Company appears to be registering previously expired domains, but isn’t picking up some obvious domains.
Facebook registered at least 22 domain names yesterday, many of them typos of Facebook. But the strategy is perplexing. Here’s the list:
betafacebook.info
facboox.com
facebocke.com
facebof.com
facebokcasino.com
facebookcredets.com
facebookkcredits.com
facebooklinker.com
facebookpeople.info
facebooksight.com
facebooon.com
facebooor.com
faceebot.com
faicbooc.com
faseboox.com
faxcebool.com
faxehook.com
feook.com
photosonfacebook.info
wwwfaceboil.com
wwwfacebppk.com
wwwfeibook.com
So why am I perplexed? Here are some examples:
Photosonfacebook.info – OK, a standard defensive registration. Except that Facebook hasn’t registered any other major TLD for this domain. Even PhotosOnFacebook.com is available at the time of writing.
FacebookPeople.info – the .com is taken (may be expiring), but .net, .org, etc. are available. Why .info?
BetaFacebook.info – someone else has registered .com, so I understand the idea to get other versions and also find a way to get the .com. But why just the .info?
Facebokcasino.com is also interesting. They don’t own FacebookCasino.com. Ditto for wwwFaceBoil.com. Someone else owns FaceBoil.com.
But I think I’ve found a common theme amongst these registrations. The sample I’ve checked shows that they were previously registered and expired. So perhaps Facebook wants to snap up anything that has expired.
Yet if someone would potentially register PhotosonFacebook.info again, wouldn’t you want to protect the .com, too?
Here’s another data point to consider. Yesterday I noticed that logon-facebook.com was freshly registered by someone other than Facebook. Historical whois records suggest that Facebook once owned this domain. Maybe the company is trying to learn from its mistakes?
JamesDouglas says
You’ve included “facebook.com” in the list? Guess that sews up some loose ends… 😉
Andrew Allemann says
@ JamesDouglas – copy and past error. Sorry 🙂
Sole Designer says
@James
“i saw that and thought one of the O was a zero.”
This might also be protecting their online presence a bit more before the IPO.
Shannon Johnson says
There’s no logic in this at all really… I hate to say, but this looks more like something that would happen after too many beers and a large supply of money….
Terrible outlook I know… but what else would explain this?
rick says
Its seems to me that this is simply one employee (a rather dumb employee) rather than a concerted effort on the part of management. After all, when options are doled out, this employee can say, hey look… I have been an integral part at protecting the fb brand!
Andrew Allemann says
Could be MarkMonitor acting on their behalf, too. But I think whoever did it needs are more encompassing strategy.
JamesDouglas says
@ Shannon Johnson – I think you’re right about the money, anyway. Perhaps just a case of someone in “Legal” trying to justify their high salary position. I don’t know why they would care anyway, as long as the typos don’t point to a “fake” facebook page where identity could be stolen. Any leaked traffic would quickly figure it out and resolve themselves to an actual facebook page. Who doesn’t know Facebook at this point – you either want it or you don’t – no business that I can see being lost by these ridiculous typos. For them to continue this game now begun, the possible tlds, typos and word combos are literally endless. And to re-register every year – Facebook is going to need that IPO infusion! (BTW, I hear Farcebook.com is planning an IPO for early 2013)