Sedo - whats your policy on typos?

[Frog]

Do you have one? Or is it about to be some suckers own fault for throwing away 10 grand on this?

http://www.sedo.co.uk/auction/auction_detail.php?auction_id=117151&partnerid=19833

Would it not perhaps be fairer to force people to clearly mark domains as typos?

 

[retired_member16]

Who cares?

If they cant spell then they shouldn't be buying stuff for 10 grand.

 

[foz]

Hard to monitor across millions of domains.

The buyer could be aware, although if it was worth keeping (type-in traffic) one would think the current owner should retain and re-direct.

 

[philiporchard]

If I was aware it was a typo when selling it, then I'd mention it.

If you don't mention it, then I guess it could be classed as misprepresention, and fall foul of the Misrepresentation Act as information has not been included about the product (in this case the fact it's a typo).

From Wikipedia...

Distortion of Fact

A representor may make a statement which prima facie is technically true; however this may tell only half the story. If a statement of fact is made but the representor fails to include information which would significantly alter the interpretation of this fact, then a misrepresentation may have occurred.

 

[Edwin]

I have rapped Sedo's knuckles on a number of issues, including the evergreen VAT problem, but in this case I don't believe it's their responsibility to play "policeman". They're simply providing the sales platform and then getting out of the way; typo domains* sell in all sorts of other venues so why shouldn't they be listed on Sedo?

In venues where commentary is both easy to supply and expected (like forum threads) I would expect people to highlight the fact that they're selling a typo in their sales thread (or not kick up a stink if somebody else jumps in to supply the missing detail)

*NOTE: I personally dislike typo names, but as long as they're 100% generic typos (of the "accomodation" variety) then they're at least "legitimate" even if they make the owner look a bit illiterate. Typos of TM names are (cybersquatting)^2 and should be avoided like the plague.

 

[mibut]

ACCOMODATION 6,600 exact UK Local Monthly Searches = a lot of people who cannot spell.
also Registered on: before Aug-1996

 

[Frog]

ACCOMODATION 6,600 exact UK Local Monthly Searches = a lot of people who cannot spell.
also Registered on: before Aug-1996

Showing results for accommodation. Search instead for accomodation.

That tells you all you need to know about the search figures.

 

[mibut]

Showing results for accommodation. Search instead for accomodation.

That tells you all you need to know about the search figures.

Perhaps you ought to check your own spelling as accommodation gives 33,100 local exacts my original figure for accomodation is correct.

 

[Frog]

Perhaps you ought to check your own spelling as accommodation gives 33,100 local exacts my original figure for accomodation is correct.

I'm not saying your figure is wrong. I'm saying anyone searching for the wrong version is automatically shown the results for the right version. So from a Google point of view, the domain is worthless as people can't even really find it.

 

[mibut]

So from a Google point of view, the domain is worthless as people can't even really find it.

The search figures are googles own, you are referring to search results, totally different. No, not worthless as Google gives a choice and if a site was optimised for the search term then google would probably show the site.

 

[Frog]

Well when anyone quotes search figures, usually the assumption would be you are hoping to get those searchers to your site...

That can't happen when Google won't show the searchers the results for that phrase, like is happening here. When Google shows people the correct results (after they type in the wrong phrase) how many of them are going to think "there is probably better websites in the wrong spelling, I'll go ahead and click to see the wrong ones"

You have pretty much zero chance of forcing Google to show a wrong spelling here, when 30k+ are searching for the legit version. In short - the domain is absolutely worthless, imo.

The only value in it at all would be if you own the other version and want to protect against losing some typos. Obviously not the case here since both are currently owned by the same person, and the real spelling doesn't have any bids on it.

 

[wb]

*NOTE: I personally dislike typo names, but as long as they're 100% generic typos (of the "accomodation" variety) then they're at least "legitimate" even if they make the owner look a bit illiterate. Typos of TM names are (cybersquatting)^2 and should be avoided like the plague.

I disagree with typos of even generic domains being "legitimate", and would say it's still a form of cybersquatting.

Obviously in this case it's a rare exception as the registrant owns the correct spelling too and seems to be happy to sell the typo (not many wouldn't for that amount).

 

[mibut]

In short - the domain is absolutely worthless, imo

it is only your opinion which doesn't really matter as you are not bidding.

I disagree with typos of even generic domains being "legitimate", and would say it's still a form of cybersquatting.

and what form of cybersquatting would that be?

 

[wb]

it is only your opinion which doesn't really matter as you are not bidding.

I wouldn't say it's only his opinion. If the bidder realises I'm almost 100% sure it would be their opinion too.

and what form of cybersquatting would that be?

Considering we're not in the US, I'm not using the term literally or according to federal law. It's squatting in the sense that it's benefitting from the correct spelling which is normally owned by someone else.

In a case like this where it's going to be pretty impossible to find the typo landing page through organic search, it will only be of benefit when users are looking for the genuine spelling at the correct address. In that sense, it's basically equivalent to passing off.

Doesn't surprise me at all to see that you have previously offered for sale typos.

 

[mibut]

I wouldn't say it's only his opinion. If the bidder realises I'm almost 100% sure it would be their opinion too.

And how do you know the bidder doesn't realise?

Considering we're not in the US, I'm not using the term literally or according to federal law. It's squatting in the sense that it's benefitting from the correct spelling which is normally owned by someone else.

So if the term has different owners for different extensions, are they squatting as well?

In a case like this where it's going to be pretty impossible to find the typo landing page through organic search, it will only be of benefit when users are looking for the genuine spelling at the correct address. In that sense, it's basically equivalent to passing off.

As already pointed out, properly optimised, the page could be found through organic search.

Doesn't surprise me at all to see that you hold typos

Yes, like most "older" domainers I hold a few (all generic) and even some domains with hyphens in them (shock horror), would you see that as passing off as well?

 

[Frog]

And how do you know the bidder doesn't realise?

Unless the bidder creates an Acorn account and tells us he knows its a typo, we don't know. I think any reasonable person would only come to one of two conclusions other than that - the person doesn't realise, or its a fake bid by the owner to trick someone else into making a mistaken bid.

As already pointed out, properly optimised, the page could be found through organic search.

You're living in fantasy land if you think someone is going to spend £10k on a typo then another £50k on enough links/branding signals to merely allow it to rank for its own name.

 

[mibut]

You're living in fantasy land if you think someone is going to spend £10k on a typo then another £50k on enough links/branding signals to merely allow it to rank for its own name.

Don't know where you get your figures from (fantasy land maybe) but any name you buy for development needs an outlay to rank for its own name.

 

[Frog]

Don't know where you get your figures from (fantasy land maybe) but any name you buy for development needs an outlay to rank for its own name.

Wrong.

How much do you think you'd need to spend to rank for "Mibut Accommodation" if you just bought that domain, and nobody else had a similar name?

 

[wb]

And how do you know the bidder doesn't realise?

I don't, hence the almost 100% sure comment. Having seen plenty of sales, I'd say this one is a pretty extraordinary price though.

So if the term has different owners for different extensions, are they squatting as well?

Obviously no, because if it's on a different extension then it's not a typo... could be argued that extensions such as ".co" are typos of ".com", but I'd say that the rule only applies for letters preceding the extension.

As already pointed out, properly optimised, the page could be found through organic search.

Who's pointed that out?

Yes, like most "older" domainers I hold a few (all generic) and even some domains with hyphens in them (shock horror), would you see that as passing off as well?

Nothing wrong with hyphenated domains, the topic is misspellings...

 

[mibut]

Obviously no, because if it's on a different extension then it's not a typo... could be argued that extensions such as ".co" are typos of ".com", but I'd say that the rule only applies for letters preceding the extension.

methinks tho' if it wasn't a generic then you would call it squatting, so whats the diff in your argument?

Who's pointed that out?

I did (read the posts)

Nothing wrong with hyphenated domains, the topic is misspellings...

but if you believed in your argument you would obviously think the same for hyphens.