Grab a cup of coffee. This will take about 10 minutes of your time.
Castello Cities Internet Network, Inc.
> Forgive me if I am long-winded here. I have some ideas that I want to share with you. Rick, Howard and I think alike and agree in how we see the Internet and domain names.
> I've been involved with the ICANN Business Constituency for many years and, like you, was against the new gTLDs when first proposed. I could go on with reasons why I felt they were not needed and how ICANN has proceeded in approving them, but we now need to take a fresh look for our industry at large.
> The new gTLDs are here, and I have resigned myself to them while seeing a silver-lining, which I believe is going to be very helpful to our industry.
> In my opinion, domain names are the key to individual freedom and survival for the future Internet. For a small entry fee, domain name ownership gives an individual the ability to own his or her place in the virtual world.
> When I was a recording artist, the one thing that would make or break my musical success was distribution. The ability to move music to the consumer was controlled by just a few companies. The Internet is likewise a global distribution network that everyone now has access to. Anyone can move an idea or product to any and all parts of the world. It is incredibly powerful and it allows single individuals to compete on a grand scale previously dominated by large telcos and corporations. It is my opinion that powerful Internet companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, and other "umbrella" corporations, have slowly shifted the perceptions of regular Internet users in regards to direct navigation in order to make domain names less crucial.
> The URL(Address Bar) is something we all own but is also held captive by those that produce browsers. In 1994, the natural impulse for me was to use the Address Bar to navigate wherever I wanted to. I found colleges were online, and I could simply type Columbia.edu in the Address Bar and their website would pop up in front of me. What power, what freedom, to steer my magic carpet ride wherever I wanted. It was still barren land and it needed individuals with a vision to help build it.
> Knowing that replicating the real word into the virtual world would take time, I saw the impatience of the public and businesses which resulted in the Dot Com Bubble. Since then, search engines have become very powerful because a user could always find a web page result while a web address did not always resolve to a working website.
> After twenty years, almost every brand or keyword now has a viable, trusted website. The problem is that Google and Facebook have become the main way people navigate to these brands. The people of the virtual world bought into services provided by these walled gardens, giving Google, Facebook, and now the U.S. government, much more control of our navigation and information. I see a monopoly that in the past would have been regulated or broken up. I see what appears to be an alliance between the government and these companies that is benefiting them and in turn, controlling the web community. I believe this upends the scales of democracy.
> What I've noticed:
> For many years, Apple's Safari browser directly defaulted to the dot com when someone typed a keyword into its address bar. Now, after Steve Jobs has passed on, Apple no longer directs keywords to dot com, and those same keywords redirect to search results and advertisers. Steve Jobs understood the opportunity that domain names offered everyone. At one point in the past few years, Google nearly removed the address bar entirely in their Chrome browser in favor of their search bar. They even asked ICANN to consider resolving DNS to just "keywords" (which would have rendered gTLDs unnecessary!). Thankfully, ICANN turned them down, saying it would break the DNS(Domain Name System). Instead, Google moved its search bar right next to the address bar, and ultimately took control of the Address Bar. Google was changing the way people used the Internet. Much like CompuServe and Prodigy in the 80s, the Internet is reverting to a series of "intranets" that are owned by large corporations. Individual freedoms and inherent rights are being trampled on. Where are the leaders "for the people" in the virtual world to bring balance? What now are WE to do?
> Domain names empower people. We could say domain names ARE people; they are that important. Everyone should have the opportunity to own a domain name and be unfettered in how they use it. Peer-to-peer (P2P) is liberty, but domain names now need protection from those entities which are diminishing their influence. The domain industry and the ICA(Internet Commerce Association) have a unique opportunity to take this plight and forge a positive result.
> Along with all of the ccTLDs, the new gTLDs make the domain name pyramid much bigger, which gives the domain industry a greater virtual signature. Everyone who promotes the domain industry is an "asset. The new gTLD registries will likely spend millions of dollars to make the public aware of the importance of domain names. They will be doing the heavy lifting, and the more the public talks about domain names, the better the balance between individual users and powerful corporations. We can coalesce to work together.
> I've suggested to the board of ICA an agreement to the "Understanding of Personal Empowerment" that I believe companies like Apple, Google and Facebook could agree with. It is in their best interests to show that they are helping domain names (i.e. individuals) and not trying to reduce their influence. Power from domain names IS power to the people. The timing is right for the domain industry and the ICA to work together to preserve direct navigation.
> If we can't agree on this protection, then I believe ICA should lobby Congress to put in place regulations that will protect domain name owners. We need numbers; those numbers are also voters. In the future, everyone will need a domain name or virtual place of residence. What we do now will help the future users of the Internet find greater mobility and advancement.
> Best wishes,
> Michael Castello
Pigeon shit peddlers unite? :)
No really, I’m with ya’ :)
Homero A. Gonzalez
100% on board.
I will propound a more detailed response later.
I DON’T agree with this idea. I don’t think the new gTLD pushers mean well for the domain industry; they can never be accepted into the larger ‘domaining’ profession, as we understand the term to mean. This group of people hate the ‘domainer’ more than anything else.
Two wrongs do not make a right.
We have to be steadfast in our effort to shine the light on both wrongs. These two problems compliment each other. The co-option of the internet is not unrelated to the new gTLD scheme.
The new gTLD scheme is so wrong that it cannot be saved. It’s unworkable; it’s wrong. It should be allowed to fail.
I will be responding in full later. I’m against the idea.
A new domain organization should be considered; I don’t like, or support any of the organizations heretofore.
Monopoly or Democracy? by Ted Turner May 30, 2003 by Washington Post. (http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0530-08.htm) / Justice Hugo Black wrote in a 1945 opinion ” The First Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public.
I will NOT propound a more detailed response later.
The guys we see front, and center and are deeply rooted in the industry and know it the best get very little day it what develops. The ones who are late to the industry, and are trying to exploit it, and pimp it out for a quick buck seem to get all the exposure, and control… What gives?
I read this, I get the big picture. But am missing the bullet points. Can Rick or Michael summarize in 5 or less bullet points? (With 100 words or less) What are the most important takeaways here of what is going to be accomplished? I think this would be extremely important in a next revision!!! And to help people understand what is going to be achieved.
stop wasting your fucking time and energy…you guys can’t do shit…google, facebook, and apple are in control now…jump on board or move the fuck out of the way
anunt, The world don’t need more resignated losers like you.
So you want to regulate the visibility of the domain name in the address bar, and how browsers interpret the addresses? Is that what this letter is about?
It funny when I see domainers trying to fight guys from Google, facebook
Wake up!! Those guys from the corporations are very intelligent.
Unfortunately, I cannot say the same about most domainers.
Freedom, that is the main point in my opinion.
Crazy. You are crazy.
Big G is here to stay. No one really cares about domain names. Spend that money on your education. Get a degree. One of my professors once said: They can take your car, they can take your home, they can steal your money but they can’t ever take your degrees away. Even in a divorce you take that degree with you. Stop whining and spend your money on something tangible. That’s all.
The .com extension will benefit from direct navigation protections. The other extensions will not benefit so much, since they receive negligible direct navigation. Domain investors financially supported the birth of the Internet, and now they are financially supporting the expansion of the Internet. I think it is safe to say that most of the new gTLD registrations are not end users.
Revenue from parking doesn’t cover the cost of most renewals. Websites like Facebook and Tumblr offer platforms where businesses can build a quick webpage that they believe provides their business with a sufficient Internet presence. And many businesses simply don’t see the need for a domain name or a company website. There are still many great .com domain names sitting idle with parked pages.
What I believe the industry needs is an organization like the American Marketing Association or the American Medical Association that establishes guidelines for the industry and promotes the domain name industry. One of the essential functions would be to demonstrate to SMBs and large enterprises the value of using more than one domain name to augment existing marketing channels. Such an organization would give everyone in the domain name industry a level playing field. I know we have Traffic, Domain Fest, NamesCon, etc., but nothing in the industry compares to an organization like the American Marketing Association. The American Marketing Association operates independently of the FTC, demonstrating that such an organization could operate and function independently of ICANN.
I agree 100%. I couldn’t say it better than that. Except to add that RESPECT is the one essential ingredient in any relationship. Love is good, but I can do without it.
Domainers must henceforth demand some respect from anybody they deal with; be it Registries, Godaddy, Sedo, Google, NameJet, SnapNames, drop catchers, Hosting Companies, Twitter, Facebook…most of them have a conflict of interest, so they all can’t continue treading on us, and disrespecting us; it appears that each one of these are bent on cutting us off of the food chain, and it is us that have been putting up with their bullshit. It’s time to spark, and demand a little goddamn respect.
We need a bottoms up association, with minimal conflict of interest built-in.
That 100% agreement was for Patrick Hipskind’s comment, which leaves 0% for the post itself.
Finally, a message that is thoughtfully drafted. I agree 100% with the message. But whether I agree or disagree really doesn’t matter. Change is the only constant. The new gTLDs bring creativity and self-expression to the masses.
I remember when AOL was the Internet. Now people laugh when I give them an AOL email address. In 20 years, the same thing will happen when companies and/or individuals use a .com web address.
My 2 cents. “The new gTLD registries will likely spend millions of dollars to make the public aware of the importance of domain names. They will be doing the heavy lifting, and the more the public talks about domain names, the …” more valuable all domain names will be. I believe that really big companies are going to spend unprecedented money getting consumers to think about domain names and new gTLDs. For those who think the highest domain name sales are still undervalued, this is potentially the shift that domainers have been waiting for. Companies spend 10s of millions or more on all kinds of dumb-ass advertising and marketing. yet they barely pay attention to domain names and even websites on a per dollar basis. Many of these same companies rely heavily on the web for revenue, without fully recognizing the value of domain names. Perhaps we are just seeing the beginning of the domaining end-user market. Sure there are more choices. But maybe there will also be more end-user demand. Sometimes a touch of anarchy reveals unexpected results.
I agree there must be a discussion about these new tech czars. However, smaller domain investors must be represented as much the larger ones. It has been suggested in the past that small investors should not have an equal footing in certain organizations because their smaller investments represent a lesser interest in the industry, at large. This is not true. At least not for me.
Not all of the smaller domain investors are so situated because they’re fly-by-nighters or because they’re hobby players. Many, like myself, start small because of a lack of resources to jump in big. That doesn’t mean our interests should be overshadowed by other players or that we should be told we can support organizations, but not actually join them, like the ICA. That is part of what I have found so offensive about the ICA’s membership thresholds. I have tried to address the issue with other domain investors, particularly Nat Cohen. For whatever reason, my argument just was not being understood. To his credit, Nat asked me to articulate my concerns in written form, but after a couple of lengthy discussions, in person and on the phone, I just felt exhausted with repeating myself in print. I suppose I have just done that, though. Perhaps should share this link with him, then?
I have grown slowly, but I have grown, and my interests in domain investment are just as valid, whether I hand-register a domain for $10 or buy one on the aftermarket for $13,000, which I did recently. Thank goodness Michael speaks to that issue, himself, when he mentions a domain owner who may have one or 1,000 names. I have a few hundred, and I’ve been careful to not tread on trademarks. When I do, either by not thinking clearly in my exuberance or when I see things from newer or refreshed perspectives, I let the names drop. But I also know that capitalism works best when there is an open race to be first with an idea, then to make that idea materialize as a useful commodity, utility or plaything.
That being said, I know – we were told by Congressman Cliff Stearns at the 2010 South Beach T.R.A.F.F.I.C. – there must be a lobbying effort of some kind that represents domain investors’ interests on Capitol Hill, and that of domain developers, too. I am both an investor and an end user. There are many in the domain space that fit that description, I’m sure. I think Rick is right, that we need to set aside whatever enmity or misgivings we have had or presently have. A dialogue must be started, and a consensus on a course of action must be achieved.
I am looking forward to the Las Vegas show, even more so, for this reason. Hopefully, we will find ourselves engaged in sound debate, arriving at cogent solutions. At the very least, I hope we find agreement on an incipient measure or set of measures we can take to prevent would-be technical oligarchs from crushing our dreams and obliterating years – in some cases it is decades – of hard work and investment.
I just checked IE, Firefox, and Chrome browsers on my PC. They still give me the URL bar to enter a domain name and visit a website directly when I choose to do so, in addition to the choice of staying within Facebook and other walled gardens. Is there any sign that this freedom of choice will be taken away from us soon?
I respect the good intentions of Michael, Howard and Rick, however I think you are making a mistake. Direct navigation in a browser is not the critical problem you seem to think it is http://www.expvc.com/2014/05/new-gtld-domain-names-google-search-rank.html However the US government DOES need to make clear that it will continue, permanently, to assert legal jurisdiction and approval authority over the registry contracts for .com, .net, and .org. Thus far, NTIA has only indicated continuing authority for .mil, .gov, and .edu. after the IANA transition. Millions of businesses, globally, have invested billions of dollars registering and developing dot com domain names based on having US legal jurisdiction and US government approval of the .com registry contract. These are the Legacy Domains, the “gold” of the internet. If we do not get this, expect registry and registrar price gouging for all .com domain renewals (such as is already happening in some new gTLDs) after November 30, 2018. As for the other issues raised in the comments above, I agree with Domenclature.
Interessanter Artikel zu den Bereich "Wetten" - Seite 50
When typing in a domain name it now auto-completes. If you allow this auto-complete to happen, it doesn’t take you to that page, but to a search result page where other similar results may rank higher. Try ‘logmein123.com’ as an example.
Let me bring everyone up to speed.
Michael’s letter provoked an all encompassing debate about direction, tone and content among a select group. What is posted is a revised original letter. There are now updated versions and more of a “Declaration”. But we are a long ways from agreement on how to proceed and what to include.
I have not weighed in much other that the need to get this thing going. I think keeping it between the 90 people selected was fine when we did not know if there would be interest or not. However there is clear interest and so everyone should be involved in this process and not just the 90 that I sent this out to. I will post my personal views next.
This is my view. I think there should be no distinction between any domain names. gtld etc. They are all Domain Names and that attracts a wider audience because domain owners are throughout the world and 99% are not domainers. But we have something in common and that is what we need to focus on imo.
The domain name has become one of the single greatest economic equalizers the world has ever known. For the cost of a lunch any entrepreneur, business owner or housewife can launch a business that is world wide. Compare that to the days of high rent and the huge cost of building. Plus the premium you would have to pay to be downtown or the mall. Today your idea has the ability to compete with the biggest in the world and on the same level platform but at a much reduced cost. But if certain companies have their way, you will lose that ability and this document is about protecting that right.
Our goal is to preserve the millions of domain owners ability to compete with the likes of Google, Facebook, Apple, Walmart and others. Your freedom can hurt their bottom line. Your free speech can be a threat.
Some abusers are using the trademark law in a distorted way to steal your valuable assets and get it rubber stamped by the governing body. There is also growing effort to squash that ability by Reverse Hijacking your domain name and your dream of financial freedom with it by spending thousands of dollars to defend your $10 name. They are also spending thousands of dollars to get your domain name. Why?
New rules will make these hijacking attempts easier and more common. Companies can use corrupt means to steal your domain and thus your business no matter how long you have operated them. These unscrupulous lawyers, companies and individuals will not stop unless you react. If the rules and laws change, anyone reading this that owns a domain name or intends to can be the victim of what is referred to as “Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.”
Companies like Procter and Gamble and Jaguar have been convicted of such things already. A stain not even Clorox can remove.
These and many other issues affect every single business or person with a presence on the web with a domain name. A domain, just like land is a generational asset. It needs protecting because those assets may be your livelihood.
And here is Michael Gilmour’s suggestion that I also support 100%
– Freedom to CHOOSE
o I can buy where I want, when I want, from whom I want
– Freedom to be HEARD
o I can say what I want and have a blog with an address to say it. My own personal soapbox.
– Freedom to GO WHERE I WANT
o I can explore where I want and learn about what I want when I want
– Freedom to BE WHO I WANT TO BE
o My business can be what it wants to be and can evolve to anything I decide it to be.
o Tackle the UDRP process in this one.
Freedom to have my domain name assets safe from predators whether criminal predator or one that abuses the process
Gilmour’s bullet points are a great way to start defining the mission of this endeavor. :)
RESPONSE TO RICK’S VIEW
“This is my view. I think there should be no distinction between any domain names. gtld etc. They are all Domain Names and that attracts a wider audience because domain owners are throughout the world and 99% are not domainers”. – Schwartz
I should begin by saying that you are a model Domain Investor, a visionary, perhaps even a prophet! Not in the mold of Moses, sacerdotal, ecclesiastical sense, but definitely in domain names, and possibly extending into business life itself.
However, I think you should look at the statements and actions of the new Registries, and reconsider. There too many new gTLDs. And their operators do not want what we want. So, how can you possibly bring these people into alliance with Registrants under one umbrella? With a common goal?
These people believe that we are dumb.
You have spent over a year elucidating the scheme, explain with precision how terrible the gTLD idea is, illuminating the landscape with great ideas, shedding light on the way forward, clarifying the distinction between us and them; how can you all of a sudden, pivot?
I am saddened, and disappointed. Oil and water cannot mix.
What you are talking about is too broad a coalition. On top of that, the goal itself is a small ball.
In light of your post, I have, since yesterday taken down my domain resell and started restructuring, so I’m extremely busy today to write what is on my mind, but you will hear from me soon.
The domain investment business is threatened and bedeviled 4 categories:
2. Big Registrars drop catching domain names
3. New gTLDs
4. Cabal of Big Domain Market places
It appears that the solution you have in mind is to continue formenting a small number of top investors selling names, the domain bloggers reporting them, and the little guy, and the newbie constantly wasting their money buying from these people, without an opportunity to sell their names. You actually want to go into alliance with people (Registries) selling Domain Registries in 3 to 4 figures, with corresponding renewals to domainers? God Forbid!
@ John Poole said:
Domains will keep their place as more connected activity shifts to apps and deep links between apps, bypassing the mobile browser. Google has its knickers in a twist over its declining place in mobile search, and is trying to emulate an app more than desktop search.
Facebook’s AppLinks: taking mobile browsers out of the equation
Facebook is developing tech to squash the Google mobile browser. App to app communication is going to bypass urls.
Very little traditional browsing is done via mobile as it is. The only loss to traditional urls is as mobile replaces desktop, which is a trend.
It gets back to, when desktop browsing was venue for discovering the internet, urls were more important. URLs still ARE important on the desktop!
Is Michael Castello nostalgic for traditional internet browsing, why he makes a case? There is no stopping technology. You have to accept the trend toward smartphone use, which leaves out the desktop browsing of the past, imo.
Its all about ‘net neutrality’ suggest ICA team up with other non domainers and link in with them. It goes beyond simple URL resolution and into overall control of information and content as well as cost of access.
Net neutrality tries to ensure the same basis as the net was originally set up for rather than corporates trying to gain control for profit.
ICANN for instance must have articles of association a ‘mission statement’ etc, and I am sure corporates trying to control the net should be against that criteria. I do think though that ICANN has gone against this concept with these new gTLDs where it exploits its privilege for monetary return under the guise of putting it to a greater good.
Need to have representation within ICANN and put forward motions to strengthen net neutrality in line with growing threats.
This is obviously in response to Chrome 36 and origin chip.
You can use buzz words like “freedom” and “economic empowerment” but its a pretext to cover for what is really your own self interests. Nobody cares about the interests of ‘domainers’ so its up to you to mind your own store.
The good news is, most of the domaining hot-shots of the 1990’s are now pretty old and only getting older. You probably won’t even be around to see your own obsolescence, so at least there’s that. You’ve had a good run. Maybe your heirs can sell off your portfolios for enough to buy a Civic.
Re: your “heirs can sell off your portfolio and buy a civic” comment – Nice :)
Develop a decent cross-platform web browser that focuses on the user (security, transparency etc) rather than the needs of the content deliverers/data whores.
This could be a fork of (say) webkit, with a list of requirements that must be maintained (such as no diversion of URL bar to search results). A configurable UI that allows the user to make it look similar to any popular browser would be helpful.
Members of domain rights organisations would be required to present a download button on their websites/parked pages for any visitor not running that browser already.
Registrants will never have proper representation within ICANN. Not unless a government with nads insists on it. The IP constituency would not allow it.
Yes, what are the goals, and what are the specific actions? I heed the call to urgency, but I don’t see the promised land or the way to get there.
A whole bunch of people said the same thing about AOL in 1998.
Please refrain from using the term “dot-com-bubble.” It focuses the bubble on the domain name, when in fact the bubble was in disreputable companies abusing the .com suffix or the e- prefix.
We should stick to the terms e-bubble or internet bubble, or something else. Put the focus off the domains, and off the .com TLD and back onto shoddy companies.
This battle may already be lost, but it’s not worth reinforcing.
AOL, Google and Apple are “Walled Gardens” . The train left the station years ago. They filter and manipulate Internet search results to keep you in the garden.
Firefox still committed to open Internet.
I forgot the biggest walled garden of them all… Face Book. No domain names needed there. The Internet has changed and domain names still have a place. It is just everybody is in motion right now and it is hard to pin down. All the new tld’s….. Jeez I am getting dizzy just thinking about it.
I am speaking of the browsers owned by those companies.. Google Chrome and Apple Safari. No sure what AOL is doing now and no time to check on it. AOL was first walled garden so i am sure they are on to something.
I think google is being more helpful to end user . Suppose I buy a domain http://www.auctioncell.com and it has nothing to do with any kind of auction , my visit to this site is waste !!
Duane J. Higgins (@cybrands)
Here are two more of my articles regarding the importance of domain names in our society:
Thank you for letting me post these.
We can fund a documentary showing how Google has destroyed the freedom of the internet. Move the grass roots Google has so diabolically manipulated towards what they actually deserve. It will hit them where it hurts.
The internet is supposed to be something that, elevates all humanity with access to other viewpoints and peoples. Or education. Or any number of higher and loftier goals. The internet should be free to all.
We do not have that, what we DO have is a problem that is defined in a single word : Google. The problem is not our URLS, it is this one company. And what it is doing needs to stop.
Something is broken when a single company can put more mom-and-pops out of business with the flip of a switch than 10,000 Walmarts ever could have.
Google says it promotes ‘brand’, but what appears in the place of these very specific stores are large gas giants that happen to offer that keyword item as an ancillary afterthought. Do we believe a person or company by what they say or what they do? ‘Brand’ or ‘Large Adwords Advertisers’?
For decades Google has been howling about the holy ‘user experience’ and now it presents this for-profit spam as what search should be. I could not agree less.
If a man can control who goes in and out of a building, and no one stops this man, that man owns that building. Does not matter what is on the deed. That man is Google and the building is the internet itself.
There are too many otherwise very intelligent people, including here, that just accept the status quo. That that is defeat.
There are three steps to a transformational idea. The first is that it is questioned, the second that it is violently opposed and the third is that it is accepted as self-evident.
So here is the transformational idea : Google is as much an illegal monopoly as an old-time railroad baron’s railroads. Take search and break it up by whatever means necessary.
Let the violent opposition commence….
I agree and support you 150%
Richard St Cyr
That was an excellent letter from Michael. We have to bond together and maybe start a company like the Small Business Association a dues paying organization that would have a board that would look after the interests of domain investors, and website developers, both big and small.
Google and FB and other big players, may be huge but collectively we are bigger, THEY NEED US.
I certainly would be interested in joining such an organization !!!
Richard St Cyr
I’ve heard this so many times it amazes me ppl think this has even a slight possibility of happening. An app dominated internet will never happen. Apps are niche specific and that is their one and only strength. They will never be one size fits all. For all facebook’s momentum, most non-techies I know don’t even have the FB app on their phone, don’t even know about it. They use FB almost 100% through their phone on their… wait for it… mobile web browser! Gasp! I know, but it’s true. Get outside your tech circles and ask real ppl how they use social. You’ll be surprised.
My reply above was to Louise.. Rick your blog comments work weird.
The ccTLDs serve the (localized) purposes.
The new gTLDs make the domain name pyramid much bigger BUT less steady.
Their addition does not give the domain industry a greater virtual signature.
It actually diminishes the importance of the domain name as a valuable asset, creates confusion amongst the public, and demonstrates that everybody with some spare cash can add new gTLDs with whatever funny/idiotic names.
Is this how the future domain names realms should look?
Thanks for your thoughtful comment and for alerting me to it.
I think there is a misconception about the ICA that it is an exclusive club open only to “big” domain investors who can afford the $1000 Supporter level contribution.
As Rick Schwartz has pointed out repeatedly, the ICA offers no tangible benefits.
The ICA currently exists primarily to pay Phil Corwin to lobby on behalf of the domain industry. The ICA has a contract with Phil. The ICA collects contributions and uses them to pay Phil’s retainer and expenses. That’s pretty much it.
Anyone can contribute to this effort. There is no minimum dollar threshold.
We have several contributors who have contributed at around the $100 level. The only thing we offer to supporters at the $1000 level is to belong to a distribution email list.
That threshold is somewhat arbitrary. But because you are added to an email list once you contribute $1000, does not mean that the ICA only welcomes support from people who are able to contribute $1000 or more.
The ICA is a collective effort made by people who care enough about the future of this industry and their business to open their wallets and contribute to shared endeavor. The domain business, more than most businesses, is built on shaky ground and is vulnerable to changes in policy.
Our fate is controlled by ICANN. We don’t even own unrestricted rights to our own domains. Our continued right to own our domains is conditional on our having registered and used them in “good faith”.
Who determines what is “good faith”? Often the person deciding the fate of your domain is an active trademark attorney who spends his days writing C&D letters and filing UDRP complaints trying to seize domains on behalf of his trademark owning clients.
The entire system is deeply flawed and biased against domain investors. Groups who are hostile to domain investors are active at ICANN trying to change policies to make it easier to seize domains held by domain investors.
It would be foolish for the domain industry to stick our heads in the sand and pretend that by doing nothing, we’ll be able to carry on business as usual.
Those who care about making sure the domain industry has a successful future are contributing to the ICA. Everyone is welcome to join in the effort.
Duane J. Higgins (@cybrands)
I tried to post these before. Not sure if you squashed them or they didnt go through. These are all regarding domain name relevance.
Lol it’s sad but true!
First, appreciate Rick for the comeback after a long break. I 100% agree with the idea, but do not know better , how to proceed on, than all gurus here. As Rick said, we are the victims of domain hijackings by some fake lawyers, corp. If a part of the TM name discovered in the domain, and if they(TM Co.) like that domain, then they will sure come up with a TM notice spoiling many nights’ sleep. So I let it drop. example, If I register the name ‘bebay.com ‘ The ebay will come back with a notice that it is infringing their TM rights after breaking the domain into: “b ebay” . Why? Like that many domains I lost & later found that it’s working fine with another user. What is the ruling of TM? In that case, for domaining we cannot use the English dictionary at all.!!
I’m 100% on board with Michael Castello and Rick.
And that’s one of the reasons why I use Firefox, and not Chrome or Safari.
You have my full support.
Just two more Rick. Probably the most important of what I have written recently:
These so called ‘walled gardens’ are what I’d always said was the biggest threat to domain names. Effectively getting people onto private networks.
Personally I doubt much if anything will ever change from what exists now, simply because there is such a thing as ‘intellectual property’ and when companies start messing around with diversion of consumers to anything other than their intended destination then they can be sure to be spanked in court.
Biggest issue on the net is that half baked geeks than know a thing or two about technology dont understand the wider ramifications of commercial and business law.
Hopefully sooner or later these large internet tech companies will realise that the way to real and sustainable profits is by providing real goods and services than enhance user experience rather than trying to steal others legitimate trade.
Domain names vanishing will NEVER happen. Things will get evolved and complex, but the disappearance of domains is just pure conjecture and comes from a lack of understanding of developing technology.
In all honesty, and to be completely frank, people are too dumb to understand anything else.
The Facebook App to App linking is emerging because they want to monetize direct ads to applications as well as making it easier to link from their own plugins directly to their own app.
Currently you can’t click a SHARE button on a website without being taken to Facebook mobile, and not their app. This is a barrier for integration for them, and they want to resolve that issue. They don’t want their mobile browser to be the default, they want their app to be the default and this is the whole reasoning behind this.
You can’t download every app for every site and then have it on your phone, it’s not practical and makes no sense.
Just because the phone has evolved into the mobile cell phone as we know it today, does not mean phone numbers can go away. The same principle works for domains. Phoen numbers have evolved, but in all, they remain the same.
Domains are only going to get longer and more complicated, which benefits SHORT .COM domains. Everyone knows .COM, and the shorter the better.
Domains have evolved into names different extensions, however the ones that the most popular today will always be popular; .COM, .NET, .ORG, .INFO.
The ONLY notable modern change to these names are ccTLDs.
It all has to do with marketing… if you are selling to the WORLD you use a .com, if you are selling to a local group you use a ccTLD or a localTLD.
I enjoy Ricks blog, I think there are some excellent tips on how to be a domainer in the current market; HOWEVER I think that this blog uses spin to influence the buying trends of domainers to favor established domainers.
The more junk domains out there, the more people will realize what the better ones are and will pay top prices for them. That is the motivation behind all of this; essentially to increase collateral damage when there is no demand for VANITY new gTLDs and the established short and dictionary word .COM’s will skyrocket in value.
Correct. The matter of the fact that domains value is around recognition and recollection (with .com also ‘trust’). Because thats the whole basis of domains, its easier to remember a naming convention than the underlying IP address.
So long as advertisers advertise then there will always be a need for domain names as a universal point of contact.
Telephone numbers will disappear long before domain names do. Because a domain name is easier to remember than a telephone number. Telephone numbers tried to get the naming convention of domains by having characters assigned to the numbers ABC = 1 etc.
Isn’t it the truth?
@J, You said, “An app dominated internet will never happen.” But, it is happening! Social (Facebook) is considered an app, and most mobile users spend time in an app environment. Plus, eMarketer released its startling report findings that online mobile is exceeding online desktop for the first time, this year.
This year, mobile will pull far ahead, to 2 hours 51 minutes, vs. 2 hours 12 minutes spent online on PCs. – See more at: http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Mobile-Continues-Steal-Share-of-US-Adults-Daily-Time-Spent-with-Media/1010782#sthash.noTWzAmx.dpuf
Here is another article:
Google Inc: Preparing for the Death of Search
Yes, apps and Smartphones are what people are currently using. They are episodic and I see them more as tools for this period. The problem arises in the very near future and will become more obvious. Right now people use the internet to find information. The future will be more of a virtual world where many of us will spend more of our time within it as technology advances and offers us more virtual mobility. Today’s youth are rewiring themselves to grow into it. You should see how much time they are spending and the personas they are creating in the gaming world now.
Ask most people “How can I find you on the internet”. They would give you a FB, Twitter or email address, most could never personalize an app nor afford one. How do corporations on TV market for audiences to find them? Can they advertise an app? How would they brand that? “Find our app at Apple, Andriod, Facebook, Google” or simply; “download our app at Staples.com”.
As the internet grows and becomes more over-saturated, it will be almost impossible to find someone or even get an unpaid listing on the 1st page Google results without being a large paying advertiser. What happens to everyone else? How do you market yourselves or make a living in the virtual world without someone finding you P2P? These are things we should be thinking about now while we have an advantage. Domain names give us that option.
I could get anyone to find me at TGIF.com or Michael.me very easily because it’s a memorable name/brand. But if we keep losing control of “our” network and direct navigation, those names will no longer help us. That would truly be a great loss for Personal Empowerment. The more power we give these “walled gardens” the more it will cost us later.
The reason you’ve lost control (note: past tense. It’s already happened) of “direct navigation” is because a generation of internet users finally grew up to realize that the domain name rarely- if ever- corresponds to what they’re actually looking for.
Owning TGIF.com is impressive to ‘domainers’ by ‘domainer’ metrics but absolutely nobody else cares, and why should they? I’d invite everyone to navigate to TGIF right now and become an engaged user. You can’t… because the only thing there is garbage… and that’s precisely what domainers have been serving up on their domains for going on two decades now. The reason you ‘lost control’ of direct navigation is because domains aren’t ‘virtual real estate’. They’re more like invitations to a party. For a decade plus, everyone kept showing up because of the invitation, but there was nothing there… so they don’t anymore. You obsolesced yourselves.
I don’t type anything in anymore because there might be a domainer or worse, someone who puts landing pages with viruses on them. One mis-stroke and whambalooza, I might get a virus! Especially on typos close to things like banks. My local bank website has every variety of typos registered and even fake looking pages to get data and passwords. Someone didn’t think through protecting the entire domain parking space from these things and now no one wants to type it into the browser for fear of getting teen Asian porn all over their computer
Right On – Power to the People
Yeah, I don’t get what they are saying either.
Sorry Rick, just don’t get it.
I am on board! Couldn’t agree more!
I agree with this sentiment. Parking domains has made some people rich and the new proposal is going to squash what’s left of this meal ticket in whatever browsers this is applied to, that is really what this is about. I would think a greater cause about “freedom” is net neutrality and the internet fast lane that the ISPs are creating that could harm startups and site owners that get influxes of large traffic but can’t afford to pay the ISPs.
It is really bizarre how many times I see someone type into Google a web address and then click on the web address in the search results instead of just typing that web address into the navigation bar in the first place.
Everyone is out for themselves, at least 99% of people, and the 1% who stand for something more, well none of them are on this page. Nothing wrong with that, it is capitalism, but don’t masquerade it as concern for the greater good.
The King Is Back!
Welcome back, King!
Mr. Castello, You are a genius!
Thanks God the doctors were wrong…long time ago…
Good morning Boys and Girls. Captain Obvious here!
I agree that the gtlds are pathetically dumb.
I agree that they never should have been introduced.
I agree that they will fail, just like .mobi, .travel, .museum and ,coop.
I agree that they are, overall, priced too waay high with high annual renewals.
I agree that very few businesses will want one.
I agree that very few will actually publish to one.
I agree that the public will shun then.
I agree that consumers will accidentally type .com at the end.
I agree that many of the gtld’s, if not all, will go belly up.
I agree that this conversation I silly and that something needs to be done, but that something is nothing. Just let them all dies peacefully. In a few months, they won’t be bothering you anymore.
@ Michael Castello said: “The more power we give these “walled gardens” the more it will cost us later.”
Michael Castello’s thoughts echoes visionary Jonathan Zittrain, who is an American professor of Internet law at Harvard Law School:
“The very thing that makes the Internet great–its “generative” or innovative nature–is being locked down in a new wave of
closed devices like the iPhone, Xbox, TiVo and the OnStar system.”
observed already in 2008, in Jonathan Zittrain’s book, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It:
“An iPhone can only be changed by Steve Jobs or soon, with the software development kit, by programmers that he personally approves that go through his iPhone apps store. Or whimsical applications that run on the Facebook platform or the new Google apps. These are controllable by their vendors in ways that Bill Gates never dreamed of controlling Windows applications.”
Ref: Zittrain: Is Apple’s iPhone Killing the Internet?
This is what Michael Castello seems to be warning us!
The current news headlines blare:
Google Chrome flirts with killing URLs
Google Kills URLs In Chrome Beta Channel
Google says goodbye to URLs in new Chrome Canary update
which sound even more final!
@ asd said, “the domain name rarely- if ever- corresponds to what they’re actually looking for.” That is true. It’s safer to search it and select a website from a list, than to attempt to type it cleanly and have the site come up. Discover the internet via a url bar, by GUESSING the brand? Going through Google is safer . . .
Also, The ORIGIN CHIP might be the BEST THING TO HAPPEN to domain names ever! Why? Because it promotes the EASY-TO-REMEMBER root domain name, with extension.
Instead of this phishing site:
The ORIGIN CHIP is like a marquee announcing the ROOT DOMAIN NAME IN LIGHTS!!!
Therefore, the domain industry SHOULD BE THANKING GOOGLE FOR ITS INNOVATION
to block bad actors, and HIGHLIGHT THE BRAND IN ITS ROOT DOMAIN NAME, INCLUDING EXTENSION!!!
Dear King, when do you collect the domain names for real-time auction?
Thank You. Best regards, Neil
I think all the new gtld’s will be a boon for dotcom in the long run after all the confusion proves that dotcom is still the default extension that serious people prefer whether they are a site owner or someone looking for a site. I have no doubt that most of the gtld’s will fail while the few survivors will be mediocre at best. As for apps, the internet is IP based so for an app to work, you first need an IP address in the form of either a domain or a string of numbers (or URL) to get to a site. So domains and IP numbers are here to stay. Might as well be an easy to remember, easy to spell dotcom if you are really serious about being on the net. That way, you won’t need to depend on apps or search engines to get traffic since search and app wars are becoming a costly reality and will get much worse in the future. Build a brand is the best way to go in the long run.The so called walled gardens will always crumble since being confined to one area works against human nature, especially in something as vast and open as the internet!
BTW Rick, Happy Birthday you old fart! Don’t take offence, I’m older than you! Glad to see that you are posting again!
All due respect, I had to research to understand what Mr. Castello is saying, and I found the interview with Jonathan Zittrain and a link to his book site: http://futureoftheinternet.org .So, I agree with that part, but the headlines about Google doing away with the url are WRONG! According to the images – because I have IE, not Chrome – the domain minus the annoying “http : //” and the folders and names to the right of the extension are gone, leaving the pure domain and extension in a, “tab,” slot, called, an ORIGIN CHIP, which looks to me like it acts like a marquee! The ORIGIN CHIP puts the spotlight on the domain, making it more memorable than a complete url, and taking away the confusion of a sub-domain . . . What ICANN should have done, security-wise, Google has done with this new feature.
The chip can be clicked to display the entire url, so I’m happy!
For the regular person, it enhances the brand.
Therefore, my opinion is: the url or domain is not going ANYWHERE, and this turn of Google Chrome is good for domain names.
It is good for discussion to hear another opinion. This one is not a battle you want to fight. There are other battles to fight. This one, you can AGREE with Google and find a common ground with Google and Safari, here, imo.
@ Rick Schwartz said: “Our goal is to preserve the millions of domain owners ability to compete with the likes of Google, Facebook, Apple, Walmart and others. Your freedom can hurt their bottom line. Your free speech can be a threat.”
The ultimate goal of the forces trying to separate you from your dot coms is to raise the renewal fees on the dot coms. Some Registrars are experimenting with premium renewals on dot com! 2-3 figures doesn’t raise eyebrows. Who regulates the registries/registrars? Pay your taxes, so that government can do its job, is one way to contribute.
As far as search results, people are more and more turning to Facebook for discovery, and other social media, than the original way of search. It’s the trend. If there wasn’t an industry to take over zombie PCs, with lists of PCs for sale on the black market to unscrupulous agents to infect with malware, there wouldn’t be a case for the, “walled gardens,” of Facebook, Apple, and Android apps. PCs no longer safe. But the trend is toward mobile adoption and discovery of new enterprises via apps.
Marketing is fun! Most have twitter/g+/facebook accounts. There are opportunities to take advantage of social to enhance the brand, and get better search rankings. I try to register the exact match twitter on my hand regs of emerging domains, to enhance the brand. Michael Castello isn’t doing poorly with Nashville.com – it is page 1 of Google, on a mobile device and desktop. There are twitter/facebook/pinterest channels associated with the website. Going forward, Michael Castello needs to adapt the site to a responsive theme, and maybe create apps for the hotels and restaurants . . . Also, the channel brand should match the domain name – if Nashville isn’t available, how about Nashvilledotcom? Exactly 15 characters – the limit for twitter.
Mobile tech is a popular search, and my site MobileTech.tv appears at the top of page 2 on a keyword search – not too shabby! It doesn’t hurt that I have a twitter, which I brand, MobileTechTV, with a link to the site. All this helps the branding, helps raise the profile in Google.
Whew! I said alot. That is what I would teach, if I had a part on the stage at Traffic.
You will soon discover that Twitter is useless too. Try to calculate how much you gain, revenue or traffic-wise, you derive from there. All these selfish platforms, Twitter, Facebook, etc, they are one way streets; they scramble, and multiplex their links, So you pretty much get nothing from using them. You can post 1000 twitter comments, see how much revenue, or traffic you get from them.
It’s a wasted effort building up your twitter, Youtube, or Facebook.
Chip Van Wreck
I am nobody, with almost nothing to his name. That was 3 months ago. I now have over 3,000 domains that were purchased based on my business intel knowledge and Aspergerish observations. Thank you for being a voice. Before, I donated myself internationally with music 4 times, to be a voice. I just to like help people. I literally bought rice in China and the AUE and all top ten industries in India for less than a couple hundred bucks the other night. A free Google Translator and Godaddy coupons just helped me complete the international business degree I’ve sought for years, for free. I’m asking everyone with $8 to use the same tools and help a cause you support. I’m now own and am donating global assets in over 20 countries, native languages matching geographics, and numerical symbolism that I think can make a strong change for the people that are deserving. I let them tell me I was crazy while CNN waited 3 months to announce it. I’ve gone toe to toe with the VP of IP at NBC after I OFFERED to return their property and they wanted more. I never went to high school. I have more than I need, and still have no money in my pocket. If I can’t help people that deserve it because corporations need protection, I’ve woken up somewhere other than where I went to sleep. II will no longer except poor examples of humanity from people that are more than capable. Thank you, sir. Sorry for venting.
Chip Van Wreck
Pardon all typos an grammar. It happens when I have a chance to speak.
And who are you to judge?
Ah blog doesn’t auto reply. @adam7
@abolitrty (I can see how you don’t understand names)
I think you’ll find many domain investor’s are educated via the system, I for one have a degree, but one doesn’t need a degree to be successful in business.
You don’t care about domain names now as you have your sub facebook name etc. But once you further your education, you might want to start a business, or start a charity, or be an individual online, then your mind set might change?
I would like to add:
o the right to equal opportunity entrepreneurism free from control or restriction by commercial or political bodies.
In response to Michael’s and Rick’s posts I would like to say that I agree wholeheartedly. There should be no domain name restrictions. Reading these posts has gotten me into a quite philosophical, ethical, and moral tone.
The obvious problem at hand is absolute power corrupting absolutely. However, the true implications of the problem are more than vast. Having domain restrictions in place would not only censor our speech, but also our future ways of thinking and behaving (both personal and professional).
With that being said, it is actually the “little guy” or business that has created the foundation for domaining to be possible. If there had been no “little guy fnor business” creating such a need for domain names, there would be no need for domaining as a whole. In a 2010 NYT article, the estimate for “women with children” bloggers was at 3.9 million people. Mind you that is just “mom bloggers” and those are old numbers and just one genre of blogging.
For me, the problem is censorship, power, and control. The resolution comes with numbers.
So I throw it back to Mike and Rick and the crowd. Is it not the responsibility, both moral and ethical to dispense this knowledge to the masses to get their responses? Is there a need for an internet domain constitution? It seems there is a definite need for this information as well as its’ implications to be repackaged (dumbed down) into a viral video or posting to allow the masses to respond to the monsters?
You miss the main driver to the internet and thats commercial enterprises.
When I go to various trade shows there is only ONE piece of information I want to take away with me and thats the web address of the supplier. Not catalogues or anything. Just the www.
I have always seen domain names as best in field of wholesale selling generics. Everything else esp social media type stuff becomes more focused on marketing etc etc.
Hello Anunt, STFU.Club is open for you to register for 14.99. P.S. I’m not being sarcastic, Just being nice.
“Is Michael Castello nostalgic for traditional internet browsing, why he makes a case? There is no stopping technology. You have to accept the trend toward smartphone use, which leaves out the desktop browsing of the past, imo.”
@Joe makes intelligent arguments in his replies; (1) “You can’t download every app for every site and then have it on your phone, it’s not practical and makes no sense.”
I currently have my sites ‘Bookmarked’ their easy to find, apps ‘could’ be located this way?
Naturally, the APP is evolving, more site/blog owners are likely to provide apps for mobile users etc, DT usage is here to stay, nothing compares to using the net than using DT. Even though mobile usage is progressing, if the ‘avant garde’ Google deletes it’s browser for mobile, it then either, forces millions of site owners to adapt to create APPS and users to move over to YAHOO or a new opportunist mobile browser!
The domain name is here to stay, simply; a website requires an address and will benefit from an APP, the domain name is the individual’s or companies online identity.
Good to have you back Rick, I’m a backer.
Toronto Domainer Supports ICA’s Mission and Michael Castello’s Call To Action
[…] Rick Schwartz puts […]
@ Domenclature, in March 2011, I wrote
in my post:
Feed the Google Monster
Original text is irrisitible to Google’s search engine;
Duplicate text repels Google crawler.
Are you going to tweet 1000 news items in your own words? Try it!
1000 re-tweets won’t gain you anything.
But, it involves work, thinking. Who wants to think? You better think!
A link from a separate server, with original content that complements the content on your site, imparts authority to the site. That is SEO 101.
Okay, that was my free lesson for TRAFFIC developer class!
@ Howie Crosby said
it is true!
In developing countries where people still can’t afford or have the electricity/connections for DT at home, they own a mobile phone. Even if people don’t have indoor plumbing, and rely on a village pump for water, but they still own a phone, and it’s growing. They own a phone, and they’re going on Facebook. That is the trend.
Welcome back out from hibernation!
Okay, so this is the solution I propose: invest in me. Yes. I am too smart! One author suggests Facebook is at fault to break the web with its deep links:
Is Facebook Breaking The Web With App Links?
And I own it. Because of the fine training I received hanging around the blogs, I own:
We can control the space. That is what I have been taught: the one who owns the dot com, is the one who controls the space! Yippee!!
Google, and the new age companies want you to think that building a business, or making money is very difficult, therefore they set ridiculous standards, coupled with abracadabra, and such nonsense as SEO, and quality content, and some of the most insulting gibberish one can think of. Whereas, they make billions for doing nothing but indexing websites.
That’s not the way money is made.
You can’t make money, or build anything serious, by relying on the good graces of Google, or any of the modern companies.
In those days, if you partner with a billion dollar company, as an associate, or affiliate, a distributor, or a dealer, you are guaranteed a good revenue, and they didn’t change policy in mid-stream like the ones these days. SEO is bullshit. Google will always pull the rug under your feet once you think you’ve settled in, and gotten with the program. They will introduce Panda 100, or Shark, or whatever animal they can pull off their asses.
Take for example, ART, can you imagine Google deciding which ART is good for page one? That is unAmerican; you can’t judge Art content for everyone. But they do!
The funny thing is that Google has the worst website in the world. How can they then tell you to take off the speck in your eyes, when they’ve got a log in theirs?
Duplicate content? Have you seen how many duplicate contents there are on Google? Try it. Some searches have millions of duplicates. Talk about hypocrites!
To me, ICANN should administer SEARCH, not a private for profit corporation. Google should be banned from Search business. They are unfair.
Finally, on another issue I want to bring up here. ICANN should administer domain drops, it should NOT be handled by Registrars. As a matter of fact Registrars should be banned from selling aftermarket domain names. And definitely, ICANN should hide domain expiration dates from Registrars. Else, ICANN is complicit in their coon. The consumer is getting fleeced by aftermarket domain sales by Registrars and their drop catchers. Instead of releasing 100000000 extensions, ICANN should take care of the ones established prior to 2010, nd without these Registrars hoarding domain names, there is enough names for Earth, Mars, and Jupiter in those.
To buttress my points about ART above, I give you a Poem.
“Delight in Disorder” by Robert Herrick
A sweet disorder in the dress
Kindles in clothes a wantonness;
A lawn about the shoulders thrown
Into a fine distraction;
An erring lace, which here and there
Enthrals the crimson stomacher;
A cuff neglectful, and thereby
Ribands to flow confusedly;
A winning wave, deserving note,
In the tempestuous petticoat;
A careless shoe-string, in whose tie
I see a wild civility:
Do more bewitch me, than when art
Is too precise in every part.
“Delight in Disorder” advocates the notion that true beauty lies in artlessness. According to the poet, structured artifice detracts from the accessibility of genuine, natural beauty. A woman free of fastidious adornment is thus more captivating, just as art that is not “too precise in every part.”
These ideas are emphasized by the style Herrick employs in this poem. Though it is composed of fourteen lines, “Delight in Disorder” does not follow the strictness of the sonnet form. Rather, it includes near rhymes, such as “tie” and “civility,” placed against true rhymes, such as “art” and “part.” This imprecision underlines the poet’s interpretation of beauty.
Robert Herrick was an English poet and clergyman in the 17th century. Much of his stylistic inspiration stemmed from the poet Ben Jonson, in addition to classical Roman literature and late Elizabethan poems. He wrote over 2,500 poems, in both English and Latin, which touched upon the topics of love, the female body, spirituality, and philosophy.
“Delight in Disorder” was published in Herrick’s collection of poetry entitled Hesperides, in 1648.
Analysis by Shenandoah Lit.:
@ Domenclature, Google delivers local results for, “art” – I’m impressed! Those are machine-generated results, which almost seem human-culled in their usefulness. At least with a machine, it’s a level playing field! That is why I like my rank of mobileTechTV: http://www.google.com/search?q=mobile%20tech&start=10 But it WAS page 1, #10, but the last article was in October . . . At least you put your $$ where your mouth is, because you don’t have Google analytics! Why does the domain industry HAND OVER your private traffic data to Google? You have to let go! Nice poem and analysis!
Your growth has been phenomenal. You’ve been calling it like it is, without fear or favor lately. It’s very attractive. Keep it up.
Thanx for the commendation, @ Domenclature, but I AM scared! I’m not panicked, I’m just paranoid.
In return, here is a 2007 article, where Google’s Shuman Ghosemajumder slammed Click Forensic’s click fraud study:
Google Slams Click Forensics Click Fraud Study…Again
Yet, Google purchased Click Forensics, now renamed, Adometry, last week:
Google to Acquire Online Attribution Firm Adometry
Google is buying up all the fraud detection firms who would expose it! lol
Finally, someone says what I have been saying for years. I am not only on-board, sign me up as a trooper.
I will say that this issue is much harder to explain to the general public in a way they understand it. I have been trying for a long while without success.
A united front is a method to take this issue to the masses but with one caution…
You know that coming from domainers, they will slander the entire issue in the media.
What do we do about that beforehand ? Can we align ourselves with other groups?
@ Rick, It would be great if you would create a poll: Do you naviagate the web (A) by typing a url in the url bar (B) by typing a search term in the url bar (C) enter search term into Google and scan the results
and any other choices you can think of. Do YOU really type an address in the url bar that you think to be it, and NOT go through Google?
This morning I wanted to call Ralphs grocery, and accidentally typed ralphs.com into the url bar. Big mistake. I had to wait and wait and wait for the page to load. What I usually do, is type Ralphs long beach phone into a google search, and find the correct store. The phone is already in the search results. I don’t have to load the page.
So, what did I do wrong? I prefer to search within a known domain, using Google.com/search?q=site:domain.extension keyword – it’s loads faster!!!
The short answer as you know is -nothing you did was wrong but…
What kind of search do you do when the results you seek have political ramifications.
No matter how you answer that, take the second part of the question…
Should you have a choice and should you know the difference of those choices.
What will you do when you have no choice or you are ignorant to the facts?
We’re way past the civic. rotflmfao…. My heirs are banked up now!!… thanks .com
Thank you Michael, Rick & Howard. Thank God for people like you! I believe in Democracy and not Monopoly. I support this 100%. Domain name owners should be protected.
@ MAGOOgle, the facts are: typing in the domain name to explore the web is dangerous to load malware if you mistype the domain, or get it wrong . . . 2nd, it wastes time if you are not sure what the exact domain name is . . . Google and Bing are filters which let you view the choices before you select one. Google and Facebook made speed a priority of speed and offering results which are a likelier match to what the user wants. The benefit of a phone is its ability to serve local results!
Still, you may view or type in an exact url.
The issues this forum seem to want to address are much larger than the current news about leaving out the longtail address and http ; / / . . . they have to do with security of websites and the internet, to make typing in a url safe and a first choice for exploring the web. Nothing has been taken away from our precious domain names, yet, by Chrome or Safari.
Homero A. Gonzalez
@Louise: Do not assume that you are safe by not direct typing a domain name and going through Google or Bing or any third party… it may help, but it is not foolproof…Nothing has been taken away, from our precious domain names yet, I agree. But Boy! are they thinking about ways to do it, Yes! they are, and they are hoping people don’t notice or don’t protest. Here’s were we come in. We will notice, and we will protest if they do.
Homero A. Gonzalez
Sorry, I meant Here’s where we come in…
Your comments are example to why I applaud Rick and the gang for making a simple coherent message to fight for. Don’t veer off track and add complexities to the main issue.
There are other battles yet to fight for… Yes indeed… One at a time.
Perhaps you should re-read the original post… It is about the right for the capability of direct navigation from the user. Or at least a choice to have that. Lets not confuse the issue. Staying on point. It’s about having someone else decide if they were really looking for your website or not. You can never be herd on the internet if not found on the internet. Who decides that ? It’s a free speech issue. One worth fighting for.
I think this is great. As a former amater musician I know that distribution is king as well as content, and without fair distribution the internet is just as a bad as a record company set up. Which is why we need the URL bar protected. Another genus idea from Rick and Michael Castello. I forwarded this to some people at chrome. Thank’s.
Guest Post By Michael Castello On Google: “Block The Bullies”
[…] You can read about Michael Call To Action program here […]
Better Act Fast
Looks like the internet is being assaulted from multiple angles … lots of new holes in the dyke:
“FCC approves plan to allow for paid priority on Internet”;
Guest Post By Michael Castello On Google: “Block The Bullies” - Redomains
[…] You can read about Michael Call To Action program here […]
Nicely written article on theDomains, @ Micheal Castello! You said:
If you want to diminish Google’s power, why not disconnect from Google Analytics?
You people are giving it all away for free to Google! Turn off Google Analytics!
We Want U Back!
We Want U Back!
I hope everything is OK with You.
Best regards, Neil
The Future is About Leverage - Redomains
[…] You can read about Michael’s Call To Action effort […]
Chip Van Wreck
Extensions are just what they say they are. Extensions of people who live in digital representations. This to shall come to pass, gratefully.
Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)
Will This Domain Portfolio Owned By The Castello’s Be The 1st To Sell For Over $1 Billion? | TOP SEO WEBSITES DESIGN
[…] Read about Michael’s Call To Action effort […]
Will This Domain Portfolio Owned By The Castello’s Be The 1st To Sell For Over $1 Billion? - Redomains
[…] Read about Michael’s Call To Action effort […]
Will This Domain Portfolio Owned By The Castello’s Be The 1st To Sell For Over $1 Billion?
[…] Read about Michael’s Call To Action effort […]
Hey Rick, you once stated something to the effect of how good Adam Dicker has been of the domainer community. You should read this 60+ page thread currently at Namepros, if you haven’t already, then tell us if you still feel the same. Cool?
Rick, have you commented anywhere about the current controversy swirling around Adam Dicker? Have you seen the Namepros thread? Do you still think he’s been a plus for the industry?
Of greater concern (to me) is the GOP sponsored bill that will overturn the former Open Internet Act (now Net Neutrality l) in favor of “the Restoring Internet Freedom Act,” that will forbid the FCC from classifying internet service providers as Title II common carriers subject to regulations of the telecom industry.
Positioned as stopping the FCC from killing the internet, ISPs would gain the freedom to block and throttle websites and applications. Big Business would have faster, better access all around and everyone else will have worse. Limitations may be imposed based on (?) and it’s possible that there won’t even be the opportunity to pay for more freedom or an upgrade.
This would then make address bars moot as I figure ICANN would be cut off at the knees. Not sure how that would work but once the internet is privatized, I suspect all bets are off.
Two articles to check out https://www.wired.com/2017/05/congress-not-fcc-can-fix-net-neutrality and http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2017/05/don_t_freak_out_about_the_fcc_s_new_approach_to_net_neutrality.html. Here’s organization that is fighting for a level playing ground. Don’t know much about them and I assume there are others as well https://www.savetheinternet.com/sti-home.
This is coming upon us soon. Now. Principals over personalities folks – without fair access to our addresses – or perhaps more importantly, without our customers ability to reach us … game over. Please keep fighting the good fight. Thank you.