PD, what's the point?

[johno69]

I have a friend who has recently received the standard PD email saying the domain in a misspelling.

In the email it states that it's a misspelt domain, and that it will be deleted in 14 days and made available again on a first in first served basis.

Seriously, what's the point of releasing it again?

I know this was touched upon recently, but surely when the email that states it's on the list to be auto PD's should not also include a note that it will again be free to whomever is first in.

It just doesn't make logical sense to me.

 

[zhenjie]

Greed.

 

[neddy]

Seriously, what's the point of releasing it again?

It just doesn't make logical sense to me.

Absolutely right.

Greed.

A'Greed

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

There are some instances where someone legitimately has a right to a domain, even though it is on the misspelling list, I'm not talking about Google misspelt as Gooogle. auDA quite rightly releases the domains and gives people a chance register a domain and to prove their interest/eligibility in it. I have seen a number of these instances.

If auDA didnt release the domains then there is potential for abuse, by letting one registrant effectively have a monopoly over a word or variations of it.

 

[acheeva]

A misspelling interpretation is not an absolute or final decision

It appears that the names can be used if they do not exploit the misspelling or if it can be established that the misspelling interpretation is not valid

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

A misspelling does not an absolute or final decision

It appears that the names can be used if they do not exploit the misspelling or if it can be established that the misspelling interpretation is not valid

Absolutely

The Misspelling Policy has the following 2 clauses of relevance:

3.2 auDA recognises that a domain name that appears to be a prohibited misspelling may not in fact be a prohibited misspelling given the particular circumstances of the case (eg. where two registrants have very similar entity, personal or brand names). The complaints-handling process set out in section 4 of this policy gives the registrant an opportunity to respond to the complaint and provide reasons why the domain name is not a prohibited misspelling. auDA will consider each case on its own merits.

5.3 If the registrant is able to show that the domain name is not a prohibited misspelling, auDA will take no further action on the complaint. The complainant may have further recourse against the registrant under the .au Dispute Resolution Policy (auDRP) or under Australian law (eg. trade mark infringement).

 

[findtim]

girls names:

alana, alanah, alanna, alayna, alina, etcccc

maybe not the same as google but if the "alana" was famous the you can see why someone would have the right to purchase their correct spelling.

tim

 

[acheeva]

An important point is that Auda seems to be reactive & do not seen to pro actively search for misspellings

They have the misspellings list (based on prior complaints) & then only seem to react if they receive a new complaint

The clauses referred to above by Cooper Mills only talk about complaints & complainants

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

An important point is that Auda seems to be reactive & do not seen to pro actively search for misspellings

They have the misspellings list (based on prior complaints) & then only seem to react if they receive a new complaint

The clauses referred to above by Cooper Mills only talk about complaints & complainants

You are right Acheeva, this is because auDA enforcement is complaint based. There are many improvements that could be made to this, for example providing the registrant with a copy of the complaint including the name of the person making the complaint (this would in my view reduce the number of vexatious complaints)

 

[GGroup]

... providing the registrant with a copy of the complaint including the name of the person making the complaint (this would in my view reduce the number of vexatious complaints)

Big +1

Word for the day: vexatious
Law . (of legal actions) instituted without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance to the defendant.

 

[James]

Problem is if the PD is connected to a brand and the brand wants to buy the misspelling domains for traffic purposes it needs to be available.

We recently acquired around 50 domains for a client which were the top tier misspellings for their brand term.

 

[Mark]

Greed.

It's not going to pay the bills to have this policy out of greed. As others have said I believe they do not restrict them so they can allow a more applicable registrant the chance of registering it. Grey area.

AFAIK, I think auDA run a daily check against the published list of misspellings:

http://www.auda.org.au/document.php?documentid=1022

And any domains hitting the list may get deleted. And this is not complaints based. However, if a domain is not on the list, it can still fall foul of the same policy, yet that would be the result of a complaint. That's my understanding of it anyhow.

I will get our auction to highlight domains on the misspellings list more clearly though as opposed to other PD domains, which may help reduce these reoccurring PDs.

 

[DavidL]

Yeah you can't say it's greed. We are talking a handful of names per month out of 2.4 million names.

However I do think they should ditch the misspelling list and just leave it on a complaints based policy like every other registry in the world. Having a list introduced subjectivity as it comes down to auda deciding what should be on the list.

A misspelling of the domain realestate.com.au (incidentally a generic word) makes the list but when does a company/brand become big enough to qualify. Should the owner of joescomputershop.com.au insist that joescomputingshop.com.au be put on the list?

The fact that auda must be selective as to who deserves this sort of brand protection is yet another example of grey area policy IMHO

 

[findtim]

Problem is if the PD is connected to a brand and the brand wants to buy the misspelling domains for traffic purposes it needs to be available.

We recently acquired around 50 domains for a client which were the top tier misspellings for their brand term.

What the difference between a mispelt name and a name "extended" eg: sydneyweddings, sydneywedding, weddingssydney, weddingsydney ???, this is just a fake but true example of a situation I have and all of the different owners just accept it and move on.

once again i say if they want them then don't come LATE to the party and muscle others.

tim

 

[marketingweb]

One thing i've never understood given that domain names are so cheap.....

Once a domain name is PD and available for reg, why isn't the owner of the "real" domain that's been misspelled obliged to register it? For example, why doesn't someone at youtube aka google pick up utube.com.au and register it and be done with it?

Why tie up resources and make things go on lists when simply registering it themselves (after it's PD) would solve this?

 

[James]

One thing i've never understood given that domain names are so cheap.....

Once a domain name is PD and available for reg, why isn't the owner of the "real" domain that's been misspelled obliged to register it? For example, why doesn't someone at youtube aka google pick up utube.com.au and register it and be done with it?

Why tie up resources and make things go on lists when simply registering it themselves (after it's PD) would solve this?

Valid point, no one at the company has taken the responsibility to put forward a case to show the traffic potential behind the domain name.

But in the US market it seems to be a different case - http://thenextweb.com/google/2012/05/11/google-wins-a-whopping-763-domain-names/

I guess its just a matter of time before they acquire the AU domains in mass.

 

[findtim]

nice article james, LOL, yehhh i have an idea i'm gonna take on a billion dollar company and run porn sites !!! redneck ! what was he thinking?


tim

 

[findtim]

hey james dig this, theapplegoogle dot com

its on flippa for sale at $20k

tim