Tag Archives: Facebook

Daily Wrap: Facebook Files Cybersquatting Complaint And 3 Google TLD Applications Set To Fail

Facebook has filed a cybersquatting complaint against a reality company in the San Diego area over 30 domain names that include “facebook” including facebookbroker.com and facebookclothes.com reports Domain Name Wire.

The report notes that many of the domains were registered in 2007.

Three of Google’s applications for generic Top Level Domains are doomed to fail, reports Domain Incite and The Register.

“The applications for .and, .are and .est are affected by the rule that prohibits the delegation of three-letter country codes appearing on the ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 list,” says the Domain Incite report.

Domain Incite also reports on the Governmental Advisory Committee slamming “ICANN’s decisions to reject at least three non-Latin ccTLDs because they might pose security risks.”

The report says the GAC has “also asked ICANN to ‘urgently reconsider’ the rulings, which were made to mitigate the risk of phishing attacks and other types of domain name abuse.”

And in another Domain Incite report, ICANN staff “acknowledged that digital archery was perceived as ‘silly’, it told the board of directors that it was ‘straightforward’ and ‘unambiguous and easy to execute’.”

Last week Domain Incite also reported “HSBC, Microsoft, Yahoo and jewelry maker Richemont have told ICANN they plan to form a new GNSO stakeholder group just for single-registrant gTLD registries.”

Google To Apply For .Google, .YouTube And More TLDs, While Facebook And Pepsi Say No

Google will be applying for several TLDs for a number of their trademarks a company spokesperson told Ad Age, while Facebook and Pepsi both said they will not be applying.”We plan to apply for Google’s trademarked TLDs, as well as a handful of new ones,” a company spokeswoman said in an emailed statement to Ad Age. “We want to help make this a smooth experience for web users — one that promotes innovation and competition on the internet.”More details were not provided, but as the report notes, expect applications for .Google and .YouTube, among others.The report also notes, and which has previously been reported, that Deloitte will also be applying for a TLD, along with Canon. But few other companies contacted by Ad Age would comment on their plans, with even those that are applying most likely not wanting to tip off their competitors.Brand names that told Ad Age they will not be applying include Facebook and Pepsi.The costs of acquiring and operating a TLD were reasons given for not applying for a TLD by Shiv Singh, global head of digital at Pepsi. Singh also told Ad Age he believed consumers’ browsing habits will take years to alter.”Consumers are always going to think about first going to MountainDew.com or Pepsi.com before they think about Drink.Pepsi,” Mr. Singh said. “And that’s not going to change anytime soon, and maybe not for a few years.”To read the Ad Age report in full, see:
adage.com/article/digital/google-plots-web-domain-buying-spree/234009/

Facebook Files Lawsuit Against 25 Typosquatters

Facebook has filed a suit against 25 typosquatter who have registered domain names similar to facebook.com reports VentureBeat.

According to the report, the domain names in question are either typos or closely related to facebook.com and are what Facebook calls example of trademark infringement.

“(The) defendants’ schemes also diminish the goodwill associated with Facebook and its marks, injure Facebook’s reputation, breach enforceable agreements between Defendants and Facebook, interfere with Facebook’s business, and unjustly enrich Defendants,” Facebook states in the court document. “Facebook therefore seeks an order cancelling Defendants’ rights in their typosquatter domain names or transferring those typosquatter domain names to Facebook, awarding Facebook damages and providing other relief.”

Of those accused of typosquatting most are companies, a few individuals, and some of the domain names in question are facebobk.com, facemook.com, wwwfacefook.com, ffacebook.com and faecbook.com.

Facebook Seeks To Recover 21 Domains

Facebook is disputing ownership of 21 domain names that include the string “facebook” such as KillFacebook.com, FacebookStuff.com and FacebookSafety.com reports TechCrunch.The domain names are all currently owned by a company called Domain Asset Holdings, according to the report, a known domain squatter based in Potomac, Maryland.When visiting websites for the domain names there are notices saying they are for sale. For example, facebookstuff.com is currently for sale for $350 and FacebookCheats.com for $4,000.The TechCrunch report is available in full at techcrunch.com/2011/03/24/facebook-tries-to-squash-21-squatted-domain-names.

Facebook Wants Companies To Ditch Websites And Hence Domain Names

Could the day be coming when companies want to ditch their own websites, and domain names, and rely on social marketing pages to promote their products or services? That is what Facebook is hoping.

In a conference presentation in London this week, Stephen Haines, commercial director of Facebook’s U.K. operation, essentially said while speaking today at the Technology for Marketing and Advertising conference that “companies’ interactions with their customers could take place so often on Facebook that company Web sites would fall by the wayside,” according to a CNET report.

“To bolster his argument, Haines showed statistics comparing how many times Facebook users have clicked a company’s ‘like’ button with how many times per month people visited that company’s Web site. For Starbucks, a top Facebook advertiser, the ratio was 21.1 million likes to 1.8 million site visitors. For Coca-Cola, it’s 20.5 million compared with 270,000; for Oreo, 10.1 million compared with 290,000; and for Dr. Pepper, it’s 4.1 million compared with 325,000.”

CNET says that while “the social-networking site is embedded increasingly deeply into people’s lives, … relying on it for customer communications means subordinating a key part of a businesses’ operations to a middleman that has shown no shortage of ambition. Many companies are happy to use Microsoft products and Google services, but companies and antitrust regulators get antsy when too much power is concentrated in one corporation’s hands.”

Such a scenario, should it eventuate, could often lead to businesses, especially smaller ones, giving up or not applying for a domain name for their corporate website.

This issue was also the subject of the Domain Pulse conference in Vienna on 17 February. The panel session late on day one of the two-day conference, Europe’s most important annual domain name conference, looked at the role of a domain name in a company’s branding and image. While a domain name is viewed by many as important, there are alternative means of promoting a company or brand such as through social networking services another panel member, Sabine Hoffman from marketing company ambuzzador, said, and these can be complementary to using a domain name.

Also on the panel was Christian Kallenberg, chief editor of FHM magazine in Germany, who ditched the domain name for FHM Germany and now relies entirely on promoting the magazine through Facebook. Kallenberg says this move has been very successful, and much more successful than using a website with the magazine’s own domain name. And much cheaper.

However this method was not supported by Tim Schumacher, CEO of leading domain name marketplace Sedo and Hoffman. Questions were raised as there is a lack of control over how you can project your brand online. For example, Facebook, Twitter or another social networking site may introduce charges in the future that could relate to the number of friends or people ‘liking’ the page. Should this happen, the business may or may not be up for a considerable fee. Hoffman wondered what would happen if Facebook introduced a charge of $1 per friend on Facebook.

Additional problems could be changes in terms and conditions, the introduction of strict regulation of sales such as proposed last week by Apple for sale through applications, the loss of popularity of the social networking site or even the collapse of the website.

Hoffman believed that using Facebook was a good idea, but should be used in conjunction with a domain name and website, redirecting from your company website to Facebook through an address such as facebook.brandname.at.

The full CNET article is available from news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20038242-264.html.

.MP & .TEL Domains

The simple concept behind both companies promoting the .TEL and the .MP extension is this: You’ll get your own name in a domain, a .tel or .mp, and then use it as a hub for your online identities and content. The sites will offer some blend of a business card function, like Plaxo, and personal feed aggregaton, like Friendfeed.

The pitch from both is similar: Instead of sending people to a page that’s heavily branded by someone else (for example, Facebook), you can give out your domain. Keep that updated with your contact info, and then as long as people know your domain, they’ll have a way to reach you.

The question that may be raised is the free domain name .MP will it have the same effect as the .TK extension ?Chi.mp has  OpenID authenticators . It’s convenient for users. Chi.mp founder Tony Haile’s vision for Chi.mp’s utility is quite similar to the promise of OpenID and to the concepts in DiSo and the Social Graph API, emerging protocols for sharing social network data between sites.

This could be the future of contacting your clients or even family across the world.

Original article : http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10034627-2.html

FaceBook acquires .COM.AU

Facebook the gaint of social networking has obtained the .com.au from an Australian company Callverse Pty Ltd. The domain name currently advertises a “click to call service” that is “coming soon”. It appears that Callverse bought the domain name from former registrant “Cocktail King Australia” and Braden Yuill between June and October 2007.

he decision was handed down by a three person panel at World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The decision has not been posted online yet so details of the dispute are not available. Domain Name Wire will post details once they are available.

To read the article Further : http://domainnamewire.com/2008/06/12/facebook-wins-facebookcomau-domain-name/