When researching presidential candidates, here’s an important question. One "l" or two?
Get it right and you end up at Hillary Clinton’s official web site, hillaryclinton.com.
Get it wrong and you might make someone else some money, and not a nice person either, not a friend of Bill's (FOB) nor of Hillary's (FOH), but a cybersquatter.
Cybersquatters are back, not that they ever left entirely, and they're doing their business right where the nation is so focused these days, in the political arena.
Squatters are buying up sites with slight misspellings of the candidates’ names--Hillary with one 'l' or Obama with two 'm's--then turning them into click farms. They load them up with pay-per-click ads and generate streams of cash from visits by surfers who end up at the like-sounding site by accident.
The squatter's gain is the candidate's loss.
“I think Hillary or whoever would like to reach out to as many people as she can, even if they misspell her name,” says Jonathan Robinson, chief operating officer for NetNames, a London-based domain name management service.
Cybersquatting, the scam of buying a web address with someone else's name to profit from it in some deceptive way, hasn’t been in the news much in recent years after a slew of stories in the late nineties. But cybersquatters are now back in force.
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the branch of the U.N. that resolves domain name disputes, received a record 2,156 complaints in 2007 alleging cybersquatting, up 18 percent over 2006 and 48 percent over 2005.
It even topped the 1,857 filed with the WIPO in 2000, a year when cybersquatting was big news. Speculators were piling into the market, buying up domain names they thought big companies and celebrities would want some day, aiming to sell them for big bucks.
Complaints subsided as various agencies stepped in to combat the problem and as the internet bubble burst.
But then it started growing again these last several years as the internet regained traction and the growth of advertising continued to soar.
But the new cybersquatters have come up with different scheme--the click farm. The advertising comes from ad networks like Google's, where the ads are placed based on traffic levels. “It is a considerable problem,” says Francis Gurry, deputy director of the WIPO.
Political names are hot these days because of the elections and all the Americans searching the web for information about the candidates.
NetNames reports that by the end of February more than 1,900 domain names related to the presidential candidates had been registered. Some were by the candidates, others by fans or detractors.
Yet others, seemingly a large numbers, were registered by those with no political leanings as such, just greed.
***
Meanwhile, in online ratings for the week ended April 20, according to Nielsen Online, Google claimed the top spot among parent companies, followed by Microsoft, Yahoo, Time Warner and News Corp. Online. The top five brands were Google, Yahoo, MSN/Windows Live, Microsoft and AOL Media Network for the fifth straight week.
NexTag regained the No. 1 advertiser spot with 6.6 million impressions, just ahead of Experian Group Limited’s 6.2 million. With just under 31 million ads served, Yahoo was again the top advertising site, well ahead of No. 2 MySpace at 4.6 million.
Sessions per person per week were down one from the previous week to 16, and domains visited per person were even at 39. PC time per person was down 3 percent compared with the previous week, to 17 hours and 31 minutes.
|
Top 25 parent companies
Through April 20 |
|
#
|
Parent
|
Unique Audience (000)
|
Reach %
|
Time Spent per Person (hh:mm:ss)
|
|
1
|
Google
|
90,571
|
64.4
|
0:35:57
|
|
2
|
Microsoft
|
86,486
|
61.5
|
0:45:42
|
|
3
|
Yahoo!
|
76,413
|
54.4
|
1:05:14
|
|
4
|
Time Warner
|
67,527
|
48.0
|
1:19:23
|
|
5
|
News Corp. Online
|
41,841
|
29.8
|
0:47:14
|
|
6
|
eBay
|
33,876
|
24.1
|
0:52:54
|
|
7
|
InterActiveCorp
|
27,902
|
19.9
|
0:12:27
|
|
8
|
Wikimedia Foundation
|
24,496
|
17.4
|
0:09:07
|
|
9
|
Apple Computer
|
24,432
|
17.4
|
0:32:45
|
|
10
|
Amazon
|
24,373
|
17.3
|
0:15:04
|
|
11
|
Walt Disney Internet Group
|
20,953
|
14.9
|
0:22:09
|
|
12
|
New York Times Company
|
20,742
|
14.8
|
0:10:12
|
|
13
|
Landmark Communications
|
20,064
|
14.3
|
0:12:22
|
|
14
|
AT&T Inc.
|
16,106
|
11.5
|
0:20:51
|
|
15
|
RealNetworks, Inc.
|
14,530
|
10.3
|
0:17:08
|
|
16
|
United Online
|
13,341
|
9.5
|
0:24:12
|
|
17
|
E.W. Scripps Company
|
13,242
|
9.4
|
0:06:07
|
|
18
|
Comcast Corp.
|
12,920
|
9.2
|
0:30:16
|
|
19
|
Viacom Digital
|
12,693
|
9.0
|
0:20:33
|
|
20
|
Bank of America
|
12,641
|
9.0
|
0:23:44
|
|
21
|
CraigsList
|
12,387
|
8.8
|
0:33:15
|
|
22
|
Verizon Communications
|
11,929
|
8.5
|
0:15:22
|
|
23
|
Facebook
|
10,503
|
7.5
|
0:47:43
|
|
24
|
CBS Corporation
|
10,494
|
7.5
|
0:19:43
|
|
25
|
CNET Networks
|
10,431
|
7.4
|
0:05:33
|
|
Source: Nielsen Online
|
|
Top 25 brands
Through April 20 |
|
|
Parent
|
Unique Audience (000)
|
Reach %
|
Time spent per person (hh:mm:ss)
|
|
1 |
Google
|
84,252
|
59.9
|
0:27:13
|
|
2 |
Yahoo!
|
75,303
|
53.6
|
1:05:44
|
|
3 |
MSN/Windows Live
|
62,183
|
44.2
|
0:46:42
|
|
4 |
Microsoft
|
55,908
|
39.8
|
0:18:13
|
|
5 |
AOL Media Network
|
54,013
|
38.4
|
1:29:07
|
|
6 |
Fox Interactive Media
|
36,609
|
26.0
|
0:49:57
|
|
7 |
YouTube
|
33,691
|
24.0
|
0:23:42
|
|
8 |
eBay
|
27,806
|
19.8
|
0:56:37
|
|
9 |
Apple
|
24,432
|
17.4
|
0:32:45
|
|
10 |
Wikipedia
|
24,390
|
17.4
|
0:09:06
|
|
11 |
Amazon
|
19,297
|
13.7
|
0:15:24
|
|
12 |
Weather Channel
|
18,094
|
|
