Slashdot Mirror
Google Propping Up Typosquatting Biz?
An anonymous reader writes "Google is making oodles of cash placing ads on a vast sea of otherwise vacant Web sites that do little more than capitalize on misspelled domain name names, according to a story in today's Washington Post. From the story: 'Google Inc., which runs the largest ad network on the Internet, is making millions of dollars a year by filling otherwise unused Web sites with ads. In many instances, these ad-filled pages appear when users mistype an Internet address, such as BistBuy.com. This new form of advertising is turning into a booming business that some say is cluttering the Internet and could be violating trademark rules.'"
No, it's not news it's a Microsoft plant. Google was the last one to get into this game and nowhere near the leader. Nice try, asshats.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Safari can't find the server.
Safari can't open the page "http://www.bistbuy.com/" because it can't find the server "www.bistbuy.com".
This is a non story. I really don't understand how anyone would hold Google culpable for this.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
It's actually quite easy. It should be based on content. If all you see is a list of search categories and lots of ads, it's typo-squatting. If you see original articles and compelling content, it's legit.
I feel that people are confusing "evil" with profit. Google went public. Google is a business. Google now aims (moreso at least) to generate profit for its owners. But doing something that makes money for a company does not make it evil? Who does this hurt?
This link should have been in the article: http://www.google.com/domainpark/
The article claims a vague "millions" of dollars at stake, but I'd be interested to know the actual numbers: I know that when I find myself at one of these pages, I am least likely to click on an ad.
First, there was the highly enlightening 404, if there was a resolution at all. Then there was the typosquatters. My fav was Micros0ft.com.
But all of those are better than intercepts, which are surprisingly common these days in 'walled gardens'. I'll take a squatter, and if google can make some $$ on them, so much the better.
DNS is primitive, insecure, rife for diddling, and as goofy as SMTP. Yes, these were all good in their day. And yes, they were made out of brittle plastic, not visionary armor. So, google makes a few bucks. Ho fracking hum. More power to them. If I get a wrong phone #, does someone give me a list of alternatives? No, but they're often helpful as in "oh, that's a 6 not a 9" or something. With DNS you get a squat, not found, or a typosquat. How droll.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Someone must have some big fat fingers if they hit the "i" when going for the "e"...
:)
nit pick
I'm sorry, but "Bistbuy" is not a "typo," it's a horrible and awful misspelling that a 3 year old wouldn't make.
What?
How do you define "misspelled"? It may be obvious to you that "bistbuy.com" is phony, but to a browser it's just another — valid — domain name.
How do you determine what's a mistake and what's a legitimate domain? I don't want my browser to go to flicker.com when I typed flickr.com, and I don't want my browser to go to dig.com when I typed digg.com.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
"Google" is itself a misspelling - so should all requests for Google go to Googol?
Another example - "slashdot" is not a real word - so should Slashdot.org go to Slashers.org? :)
I don't blame Google either, considering that the ads aren't placed on the typo-squatting sites BY Google, they're placed by the typo-squatters themselves! What is Google supposed to do, weed out any advertisers that seem like they might be using the ads in a non-standard way?
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
Why not? PC Gamer among a few others refuses to take ads from gold farmers. Why shouldn't google refuse to pay typosquatters, its not like their page is actually of any remote value.