Latest news of the domain name industry

Recent Posts

Go Daddy files UDRP on “Mad Dog” host

Kevin Murphy, January 5, 2011, Domain Registrars

Go Daddy has filed a UDRP complaint against a web hosting company that uses a similar brand to sell domain names, maddogwebhosting.com.

The domain appears to have been used by a small-time hosting reseller for about two years. Its mailing address is a flat in south London.

But Go Daddy subsidiary Mad Dog Domains, which also sells hosting, has been around for longer and appears to have a trademark on its brand.

It’s not really an open-and-shut case by UDRP standards, given that Mad Dog Web Hosting appears to be a legitimate site, but I suspect Go Daddy has a reasonably good chance of prevailing.

We’ll have to wait for the ruling to be made and published by WIPO to find out the full details.

Go Daddy passes 45 million domains milestone

Kevin Murphy, December 27, 2010, Domain Registrars

Go Daddy now has 45 million domain names under management.

That’s the word from Scottsdale tonight. The news comes less than a year after the registrar announced its 40 millionth domain name registration.

According to the company, it “is registering, renewing or transferring a domain name every eight-tenths of a second” and is now “larger than eight of its closest competitors combined”.

Obviously, this is great news for Go Daddy.

It also means that the company is in a very dominant position in the market, which may attract more attention in future.

Go Daddy offers Whois privacy for .co domains

Kevin Murphy, December 22, 2010, Domain Registrars

.CO Internet has started allowing registrars to offer Whois privacy services for .co domains, according to Go Daddy.

In a blog post, Go Daddy’s “RachelH”, wrote:

When the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and .CO Internet S.A.S. drafted the .co policy earlier this year, they decided to hold off on private registration to prevent wrongful use of the new ccTLD — especially during the landrush. Now that .co has carved its place among popular TLDs, you can add private registration to your .co domain names.

Unless I’m mistaken, ICANN had no involvement in the creation of .co’s policies, but I don’t think that’s relevant to the news that .co domains can now be made private.

During its first several months, .CO Internet has been quite careful about appearing respectable, which is why its domains are relatively expensive, why its trademark protections were fairly stringent at launch, and why it has created new domain takedown policies.

It may be a sign that the company feels confident that its brand is fairly well-established now that it has decided to allow Whois privacy, which is quite often associated with cybersquatting (at least in some parts of the domain name community).

It could of course also be a sign that it wants to give its registrars some love – by my estimates a private registration would likely double their gross margin on a .co registration.

Whistleblower alleged shenanigans at DirectNIC

Kevin Murphy, December 18, 2010, Domain Registrars

A former employee of a company allegedly affiliated with domain name registrar DirectNIC claimed the company operated a fraudulent domain arbitrage scheme using Yahoo ads and Parked.com.

Mark Deshong filed a whistleblower lawsuit in August. It was settled in October, but its claims are quite interesting, and don’t appear to have been reported on elsewhere.

Until April this year, Deshong worked for a company called Keypath LLC, a domain registration and monetization company based in Tampa, Florida.

According to his lawsuit (pdf), Keypath is owned by the same bunch of people (notably Sigmund Solares and Michael Gardner) who run DirectNIC and Parked.com, as well as entities including Intercosmos Media Group and The Producers Inc.

Deshong said he was fired after blowing the whistle on a “fraudulent” scheme to bilk money out of Yahoo Search Marketing using the old practice of domain arbitrage.

The suit claimed Keypath bought ads on YSM to bring traffic to sites such as cameras.com that, in turn, displayed nothing but contextual ads generated automatically by YSM.

The company would pay Yahoo small amounts for the traffic it received, but would be paid larger amounts for the traffic it sent elsewhere.

That’s domain arbitrage in a nutshell. It was commonplace among domainers back in 2007 and earlier, and Keypath was far from the only company engaged in the practice.

Yahoo tried to put a stop to arbitrage on its ad network in February 2008, as Domain Name Wire reported at the time, but the lawsuit alleged that Keypath carried on regardless, using bogus identities.

This is when the “fraudulent” behavior is alleged to have commenced.

The suit claimed Keypath “created fictitious, unregistered DBA [Doing Business As] company names” in order to obtain up to 1,000 credit cards from Regions Bank.

The complaint, in an eyebrow-raising paragraph, goes on to list almost 100 of these alleged DBA companies’ names.

Each one of these companies would get a Gmail or Hotmail email address and a Skype phone number for the city where the “fictitious” company was supposedly based, the complaint alleged.

A proxy server would be obtained in each of these cities, which Keypath would use to access YSM and order ads pointing to parked pages, under the guise of one of the DBAs, the suit alleged.

The scheme covered about 50,000 domains and made about $375,000 during January 2010, according to the complaint.

The lawsuit was filed under Florida’s whistleblower act, so while it alleged multiple illegal acts (such as bank fraud and wire fraud) on Keypath’s part, it only attempted to prove wrongful termination.

Deshong basically claimed that he was canned after telling his superiors he could no longer carry out duties he believed to be illegal – he didn’t want to go to jail.

In its response (pdf) to the complaint, Keypath denied essentially all of Deshong’s claims.

It also denied that the company has ties to DirectNIC, Michael Gardner, Sigmund Solares, Intercosmos, Parked.com or The Producers.

(Probably a disingenuous claim. Florida company records show they’re all currently or recently linked to businesses located at 5505 West Gray Street in Tampa, Parked.com’s main US office. Keypath’s web site shows the same address).

5505 West Gray Street

Keypath also accused Deshong of a shakedown, attempting to “extort an unreasonable severance package”, and said that he had “improperly retained” a company laptop after he was fired.

The suit was settled out of court (pdf) on October 25th for an undisclosed sum.

The lawsuit is only tangentially related to the cybersquatting lawsuit Verizon filed against DirectNIC earlier this year. That case appears to be currently tied up in a pre-trial discovery/jurisdictional nightmare.

Register.com settles Baidu domain hijacking lawsuit

Kevin Murphy, November 25, 2010, Domain Registrars

Register.com has apologised to Chinese portal company Baidu for allowing its domain, baidu.com, to be hijacked by the Iranian Cyber Army hacker group.

The two companies have announced that the lawsuit, which alleged gross negligence among other things, has now been settled. Terms were not disclosed.

If Baidu’s complaint was to be believed, the hackers took over baidu.com with a trivial social engineering attack that relied upon a Register.com tech support employee being asleep at the wheel.

The company is one of China’s largest internet firms, employing over 6,000 people and turning over well over $600 million a year. But for the period of the hijack, visitors to baidu.com instead just saw the hackers’ defacement message instead.

The registrar had argued in court that its terms and conditions released it from liability, but the judge didn’t buy it.

Register.com, which was acquired by Web.com for $135 million in June, said yesterday:

After an internal investigation, we found that the breach occurred because Register’s security protocols had been compromised. We have worked with United States law enforcement officials and Baidu to address the issue. We sincerely apologize to Baidu for the disruption that occurred to its services as a result of this incident.

Baidu said it accepted the apology. And the check, I imagine.