responsible for distributing spyware and i would like to protect our customers as well

  21. Almost like store placement by jfried · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was told a story that McDonalds spends millions on strategic restraunt locations, where it would see the most traffic, and the condition of the neighborhood and all kinds of good statistics. what ever it takes to find the perfect store location.

    Then burger king builds across the street.

    1. Re:Almost like store placement by notbob · · Score: 0

      "Then burger king builds across the street."

      God bless America... 2nd place isn't 1st but it certainly is cheaper to let u do the hard work and still reap 80% of the profits

    2. Re:Almost like store placement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the story you were told is 100% correct.... the arches pumps millions into just researching were to buy property, and once they do buy property every other fast food chain goes and buys land as close to the arches as is humanly possible..... ain't it great to know who does the research, and who leechs off them?

    3. Re:Almost like store placement by luiss · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've heard this too. But I've also heard that they know this, and they buy the property across the street too. Burger King can then either buy or lease from McDonalds.

    4. Re:Almost like store placement by Sebastian+Jansson · · Score: 1

      But that doesn't harm the customer the same way bogus domains do.

  22. hope they bought title insurance by _|()|\| · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You couldn't pay me to own a bunch of typo. domain names. It sounds like a thousand lawsuits waiting to happen.

    1. Re:hope they bought title insurance by dustman · · Score: 1

      You couldn't pay me to own a bunch of typo. domain names.

      Not even $164 million?

    2. Re:hope they bought title insurance by natrius · · Score: 1

      They tried to buy title insurance, but got scammed at tilteinsurance.com. Happens to the best of us.

    3. Re:hope they bought title insurance by ajs · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not illegal. At least not by default.

      Where it becomes a problem is when you attempt to steal customers in this way. For example, you would be well within your right to put up a site called slashdot.info and have as the main page, "[ad] [ad] [ad] Sorry, you typed slashdot.info [ad] and you probably meant [ad] to type slashdot.org [ad] [ad] [ad]".

      You are providing a (questionably useful) service ad deriving advertising from it. Trademark law allows for this. When, on the other hand, you put up a site that looks exactly like Slashdot.org with your own ad revenue, but is at slashdot.info, then Slashdot would have every right to sue.

      Honestly, I'm at a loss to understand the anger here. Even if you don't tell the poor sap where to go, this just seems like a silly thing to get upset about. It's not at all a zero-sum game, so relax and take a deep breath.

  23. Do all the domains go to the same set of IPs? by wowbagger · · Score: 1

    I wonder - do all of these domains go to the same set of IPs?

    Has anybody created a blacklist of those IPs?

    Has anybody created a blacklist of those domains?

    I'd apply a blocklist on my proxy just to deny these assholes any chance to get anything.

    1. Re:Do all the domains go to the same set of IPs? by Big_Al_B · · Score: 1

      I'd apply a blocklist on my proxy just to deny these assholes any chance to get anything.

      I hope you're a LAN admin, and not an ISP admin.

    2. Re:Do all the domains go to the same set of IPs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder - do all of these domains go to the same set of IPs?

      I wonder - has wowbagger ever heard of nslookup?

  24. Fun with PPC adverts by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You can have tremendous fun with other people's pay-per-click adverts if you have an ADSL connection and spend time not using it every day {like when you're at work, or asleep}. All it takes is a list of open proxies and a list of known PPC adverts. Then you write a little script that goes around "clicking" on PPC adverts via various proxies. Of course, you don't have to do anything useful with the "data" you retrieve.

    One day, I might even write a screensaver that does exactly this.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    1. Re:Fun with PPC adverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do RISC processors have to do with online adverts? Please learn how to correctly define an acronym.

    2. Re:Fun with PPC adverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe since "Pay Per Click" was obviously the topic, you should shut the fuck up and figure it out from the context.

    3. Re:Fun with PPC adverts by knifeyspooney · · Score: 1

      A classic DOS attack. (DOS = Denial of Subprofitability)

      You're helping the squatters!

    4. Re:Fun with PPC adverts by HarvardAce · · Score: 1
      You're helping the squatters!

      Initially, yes. But when the people paying for the advertisements realize that they're paying for a bunch of clicks and receiving no revenue for it, they'll quickly lower their rates to those sorts of sites, or stop advertising on them altogether.

      Then again, it's also possible that the advertisers could get that same list of open proxies and just not pay any money for clicks from those proxies.

      It's really an interesting problem, and I think it's a lot like the war on drugs. You can either go after the drug users (in this case, the squatters), or you can go after the drug suppliers (the companies paying for the advertisements). Without the companies willing to pay for the ads, the squatters wouldn't be getting any money. I personally will try to avoid supporting any business that advertises in such a way.

      --
      Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
    5. Re:Fun with PPC adverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moron. Last time I checked, one acronym can be used to represent multiple things.

      Personally, I think acronyms are fucking stupid as hell, period.

    6. Re:Fun with PPC adverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's another acronym for you: YFI!

    7. Re:Fun with PPC adverts by alakazam · · Score: 1
      What, squatter = someone who advertises on a site? Or squatter = someone who uses a site in a non-obvious way? (Such as selling ice cream at carparts.com)

      Why would you maliciously cause someone to lose money on something that's legally okay?

      If I own carprats.com and point it (via affiliate link redirect) at someone who sells car parts, what part of that is a wrong that you're obligated to right?

      It's possible you're talking about something else and I'm just confused here, but if a word isn't trademarked, there's nothing wrong with having a misspelled version of that as a domain name.

      There *is* something wrong with stealing money from people -- which is what you're doing if you click on an advertisement just to make someone pay.

      Jay

  25. Haven't people learned about google? by vagabond_gr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I had the impression that the buy-a-domain-to-be-rich story was over, not only due to NASDAQ, but also because of google! I can't imagine anyone who wants to update its hardware typing www.hardware-update.com, instead of googling "hardware update" (and at least in the first 20 pages of results that I checked, hardware-update.com does not appear!). Personally I even type "apple" in the google bar sometimes, its easier than www.apple.com).

    Apparently domain sales prove me wrong.

    1. Re:Haven't people learned about google? by jizmonkey · · Score: 1
      Personally I even type "apple" in the google bar sometimes, its easier than www.apple.com).

      Ah, you should be using mammals.org instead!

      --
      With great power comes great fan noise.
    2. Re:Haven't people learned about google? by jaguar5150 · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Personally I even type "apple" in the google bar sometimes, its easier than www.apple.com"

      Or you could save yourself even more time, by typing "apple" in the address bar and hitting "ctrl-enter"

      (inserts the http://www.|whatever-you-typed|.com for you)

      Works in IE and Firefox, not sure about the others.

    3. Re:Haven't people learned about google? by joostje · · Score: 1

      Yes, get's me to slahsdot right away!

    4. Re:Haven't people learned about google? by Uerige · · Score: 1

      Have you really tried this? For me, this opens a new tab/window with the contents of the site "apple".

    5. Re:Haven't people learned about google? by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

      A lot of people try to buy domains with keywords in them, because they're immediately attractive to search engines like Google. That's why buy-a-domain-to-be-rich still works, though not necessarily mistype - although I guess I can see how that would work; if I have a website I check often and I keep mistyping, that's atleast enough "hits" from me (even if it takes me seconds to ctrl-W outta there) to attract advertisers.

      Like someone mentioned, I can't believe anybody actually clicks on the ads! So how do these guys make (advertising) money?

    6. Re:Haven't people learned about google? by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      On Safari and IE for Mac (at least, the last version of it I ever used), a standard "enter" on a nonvalid URL (like "thaturl") will first try that URL, then try http://thaturl.com/, then try http://www.thaturl.com/, before giving up and giving an error page. I always found Windows browsing immensely annoying in that I had to actually TYPE the http://www.thedamnpageiwant.com/, instead of just the name of the page I want. Combined with autocompletion of URLs, for the most part I just type the first letter or two of the sites I commonly visit and hit return to go there. ("sl" for http://slashdot.org/, for example).

      Though, someone else in this thread mentioned the Google "I'm Feeling Lucky" results that are used in FireFox... that seems like a much better method to me. Although as much as I love Google, I always hate it when a piece of software relies on the continued existence of some commercial service to function...

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
  26. Database for spamassassin? by jbrax · · Score: 1

    If there were a list of these 100 000 domains somewhere I would be interested in adding it to mail server's spamassassin.

  27. The funny thing is the name of the company... by Uptown+Joe · · Score: 0

    hardware-update.com
    Registrant:
    Moniker Privacy Services
    20 SW 27 Ave
    Suite 201
    Pompano Beach
    FL
    US
    33069

    Privacy Services... Nore like invasion of Privacy Services.

  28. So, can we expect... by http101 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...yet another hotfix from Microsoft to remove the coded BSOD link to www.hardware-update.com since it contains ads, possible spyware, and not to mention Marchex Inc. might start charging Microsoft just for using their name in the OS they sell for $249.99 (US)?

    --
    -- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
    1. Re:So, can we expect... by marafa · · Score: 1

      why should they fix the hardcoded link? this way they will boost sales of their new antispyware program. (which btw they dint build from the ground up fyi)

      --
      _ In Egypt Networks: Network Solutions with a Twist
  29. Hard to find available .com domains these days by ylikone · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I find it is almost impossible to buy a .com domain anymore, at least one that isn't just a random bunch of letters. And the problem is that almost everything you try will just end up going to a site with a load of ads and not pertaining to the subject matter of the domain name at all. Maybe there should be a rule against this... buying a domain JUST to put up ads should be illegal.

    But I suppose when one is googling, the easiest thing to do to find good results is to NOT click on .com links, instead go for the .org links which usually contain actual information.

    Hey, since we're on the topic of domain sales, I own customalbum.com and it's for sale. Never did anything with it. Anyone have ideas for what I could do with this domain (other than try to sell it)?

    --
    Meh.
    1. Re:Hard to find available .com domains these days by Quill_28 · · Score: 1

      You could try put ads on it! :-)

    2. Re:Hard to find available .com domains these days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sell custom albums?

    3. Re:Hard to find available .com domains these days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Maybe there should be a rule against this... buying a domain JUST to put up ads should be illegal."

      There goes MSN ;-)

  30. Dashslot !! by rudy_wayne · · Score: 0


    http://www.dashslot.co.uk/

    1. Re:Dashslot !! by 10537 · · Score: 1

      Hey, that's ME! Only owned the darned thing for a weeks, and already it's famous...

      --
      This sentence no verb.
  31. $257,000.00 - and doesn't work very well by neil.pearce · · Score: 1

    Visit whatismyip.com...

    Address reported: 213.107.x.x...
    Actual address: 81.98.x.x

    Visit other "whatismyip" type web pages...
    Address correctly reported as 81.98.x.x

    Conclusion: someone paid a lot of money for crap

    1. Re:$257,000.00 - and doesn't work very well by danny31415 · · Score: 1

      They are paying all that money for the domain name. They don't care how well it works right now.

  32. How they do it? by Civil_Disobedient · · Score: 2, Informative

    Same thing happened to my old domain, but luckily I was able to snag one close enough not to matter. Still, you have to wonder about all the asshats holding on to "DorothyLSmith.com" or whatever. I guess they're in it for the long haul. In a way, it's like Old West stakeholders -- just stake your claim and you get the property rights forever and ever, providing you keep paying your taxes (registration). Forget to make a payment, and all the jackals come out of the woodwork.

    They must be running some kind of automated system that spiders URLs, puts them in a database, then looks up the registration expiration date, puts that in the database. Then you just have a script running all the time. Sort the data in reverse chronological order by expiration date, then when the time comes, run a "register" script that attempts to automatically register the domain.

    Thing is, this has to be extremely expensive. I guess the profit margins on people trying to buy back their domains is high enough to offset the loss of all the useless domains you purchase. You could mitigate the cost by going through the database and flagging URLs that don't look like they'd generate any profit.

    This is basically your textbook definition of bottom-feeding.

  33. How about a new Firefox extension by thrillseeker · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Anyone out there got an itch to write a useful extension for Firefox? One that catches any domain name that leechers (yes, they are leechers - they are capitalizing on someone's mistake, not their intent) use to take unfair advantage, and redirects it to the intended site. It'd need an easy "on/off" button so that you could visit the crap sites if you wanted.

    You'd be an internet hero.

    1. Re:How about a new Firefox extension by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 2, Funny

      It could detect when you were misspelling the domain name and suggest an appropriate replacement:

      You asked for slashdpt.org, but that domain is now owned by domain-snatching, spam-feeding liars that get rich because people like you can't spell/type.

      Perhaps you meant slashdot.org?

    2. Re:How about a new Firefox extension by vagabond_gr · · Score: 1

      Sure, here it is.

      Try:
      slashdt - Did you mean slashdot?
      sourcefore - Did you mean sourceforge?

      Sometimes you get strange results though:
      pr0n - Did you mean slashdot?

    3. Re:How about a new Firefox extension by fyoder · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Something that would convert what you type to something else you've specified in a list. It wouldn't be populated by default initially, since the main objection would be that you can't really assume for everyone, but lists would pop up on web sites, and those could be used rather than populating from scratch. Like adblock.

      Also like adblock, it would support regular expressions. The first thing I would add to my list is conversion of a final .co to .com . That's a common typo for me. Hasn't resulted in bogus web sites, but would be nice if firefox just 'knew' that for me .co domains are actually .com .

      This post constitutes prior art for any potentially patentable ideas expressed. Maybe that should be a standard sig these days.

      --
      Loose lips lose spit.
  34. I think this passage from Wikipedia is fitting.. by phuturephunk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    About Warren Buffet: Buffett believes that much of the problem with the economies of the United States and other industrialized countries in recent years results from the proliferation of persons and organizations who produce nothing directly but are compensated based on the volume of business which they transact. He feels that most stock trades are recommended and made primarily to benefit the brokers rather than the investors and has stated that he feels that the world would benefit if each person had a lifetime maximum of twenty stock trades. He steadfastly refuses to split Berkshire Hathaway stock because the purpose of this would be to facilitate trading, which he has no desire to do. -Wikipedia entry on Warren Buffett Read that passage, then read it again..and when you're done reading it, read it one more time. Then you'll understand why some knucklehead will pay 160 million clams for absolutely nothing of real hard value.

  35. Never mattered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea, domains never mattered much anyway, since a link is a link, and the URI beneath it is generally hidden. The net was designed to be independent of such things; people who treat domains like personal license plates just don't get it.

  36. I'd do it! by qube99 · · Score: 1

    As long as at least 50% of them contained "Britney"

  37. I wonder.... by HTL2001 · · Score: 1

    how long it will take all those domains to be put on the spybot host file list

    --
    By reading this, you have given me brief control of your mind.
  38. nothing new.. by window · · Score: 0

    nothing new, i know someone that bought a domain for 500$ because the domain was owned by a add company,and this is another biz, to buy good domains to sell them at 100x more expensive after

  39. corrupting Google searches by MisterBlue · · Score: 1

    This made a light go off for me -- the other day I did a Google search and the first several pages of results were to 'regular' domain names but they all want to an ad site.

    I think the other use for collecting expired domain names is to fill Google with ad links.

  40. Trademark your domain name. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    This is why you trademark your domain name. Using a mark that's so similar to yours that it's just a typo is infringement, if the typo domain is marketing to the same market. Even if it isn't, which is usually the case with these typo domains, it can be easier to get them to cease & desist, and move on to cheaper prey to vulture.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Trademark your domain name. by neoThoth · · Score: 1

      I just had to learn about this in a class I'm taking. Having a trademark does help but it's not as simple as sending a C&D. If the squatter is a push over then great but normally the greed factor kicks in. In that case your usually subject to an arbitration proceeding between you and the squatter. This should run about $1000 and generally handed to org's like WIPO. There was a huge case at one point for Corinthians.com and essentially WIPO sided with a Brazilian firm (who's trademark was infringed on by a squatter). Problem is WIPO can't supercede law so the URL, temporarily awarded to the brazilian firm, ultimately came back to the squatter after he took it to federal court (he appealed a lower court ruling in his home state).
      check it out for yourself (www.corinthians.com)

      Bottom line: C&D's are not a solution that will work on anyone with legal council.

    2. Re:Trademark your domain name. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Someone recently asked me about a domain they're trying to get. The started a record distribution company, called ABC Records, and trademarked "ABC" in the field of music distribution. Did business under that name for about 6 months, then went to build their website, and found someone else already registered ABC.com , 2 years prior, and was selling (rarely) their one record (called something like "The Jack Band") by mail order from that webpage. The domain owners smelled money, and declined the offer of about $1000 and renaming/relocation fees. So they wanted to know whether they could enforce their trademark on "ABC", and force ABC.com out of the hands of the owner who's infringing their trademark. I told my friend I didn't know (IANAL), but I thought they could. What do you think?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Trademark your domain name. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think ABC.com has been registered to the American Broadcasting Company for a long time (since 1996 in fact).

      Are you an idiot, a liar, or a really bad comedian?

    4. Re:Trademark your domain name. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      No, I'm giving an example with contrived names, without specifying exactly who the people are. What's *your* excuse Anonymous Coward?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:Trademark your domain name. by neoThoth · · Score: 1

      If it's worth the money to your friend then he can make a valid claim. It will go to arbitration first and likely then to a court near you. the first procedure cost something like $1000.00. In this proceeding an arbitration panel will likely figure out that neither side is willing to budge and that both have equally "valid" claims. It doesn't sound like you can claim squatting under federal legislation. even if it could be found in your friends favor the transfer of the domain can be stopped with a simple appeal by taking the case to a state court. It can then be appealed to a federal court. So here's the deal
      It's $1000.00 to play and after that it's whoever has the most money, the best attorneys, and the most time. If it's worth it to your friends then seek an IP attorney.

    6. Re:Trademark your domain name. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Thanks - sounds like the original trademark fee is the price to pay more money later ;). But maybe they'll wind up with the domain name of their dreams.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  41. Solutions by F�an�ro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Users misspell domain names, causing actions they do not want...

    so, what technical solutions could we use for this problem?
    We could of course leave it as it is, a la survival of the fittest. Or we could try educating users not to mispell (fat chance). But are there other options?

    Credit card companies and banks have been dealing with somewhat similar probems, their solution usually involves checksum digits included in each number

    Could we apply a simmilar system to domain names?

    i.e advertise a www address as
    httX:/Y/zzz.com
    where httX tells the browser that the next character is a checksum, and Y is the one-digit checksum for "zzz.com"?

    users of older browsers would still be able to visit such a domain by leaving out the checksum

    Or, make a new top level domain, .check, where the second-level-domain has to be a checksum for the rest?
    http://zzz.Y.check

    this would require no changes in current software, but would require companies to use something else but .com in their domains.

    Any other ideas? What do you think?

    1. Re:Solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not even going to take the time to rewrite the spam formletter. Change the nouns where appropriate:

      Your post advocates a

      ( ) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante

      approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

      (x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
      ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
      ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
      ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
      (x) Users of email will not put up with it
      ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
      ( ) The police will not put up with it
      (x) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
      ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
      (x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
      ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
      ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

      Specifically, your plan fails to account for

      ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
      (x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
      ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
      ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
      ( ) Asshats
      ( ) Jurisdictional problems
      ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
      ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
      (x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
      (x) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
      (x) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
      ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
      ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
      (x) Extreme profitability of spam
      (x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
      ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
      ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
      (x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
      ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
      ( ) Outlook

      and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

      ( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
      been shown practical
      ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
      ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
      ( ) Blacklists suck
      ( ) Whitelists suck
      ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
      ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
      ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
      (x) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
      ( ) Sending email should be free
      ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
      ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
      ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
      (x) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
      ( ) I don't want the government reading my email
      ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

      Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

      (x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
      ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
      ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
      house down!

    2. Re:Solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldnt it be easier to bookmark your bank's site?

    3. Re:Solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya right... It's hard enough to remember the domain, now you want me to remember some stupid "code" for every one?

      Fat chance!

      OK, so I can ignore the code. Would anyone use it then? No way!

      NEXT!

  42. One handed method... by MarkByers · · Score: 1

    Or you could save yourself from having to use both hands (can be useful on occasion), by typing "apple" in the address bar and hitting "enter". This does a 'Google I'm Feeling Lucky' search, which also gets you to the same webpage.

    Works in Firefox, not sure about the others. ;)

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
  43. Spam Upgrade! by Anusien · · Score: 1
    (including hardware-update.com, previously owned by Microsoft and linked from within the Windows 2000 OS)

    So I take spam that I pay $400 for, and swap it out for spam I get for free. Sounds good.
  44. SOMETHING WRONG? by mattkidman · · Score: 1

    Well, GEE! $386,100.00, damn! My groundmother could do a better website, I mean doest seems to be something wrong? something illegal behind the scenes? What makes a web site been selled for so much money like that?

  45. Apple Tech support # was spoofed by SethJohnson · · Score: 2, Funny



    Back in the mid-nineties I worked at APple Technical Support here in Austin. We'd frequently get people on the phone who would say, "Did you know that if you dial 1-800-SOS-APPL with a zero in SOS you get a porn line?" I would usually tell people that was a service provided by Apple for people without internet connections.

  46. Commerce does have its positive sides as well! by characters42 · · Score: 1
    Incredible... I remember back when the net was young, before all the commercialism, and to think the amount of money these guys made simply collecting and selling domain names.

    I remember these days too. In 1995 I paid a dollar per megabyte (no typo) download plus phone plus monthly fee. Download rates were often below 100 bytes/s. Netscape had a button in the main toolbar to switch image downloading on and off. Many people considered it bad behaviour to have the images in webpages switched on.

    Today I pay 30$/month for 2Mbit ADSL flat. And that's even expensive. Yes, some good things have gone since then - but nevertheless I don't want to have the 1995 internet back. And I rather doubt that more than 0,01% of all users want to have it restored... ;-)

  47. when you could have thereisnocabal.* for $666 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  48. Much about nothing by neckdeepinspecialsau · · Score: 1
    Getting all up in arms about these sites and talking black lists and such is going to do a bunch of nothing. I hit these site on occasion and they are annoying but beyond that they are what they are (not the devil); a valid business. People pay for their traffic, for all the good it that untargeted traffic brings. I suspect they make money not when someone clicks but from ad impressions.

    What I find funny is that they more often than not ask you if you would like them to be your start page! Really as if this sad little link farm is a service to anyone but the owner of the domain.

  49. Just read that on slashdot.net... wait... by j_heisenberg · · Score: 1

    not really. Also not
    * freshmeat.com
    * freshmeat.org
    That might be worth a fundraiser.

  50. Thanks for the idea! by ylikone · · Score: 1

    I just registered slsahdot.com, which was also amazingly still available. I have put up a page with links to slashdot, and my own google adsense bar at the top. Now sit back and see if it actually makes any money. Ehhh, if you can't beat em, join em I say.

    --
    Meh.
    1. Re:Thanks for the idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get some stats up on how many people are visiting/mistyping it!

  51. Re:i just masturbated by Regul8or · · Score: 1

    Son, looks like you shot a blank.

  52. Re:I disagree by symbolic · · Score: 1


    It's just another form of spam. No more, no less.

  53. Stop Yer Whining! by cjsnell · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Don't tell me about losing domains. In 1994, I registered several very good domains:

    snell.org (Me of course)
    cjs.com (Me again)
    eleet.com (I thought I was...)
    grateful.com (I was into the Grateful Dead)
    bikeworld.com (for my dad's co.)

    When NSI took over registrar duties for .com/.net/.org, they started charging $70/yr/domain. I was a poor college student, barely able to buy food (much less $350/yr of domains) so I let them expire--except for bikeworld.com (Dad paid for that one).

    Biggest. Mistake. Ever.

    Here's a little snippet from the WHOIS record for grateful.com:


    Administrative Contact:
    Reflex Publishing Inc.
    Internet Admin (not for sale) (admin@reflex.com)
    +1.8133544500
    Fax: +1.8133544500
    1971 W. Lumsden Rd. #110
    Brandon, FL 33511
    US


    "not for sale" ... As if this asshat thought up this domain in the first place.

    I get sick to my stomach every time I think about this.

  54. Something is bogus about Marchex by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
    This is all very strange. Marchex is a small company. In their last reporting quarter, they made only $144,000 on revenue of about $12 million. Then, suddenly, despite their lousy track record, they did an IPO for $222 million and got onto the NASDAQ National Market System.

    With the revenue from this, they bought a collection of domain names of marginal value. It looks like they actually paid out only only $24.6 million on cash upfront for Name Development. And even that goes into escrow for 18 months. Name Development's income for 2004 was $4.6 million.

    Name Development seems to be one guy operating out of the Virgin Islands who sold click-throughs to Yahoo:

    • Name Development currently earns 100% of its revenue through the outsourcing of its pay-per-click listings to one major provider, Yahoo!

    Marchex is the target of spyware/adware litigation:

    • On February 3, 2005, we received notice of a purported class action complaint entitled Pagniello v. Cool Web Search, Enhance Interactive, Inc., Marchex, Inc., FindWhat.com Inc., Google Inc., Yahoo/Overture Search Engine Co., Microsmarts, LLC, STOPzilla, Inc., PC Tools Pty Ltd., eBlocs.com, and Network Dynamics Corporation, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on January 24, 2005. The complaint alleges that the defendants have exploited web browsers and reconfigured his and others' computers by installing code on their computers without their approval or knowledge and seeks injunctive relief and damages. Based on our initial review of the complaint, we believe that we have meritorious defenses to these claims and intend to contest them vigorously. However, since the litigation is in a preliminary stage and any litigation is inherently uncertain, it is not feasible at this time to predict how this matter will proceed, what the ultimate outcome will be or whether an unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse impact on our business.

    I don't see how this adds up to a company with a market cap of $761 million. This looks more like a dud dot-com.

    1. Re:Something is bogus about Marchex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      allow me to correct your misinformation:

      1) Marchex just raised $210m to pay for this acquisition.

      2) 24.6 million cash refers to the MONTHLY payment until the total of 155m cash is reached

      3) Name Development's revenue for 2004 was $19m

      4)yes, it is one guy, and yes, he is smarter than you

      5) google and yahoo are also named in that frivolous lawsuit you quote. what's your point?

      too bad the slashdot crowd can't see the forest for the trees. for reference, see ipod mini predictions.

    2. Re:Something is bogus about Marchex by Animats · · Score: 1

      There are various figures for Name Development's 2004 income, but the balance sheet on page F-70 of the SEC filing says $11,474,620.

      Presumably there's some payment schedule for the Name Development acquisition, but it doesn't seem to appear in the prospectus.

      Name Development seems to be related to Ultsearch, the company that puts up those worthless "search" pages on dead domains.

      This sort of thing will become much less valuable if Google zeroes out the PageRank of domains when they change ownership.

  55. I can top your laziness by SilentReproach · · Score: 1
    Personally I even type "apple" in the google bar sometimes, its easier than www.apple.com

    I type "google" in the google bar...it's easier than typing google.com
    --
    Religion is the opium of the people. Evolution is the opium of scientists.
  56. Re:I think this passage from Wikipedia is fitting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Warren Buffett is an idiot with a large investment in Coca-Cola. He's not god.

    He should split his stock, too, because he limits the value of the company as a whole by not doing so. Perhaps a split would inflate the price, but the refusal to split, deflates it -- a move which undervalues his company and presents the average investor from purchasing shares.

  57. Re:I think this passage from Wikipedia is fitting. by Apotsy · · Score: 1
    Too expensive? That's what the "b" shares are for. BRKb is an order of magnitue cheaper than the regular, voting BRKa stock. It's well within the reach of an average investor.

    Also, Buffet's comapny consistently beats the market, aside from a brief NASDAQ spike at the end of the dot-com madness in early 2000. If he's an idiot, how come his company is able to perform like that?

  58. Umm...that doesn't make sense by mrmike37 · · Score: 1

    How are you going to remember the checksum? Wouldn't it be a lot easier to have a bookmark?

    --
    Really, I'm not trying to be clever with my signature.
    1. Re:Umm...that doesn't make sense by F�an�ro · · Score: 1

      sure, but urls are often typed in from memory or from an ad or similar.
      the checksum would be *part* of the url.

      do not get me wrong, I know how to bookmark, and I rarely have a problem with misspelled webpages.
      But obviosly a lot of users do have these problems.

    2. Re:Umm...that doesn't make sense by mrmike37 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm going to remember 3432433.amazon.com. Is it really in the best interest of a company to turn away a surfer who has the amazon.com correct, but not the checksum?

      --
      Really, I'm not trying to be clever with my signature.
    3. Re:Umm...that doesn't make sense by F�an�ro · · Score: 1

      it would be more like amazon.com.x
      checksum could be a single letter
      and if that letter is missing, the browser could just generate it

      But if the checksum is wrong, like in amazzon.com.x, it would not be the amazzon webserver that is rejecting the the request, but the browser (or dns server).
      could be automated with a message "Checksum incorrect, do you want to go there anyway?"

      Still, I know the idea as it is now has as much chance to get widespread as a snowball in hell, but why should that stop me? :)

  59. Re:I think this passage from Wikipedia is fitting. by sugarmotor · · Score: 1
    What do you say to these graphs
    1 year comparison, or
    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=BRK-A&t=1y&l=off &z=l&q=l&c=brkb,%5EGSPC,%5EIXIC,%5EDJI

    Stephan

    --
    http://stephan.sugarmotor.org
  60. My annoyance with typo squatters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    My annoyance with typosquatters is that they tell the web archive to delete all instances of the page as it existed before the domain was expired. For example, in the robots.txt file for hardware-update.com, they have this:
    User-agent: ia_archiver
    Disallow: /
    What does this do. Well, look here to see people being unable to access the pre-squatter content of the web site in question. This was an issue a year ago, when I wanted to find out when a church where I used to live had services, looked up their web site on Google, got the expired-squatter webpage, then was unable to see the pre-expired webpage.
  61. Re:I think this passage from Wikipedia is fitting. by Apotsy · · Score: 1
    Short term vs. long term.

    BRK is one of those investments that still goes up even when the market goes down. If the market has a good year, it can beat BRK for that year. But over a longer period, the bear markets more than make up the difference.

  62. Franchises by xant · · Score: 1

    McDonald's and BK are both franchises. A small(ish) business investor builds them both. If Mr McD investor wants to buy across the street (and I'm sure some do) he will, but it's not exactly a rule.

    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
    1. Re:Franchises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      McD's owns far too much land and buildings for what you said to be completely true.

      Part of the franchise agreement is a lease back type arrangement.

      Every year a larger percentage of their shops are company owned as well.

    2. Re:Franchises by nettdata · · Score: 1

      I remember reading some business case study that explained how McDonalds has purchased back most of it's privately owned stores, and how it's now impossible to purchase a new McDonalds franchise. All new stores are owned by McDonalds.

      --



      $0.02 (CDN)
  63. Browser mod to catch bogus URLs by xixax · · Score: 1

    How about a browser mod that does something like Google's "did you mean:" and intercept URLs that are similar to the ones you normally use. It could also be used to intercept crafted URLs like www.micorsoft.com@1.2.3.4.

    Xix.

    --
    "Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
  64. domain parking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the concept of buying a domain and monetizing any resulting traffic is known as "domain parking". there are numerous companies who provide this parking service. these companies host a domain, optimize keywords related to the domain and then pull in PPC ad feeds like Overture. The parking company splits the PPC revenue with the domain owner. The consumer is directed to a web site that they have chosen. If a domain is not hosted by the owner or "parked" a user would see a 404 page. So if someone types in careerinfo.com, whch a domain owner has not developed, a "parked" page shows PPC links related to "Careers" which would seem to be a better user experience than a 404 error page. there are domain owners earning as more than $5,000/day via this method. serious $$$.

  65. Do you own a Ford GT40? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  66. Re:I think this passage from Wikipedia is fitting. by pipingguy · · Score: 1


    This is because that some investors think that following trends (I.E., pop-culture/management theory-type trends) are good to invest in.

    I don't see what all the rush is unless you're trying to make a quick buck. If you're trying to make a quick buck (and that is the only goal) then knocking over a few liquor stores might be a better short-term solution to the desire for immediate gratification and reasons to celebrate often.

    Maybe the "investor class" has been co-opted and is now so filled with people focused on wanting a yacht with no brainwork effort that they have lost all touch with reality.

  67. Leave a present! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have requested domain price for slashdot.net!

    ----

    Thanks for choosing Buy Domains!

    * required information
    * Email: FUCK
    * First Name: YOU
    * Last Name: FUCK
    * Company: YOU
    * Your main URL: FUCK
    * Phone: YOU

    *When will you be purchasing this domain?
    FUCK YOU

    *What is your intended use for this domain?
    FUCK YOU

    * Comments:
    FUCK YOU

    (x) Check here to be added to the Domain News email list (sure!!)

  68. Strategies to avoid going to these sites-- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    --I don't think /etc/hosts can be that big.

  69. hostip.info by hostip · · Score: 1

    http://www.hostip.info/ is a community project to geo IPs and the site is listed in rdf.dmoz.org

  70. Funny?! by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

    ... I don't get it, and I wrote it. Mods on crack?