Is the world’s biggest registrar typosquatting some of the world’s biggest brands?

Typosquatting refers to registering domain names similar to popular sites but with misspellings or missing/added characters. For example, typosquatting would be registering yaho.com instead of yahoo.com. Millions of people type ‘yahoo.com’ into their browsers every day, and many of those accidentally neglect the second ‘o’. Typosquatting is a big business, and typo domains regularly sell for over $10,000.

Microsoft recently disclosed research showing the extent of the problem.

But is it possible that GoDaddy, the world’s biggest registrar, is an active typosquatter? The culprit is GoDaddy’s TDNAM.com service. TDNAM is a domain name aftermarket at which people can buy and sell domains (similar to Sedo and Afternic). However, GoDaddy also auctions off expiring domains that are currently registered at GoDaddy. This is a common practice — all of the big registrars auction off such domains through services like Snapnames. But GoDaddy parks expiring domains on its servers for a couple weeks before auctioning them at TDNAM. This allows the company to calculate the amount of visits the domain receives and the associated revenue from pay-per-click ads. It then sets higher starting bids for expiring domains that produce revenue.

For example, TDNAM started an auction for privatebankruptcy.com at $140 rather than TDNAM’s standard $10 expired domain start price because privatebankruptcy.com receives valuable web traffic.

No problem there. But what if the domain in question is a typo of a trademarked term? That was the case with FootLoocker.com, which TDNAM set a starting price at $1,000s of dollars. (It receives a lot of type-in traffic.) You could rightfully argue that GoDaddy shouldn’t have to screen all of the expiring domains it lists to ensure it doesn’t include trademark typos. But what if no one bids on the domain? What happens to it then?

It appears that GoDaddy keeps the domain and tries to sell it under cover on TDNAM. FootLoocker.com didn’t receive any bids during its expired domain auction, but it’s currently listed for sale for $3,630 at TDNAM.

I believe that GoDaddy still owns the domain. As proof, the domain is currently registered via DomainsbyProxy. It appears that all of the domains that aren’t successfully auctioned off but are retained are registered through DomainsbyProxy. Second, FootLoocker.com currently resolves to a standard GoDaddy.com parking page. The company makes money from the sponsored ads on that page. If someone other than GoDaddy purchased this domain they would immediately park the domain at a service that would create revenue for the owner.

What’s worse is that it appears the company is trying to cover up its tracks. I recently purchased a number of domains from TDNAM that were expired domain auctions that ended with no bidders (I didn’t buy any trademark typos, mind you). All of the domains showed DomainsbyProxy as the registrant. Although it appears GoDaddy is the seller, I received an e-mail from a random web address offering to complete the transaction by transferring the domains to my GoDaddy.com account. What shows up if you go to that web address? A GoDaddy.com parked page. I suspect GoDaddy doesn’t want the e-mail to appear to come from the company to cover up its tracks.

To sum it up, I believe that GoDaddy is retaining high traffic expired domains that it fails to successfully auction off at TDNAM. It lists the domains on TDNAM as “Buy it Now” sales, and parks the domains at GoDaddy to earn revenue from pay-per-click ads. GoDaddy is profiting from typosquatting.

Rock band Pearl Jam won the rights to PearlJams.com.

As is usually the case with arbitration involving high profile companies and celebrities, National Arbitration Forum issued a press release announcing that it found in favor of the complainant. But “won” is a strong word because the previous owner of PearlJams.com didn’t even respond to the complaint. Thus, the domain defaulted to the complainant.

I’ve raised this issue before, but I’m uncomfortable with National Arbitration Forum issuing press releases about individual decisions. By issuing a press release, it gives the group reason to find in favor of the high-profile company or celebrity. After all, I haven’t seen any press releases from NAF about ruling against a high-profile complainant or settling a case that involves relatively small players.

Just days after Wired Magazine called the .xxx domain delay one of the top 10 worst tech moments of 2005, The New York Times has called Microsoft’s free domain offer one of the top 10 “Greatest Gadget Ideas of the Year.”

An article by David Pogue published today refers to Microsoft’s Office Live service, which will offer a free domain to all users:

“It took Microsoft, of all companies, to make getting your own dot-com name free. Its new Office Live online software suite for small businesses, now in testing, will offer a domain name, Web site and e-mail accounts free. Yes, you’ll see ads on the screen (unless you pay for the adless version) – but plenty of people won’t mind viewing them in exchange for a free, professional-looking Web presence.”

Perhaps Pogue should have called the gadget of the year “cheap domains”, since more and more domain registrars are offering domains at rock-bottom prices. But Pogue isn’t declaring that just free domains are a great gadget, but the way Microsoft makes it easy for small businesses to launch a web presence with little tech knowledge.

Sedo is reporting one of the biggest domain sales of the year, Annuities.com, for $600,000.

Details of the transaction are not available. Sedo’s home page also shows sales of RedWine.com for $19,500 and SiberPortal.com for $9,000. Hopefully we’ll get details on these transactions in next week’s DNJournal sales report.

A couple new TLD domain sales to report… Cardiology.info traded hands for $1,000 at Afternic, and advertise.us sold for $1,300 at Sedo. Both of these seem like good prices to me.

Following the acquisition of Web.com and its assets by webhosting company Interland, the company announced that it will change its name and web presence to Web.com.

Web.com is one of the best possible domain names for a number of uses, in particular webhosting. But I suspect part of this move is to change the company’s image. As one of the earlier “big” webhosts, Interland had its share of rocky experiences. I used Interland’s services for some of my first web sites. They charged mamoth fees and didn’t back it up with support. It seemed like my site was down weekly. When I’d call to complain, the company’s line was that I shouldn’t expect solid uptime with shared webhosting. They compared it to living in an apartment, where if one of your neighbors makes noise you have to live with it.

So I switched to another shared hosting provider that cost about 80% less and never had outages.