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.'"

6 of 279 comments (clear)

  1. Wasting people's time by Statecraftsman · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I think the biggest problem with typo-sqauatting and the nastier problem(for web developers) of domain-squatting is that it wastes people's time. It's like traffic when you're on the highway. Wouldn't it be great if you could just make traffic illegal one day? I understand the problem...how can you tell if someone is typo-squatting or doing an original website?

    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.

  2. Missing link by broothal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This link should have been in the article: http://www.google.com/domainpark/

  3. Another idiocy of DNS by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  4. Fat Fingers by nickgrieve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Someone must have some big fat fingers if they hit the "i" when going for the "e"...

    nit pick :)

  5. Re:Confusion between "evil" and profit by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?

    Answer me that question once you go to a drugstore on Sunday morning, and you're tying to get rid of that hangover before doing your Sunday church appearance. With a splitting headache, then go to the pain relief isle, but B4Y3R aspirin, that looks just like BAYER aspirin minus the chemicals that relieve pain. But, you forgive the company because its now owned by Google and they owe it to their stockholders to put such products on the shelf.

    Why is it that common sense and reality go out the window when a computer is involved (patent pending)?

    Things with direct analogies to life like email forwarding vs snail mail forwarding don't make sense to people, but things like popup/under advertisements and typosquating makes sense. In the future, will businesses open on 212 Madison Ave when a known company is at 212 Madison St just in case someone gets lost?

    Reminds me of when the only people that really profited off of the gold rush were shovel salesmen and prostitutes.

  6. Re:I don't blame Google for enabling typosquatting by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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