45

Biz model for domain names to change

The home page of the photo-sharing website Flickr.

To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.

Get Adobe Flash player

TEXT OF STORY

Kai Ryssdal: Ever wonder why the address for the photo-sharing website Flickr doesn't have an E in it? It's because -- and this is a true story -- the founder liked the name "flicker" -- E, R -- but couldn't negotiate the rights to it. The guy who had it wouldn't sell. So, she improvised and came up with the next best thing. Cyber-squatting, as it's known, has led to a whole spate of oddly-spelled company names and web addresses.

But Cash Peters found out the practice of hoarding available domain names may soon become a broken business model.


Cash Peters: Choosing a domain name is such a drag. No matter what name you think of, it's already taken.

David Sarno's the tech reporter for the L.A. Times.

David Sarno: If you wanted to go start a beer company, say, forget trying to get Beer.com. Somebody probably got that 20 years ago. And then you'd try every combination of "beer" that you can think of and all those combinations are taken, too. So what you're left with is people trying to figure out a nonsense word that nobody has the rights to, and naming their company after that.

Precisely. I hope you're listening, Grrrrrrrrrr.com. A lot of times the domain isn't even in use. Some greedy opportunist is just sitting on it, waiting for you to buy it from him at an inflated price. It's sneaky and outrageous. Or, to put it another way, capitalism. Because a good domain name is vital part of your brand, though, this is a real problem.

As it happens, I keep branding expert John Tantillo right here on speed dial.

John Tantillo: It's gotta be easy to pronounce, it should be distinctive, it should be able to be translated into a different language. And it should be trademark-able.

He's right -- like IKEA.com or AOL.com. Don't go calling yourself something nobody can spell, like Wachovia for instance, or Husqvarna. Also, if you can't get your first choice, John says, be prepared to compromise.

Tantillo: You might not get the dot-com name, but you might get the dot-biz name.

Peters: Yeah, but it's so uncool. Nobody wants something dot-biz.

Tantillo: Coolness is relative and it's temporal. You can't worry about coolness, what you've got to worry about is marketing!

Actually, in his case, I'd be more worried about having a stroke. So OK, I have an idea: Why doesn't someone got off their backside and fix this? Ya know, just thinking out loud. Well, thankfully they're about to. Seems there are two ways to do it. Number one, replace this elaborate code we call a domain name with a simple search, like speed dial. David Sarno.

Sarno: I don't know any of my best friends' phone numbers. That era is gone where you had to remember phone numbers. Now, you just pick out your phone and click on their name. So, it should be a similar thing with businesses and entities of all kinds, where all I have to do is remember your name, and I've searched for your name online and it takes me to your website.

But there's a second way to fix this mess: Extend the number of top level domain names -- from your basic dot-coms and dot-orgs -- by adding tons more.

Doug Brent is COO of ICANN, the Internet... Corporation of... Anyway, they oversee domain names.

Doug Brent: In the physical world, when you have beach-front real estate, there just is that limit. There's going to be competition for the beach. It doesn't have to be that way in domain names.

Over the next year -- perhaps longer, but maybe in that time frame -- basically, anyone could apply for a top-level domain name. So instead of dot-com, it can be dot-my-brand or dot-my-community, like the dot-Inuit community. Or perhaps dot-Facebook. The feeling that all the good names are taken doesn't have to be true anymore.

Great. But uh-oh, wait. If you add these new names, what happens to all those greedy opportunists who basically registered the entire thesaurus to make a fast buck? I do hope they'll be OK and don't lose all their money.

Tantillo and Peters laughing

I don't know why that's funny, it just is. But really, they're in for a shock.

Sarno: You're going to have a whole lot of people who have paid a whole lot of money for codes that don't mean anything anymore. And it's going to be replaced, and everybody that paid money for a piece of that system is going to be out of luck.

Oh, darn. In short, the whole system's about to become freer and simpler. In the meantime, though, I guess you grab any name you can. Shame that Grrrrrrrrr.com is taken, really.

Tantillo: As Frank Sinatra used to say, "That's life."

In LAcity.org, I'm CashPeters.com for Marketplace.org.

Pages

David Spalding's picture
David Spalding - Jun 3, 2010

I almost always enjoy Cash's reports ... well, okay, I thought this one was fun, too ... but Cash needed to make a few more investigative calls. Cash, do a little reading on "Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act" (ACPA) laws U.S.C. § 1125 and U.S.C. § 1129 and THEN ask "experts" about this practice.

Chad Hastings's picture
Chad Hastings - Jun 3, 2010

Gosh, it's funny to see all the domainers get upset over the prospect of their shallow world changing. It seems they have spent so much time and money investing in this artificial world that they don’t realize how contrived and transient it is.

Let’s use the example from a domainer’s comment above of beer.com. When I want to enjoy a cold brew, find a particular beer, or discover new beers, what do I do as the average beer drinker? Off the top of my head, the actions I would take are (1) Ask a friend or note what they’re drinking and try it. (2) Go to a new pub and look at their offering; maybe ask the bartender. (3) Go to a store and browse the aisle. (4) Go to a beer garden, beer festival, etc. (5) Do a Google search on a beer name and follow the top results.

Never is my first action to waste time going to my browser and typing any domain name with “beer” in it, whether it’s “beer.com” or beer.[some other TLD]. I want to find a real-world product. Even if it were to be a virtual product or service, I am not going to trust being routed to whatever unknown entity has bought up “beer.com”. There’s no guarantee of any quality in the result.

Domain names are an artificial addressing system. I do want to remember the unique, branded names like “Flickr” because they are distinctive. For virtual services, they offer a unique experience. So the TM’d brands that are built up are what matter. Generic domains rarely do this. If anything, any value is in the great technology of the site behind the name. “cars.com” is a useful search tool, but could have just as easily been “carsearch.com”. I visit for the experience of using the site and the results, not the domain name. And I only went there because Click and Clack mentioned the domain name on Car Talk, not because I ever thought to myself, “I’m looking for a car. I think I’ll try cars.com.”

Wm Lozada's picture
Wm Lozada - Jun 3, 2010

I am amazed at the lopsided, unfair, and poor reporting of this article. So if I buy some Halliburton stock at a $1 a share and it shoots to $100 a share, I should sell it for $1? What you guys have a serious case of is GREED! Greed that you weren't smart enough to buy .coms when they were affordable. And greed at the amounts these gems sell for! As far as the idiotic .cocacola concept. Yeah, it's there, but seriously, who's going to type in cocacola.cocacola? Stupid! .com is KING and will always be KING! ICANN invent's bs extensions to continue and line their "non-profit" pockets. The big show is and always will be .coms!

Domain Buyer's picture
Domain Buyer - Jun 3, 2010

Is CashPeters.com for sale? It must get some serious type-in traffic. Would $5,000 be a good starting offer for the domain?

Oh wait... apparently Cash Peters is not a "greedy opportunist" so I probably can't purchase this domain from him for $5,000 or even $10,000. Guess I'll have to settle for registering CashPeters.biz !

Dan Brown's picture
Dan Brown - Jun 3, 2010

Hi,

Very Well Said: " Stephen Douglas"

Best!
Dan Brown

___

Here is an old story:

The domain "cowboys.com" was selling at auction for 275K it is and was selling cowboy related wear, hats, boots etc...

The Dallas Cowboys put in a bid of $275.00 and everyone thought they where bidding 275K.

When then found out it was 275K, the Cowboy Organization reneged on their bid.

Here is a company worth a BILLION+ dollars...and will not spend 275k to protect their "Brand" ...use it to sell all kinds of cowboys merchandise...

The site already got major traffic from people looking to buy tickets, merchandise etc...

They could have "paid" for the name within 6 months...EASILY!

If I where Mr. Jerry Jones... "Heads" would have rolled over this MAJOR blunder....

These guys working for him, thinking they could buy this domain for $275.00

Beyond..."dumb"

Only goes to show the major ignorance of really smart people, when it comes to domain names.

This is Pervasive...in a lot of Major company's.

Domain was bought a few hours later for 300K by 30 people putting up 10k each.

I would not sell it to "Jerry" for less than 1.5 - 2 Million+ now... and it would STILL be a great "Buy" for him.

IMHO as always....LOL

Peace!
Dan

BTW:

Babys.com was mention above... J & J own this and many other "Generic Domain Assets"...in a very well thought out and effective way...whoever is running the show for them gets AAA+ ... as they are these domains very well thought out marketing way.

Bill Hammond's picture
Bill Hammond - Jun 3, 2010

Just a reminder, folks, that Marketplace is distributed by American Public Media, not NPR.

FloName Domains's picture
FloName Domains - Jun 2, 2010

Domains are a bit of a rogue industry. Not enough people know enough about it to form an arguable opinion. Uninformed & otherwise ridiculous stories like this are what contribute to the reclusive & greedy reputation that domain investors are cloaked by. Without understanding the inner workings of the industry, how can NPR publish such a perfectly 1 sided & misleading article? Shame on ANY representative of ICANN for even affiliating themselves with this type of misrepresentation of an industry they are charged with PROTECTING!?! More proof that this "not for profit" entity can barely raise their snouts from the "fee" trough long enough to ask for more!

Jerry Russell's picture
Jerry Russell - Jun 2, 2010

Domains are a bit of a rogue industry. Not enough people know enough about it to form an arguable opinion. Uninformed & otherwise ridiculous stories like this are what contribute to the reclusive & greedy reputation that domain investors are cloaked by. Without understanding the inner workings of the industry, how can NPR publish such a perfectly 1 sided & misleading article? Shame on ANY representative of ICANN for even affiliating themselves with this type of misrepresentation of an industry they are charged with PROTECTING!?! More proof that this "not for profit" entity can barely raise their snouts from the "fee" trough long enough to ask for more!

Lucky Chucky's picture
Lucky Chucky - Jun 2, 2010

I think I figured out a little more of what they intend here. Let's say Coca Cola owns CocaCola.com . To protect its trademarked brand identity, its legal and IP staff must scour the registries for all 50(?) or so tld variants -- cocacola.net, .biz, .mobi, .me etc. and hope to lock them all up, because every tld variant not in Coca Cola's own hands is owned by a cut_and_dried cybersquatter (not so for soda.com, cola.com or maybe even coke.com -- all generics).
Now let's say ICANN lets Coke buy up it own .cocacola tld, and the browsers as well as Google come up with some sort of direct navigation protocol which makes .cocacola superior to .com and all the other TLDs, so that all Coca Cola queries only go to the .cocacola address …. I think that might be what's under discussion.

Lucky Chucky's picture
Lucky Chucky - Jun 2, 2010

I think I figured out a little more of what they intend here. Let's say Coca Cola owns CocaCola.com . To protect its trademarked brand identity, its legal and IP staff must scour the registries for all 50(?) or so tld variants -- cocacola.net, .biz, .mobi, .me etc. and hope to lock them all up, because every tld variant not in Coca Cola's own hands is owned by a cut_and_dried cybersquatter (not so for soda.com, cola.com or maybe even coke.com -- all generics).
Now let's say ICANN lets Coke buy up it own .cocacola tld, and the browsers as well as Google come up with some sort of direct navigation protocol which makes .cocacola superior to .com and all the other TLDs, so that all Coca Cola queries only go to the .cocacola address …. I think that might be what's under discussion.

Pages