Typosquatting: An Invesstment in Stoopidity
In recent weeks, both Google and Yahoo have come under public scrutiny for profiting from a practice known as typosquatting. A clever way for publishers and advertisers to capitalize on spelling-impaired web users, typosquatting is the parking of a domain name spelled a few characters differently than a major branded site, as in “Goggle.com”.
Once considered amateurish and ineffective, typosquatting has refined its tactics, enticed the big name ad networks, and become a lucrative stream of emarketing in its own right. Yet as the practice grows in prominence, it raises more and more concerns over trademark infringement and the intentional misleading of web users.
According to recent estimates, about 15 percent of all web traffic originates from users typing directly in to the URL box. As there is obviously no such thing as a spell check for URLs (to date), a good deal of hastily or ignorantly typed addresses are inaccurate. Instead of returning to a dead-end “404 File Not Found” page, these sites started to get bought out and filled with ads relevant to the product or service of the site being emulated.
It didn’t take long for the major ad networks like Google to get in on the profits and start selling inventory to countless typosquatting sites. Operators soon developed programs to devise thousands of misspellings for a given site, register them as domains, and park them on a trial basis to find which provided the most erroneous landings.
Typosquatters have since thought of just about everything. Commas next to periods, phonetic misspellings, abandoned brand names or campaigns, and interchanged address suffixes (such as .com for .org) are all effective strategies.
With the sophistication of typosquatting inevitably came the backlash of the major brands, who justifiably claim the sites make a profit off their names and detract from traffic to their own sites. While they’ve tried a number of methods to combat the practice, such as filing lawsuits and buying out misspelled domains of their own, they have yet to formally define typosquatting as a legal infringement. There is no doubt that typosquatting negatively affects the sites which it parrots to some extent, but determining exactly what constitutes trademark infringement in a web URL is a very subjective matter.
A more legally debatable question at this time is whether or not the sites do more help than they cause harm to the users who find them. In most cases, users will quickly realize their mistake and not think they are actually on the page they intended to visit. And frequently, they are led to sites which can help them find what they need, if not the actual site they attempted to type in.
Yet fundamentally, typosquatting intends to mislead users by utilizing an advance understanding of what they are looking for. On top of that, they frequently transport surfers to sites with pornographic, gambling-related, or otherwise questionable content, an interaction which can incidentally detract from their identification with the brand in question.
Regardless, typosquatting has gained the most valuable currency that exists on the Internet: the support of Google, Yahoo, and MSN. In addition to supplying ad inventory for these sites, the giants have attempted to extend the reach of their search engines by claiming misspelled sites for themselves. Internet Explorer users, for example, are by default greeted with an MSN search box any time they stumble onto a site that is not registered to anyone.
As long as idiocy rages on the Internet, and as long as major companies try to profit from it, typosquatting will continue to be a viable marketing avenue in the online space.
Reader Comments.
No comments yet
Leave a Comment
Article Sponsor
More Features
-
Loading ...
Latest News
- Hulu’s Bringing Its “A” Game But… March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – Hulu’s sales team is actively subverting the ad [...] more »
- Yelp! A class-action suit? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – One of three civil suits against Yelp filed [...] more »
- Viacom Accuses Google; Testing Digital Millennium Copyright Act March 19th 2010 Viacom has accused Google of turning a blind eye to [...] more »
- Google to Leave China April 10th? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – According to the China Business News, Google Inc [...] more »
- [x+1] Creates The Smartest Tagging System Around March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Today, if you happen to be at the [...] more »
- IAB’s Video Standards Tackled By ADTECH March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – ADTECH, a part of AOL Advertising and an [...] more »
- Google Search and Mobile and….TV? Oh My! March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Google wants to dominate your screens…. Not just [...] more »
Features
- Growing Pains March 19th 2010
- For Better or For Worse? March 18th 2010
- Yahoo! Wants to Get More Personal March 17th 2010
- Creative Considerations for the iPad March 16th 2010
- Amazon Leaves Colorado Affiliates Out in the Cold March 12th 2010
Spotlight
AdBidCentral’s CEO, Vivek Veeraraghavan Talks Openly*What was the inspiration to start AdBidCentral? The conditions that inspired AdBidCentral came from a variety of factors in my personal [...] more...
Reader Favorites
Classifieds
- Sr Director, Marketing Services
- Senior Web Analyst
- Account Director
- Director of Analytics
- Manager, Business and Trade Media Relations
Recent Comments
- Jedd Gould: I think you miss the point. Publications have to charge because the content most are
- Gavin Dunaway: They're similar, but Ning is more a competitor to Facebook and MySpace while StumbleUpon considers
- Steve Feldman: Does StumbleUpon compete with and does essentially what Ning networks does?
- Bulent: I wonder how many of the clients would accept a media plan, that would -as
