Suspended Page Rank 5

[findit]

I have found a domain which is suspended with pr5 and 74 backlinks, the domain name isnt grat but is it worth getting just for the other value?

 

[dragon]

i *believe* that after it goes through the 99 day process with nominet all the links and pr are "stripped" ... having said that i've heard of people who managed to keep the pr/links as well but not for long... so it is damn confusing to say the least!

 

[retired_member21]

Good in theory, but I'm not sure it holds true - can't see link values affected that severly on domain expiry, but haven't tested extensivley enough really.

If it's cheap enough I'd definitley 301 / use it for PR.

 

[dougs]

pr dies

Google are a registrar for a reason.

They have the suspended list and kill the pr and links, there is lots of talk about this on many seo forums

There are some exceptions, but not many

doug

 

[Skinner]

The back links are on other peoples websites, so unless they remove them, they will still be there, the PR is toast tho (some people held theirs by duplicating the original content and 'slowly' changing it to new).

 

[nat0]

as the guys say not likely you'll save the PR therefore not worth it

 

[DaveH]

The backlinks are still there and valid and the domain could be built around the original topic then it's certainly worth registering.

Google PR will drop, but the traffic should still make it worth the regfee.

 

[Blackpool]

nope the pr is history im afraid.

 

[andydw]

I would agree with DaveH (Since "Blackpool" figured it was worth dredging up to add his concise knowledge too...)

I am sure that although Google strip PR, if you get the site and pages back together with similar content then Googles review will expire and at some point they will view it as a new site again, taking into account the backlinks and eventually restoring the PR ranking (if it still merits it).

Happy to be linked to something showing this is wrong though - still learning myself.

 

[LumpyBumps]

My personal opinion on this is that if the domain is rebuilt around the original content and the domain is resubmitted to Google via the webmaster console then there's no reason why the PR shouldn't return in time.

As others have said, the backlinks are still there and it's those that give the PR so as long as Google can be shown that the domain has been recreated for genuine purposes. What they can take away they can certainly re-instate as well.

What I'll do is register a domain that had PR and some quality backlinks (found via Unwanted-Domain-Names.co.uk), will rehost and rebuild it and I'll see what happens.

I'll report my findings back here.

Phil

 

[thebutler]

Does not strip

The big G does not strip the PR when a domain drops. I have several dozen domains around to back that up. Its not just theory but actually use.

Now IF the backlinks disappear than the PR will drop. Thats the fine art of finding domains that have very dated backlinks that likely will not disappear over time.

 

[seojonrich]

pr will almost certainly be stripped, links will remain, the inbound links will stay, there is no way all the inbound links could possibly be deleted.

 

[retired_member12]

This prompts an interesting thought though, to maybe re-reg such a domain name, download (as much as is possible, if it's there) the old content via archive.org, and see what it brings.

 

[seojonrich]

yeah that’s not a bad idea actually, does that come with copyright issues i wonder

 

[Edwin]

yeah that’s not a bad idea actually, does that come with copyright issues i wonder

Of course! Copyright remains with the original author for something like 75 years. It doesn't matter if the material's still being displayed or not, copyright has to do with the right to the "copy" i.e. the right of authorship. Just like the author of an out-of-print book retains the copyright...

 

[retired_member12]

Of course! Copyright remains with the original author for something like 75 years. It doesn't matter if the material's still being displayed or not, copyright has to do with the right to the "copy" i.e. the right of authorship. Just like the author of an out-of-print book retains the copyright...

What if the author is in fact a dissolved company? Who's going to chase you up on that basis?

 

[GreyWing]

What if the author is in fact a dissolved company? Who's going to chase you up on that basis?

Technically it would be the creditors if liquidated or the crown if just disolved. Of course the chances of that happening is rare but I think Edwin is saying it could happen if they wanted to that badly.

 

[retired_member12]

They're fair comments of course.

As a legal functioning entity, a company usually ceases to exist in any form once dissolved, but I am aware that companies have been reinstated for short durations, usually by order of the High Court, but this is where a past legal matter regarding actions against it's former Directors is required, or where funds have turned up/been produced to settle Inland Revenue or VAT debts against the company, or something of a similar significant nature. I imagine it's highly unlikely someone's going to use that mechanism for a bit of content copying.

Having said all that, I wouldn't suggest pretending to be the former registrant/company in those circumstances, because although 'passing off' couldn't be applied (because the company has ceased to exist), the more serious offence of 'deception' would probably kick in.

 

[Edwin]

Copyright is created the moment something is written, and survives for a period set down in law. 70 years, in fact.

The dissolution of the company, or indeed the death of the original author, doesn't change a thing, except that nobody will be around to give somebody else the license to re-use the material (so in fact copyright material written by a now-dissolved company is even more unusable than other copyright material since, at least theoretically, you could write to a still-existing company and get their permission to reproduce some of their material)

The type of material we're discussing is considered "literary" under copyright law (yes, even a quick blog post would count as "literary" - the categories are very broad)

See this factsheet for more info
P-01: UK Copyright Law fact sheet

It's also important to note that the act of creation/publication creates the copyright, you don't have to explicitly register it anywhere. So I have full copyright over this forum post, for example, except where I have explicitly ceded that copyright e.g. if there was something in the Terms and Conditions of the forum which stated all copyright passed to Acorn Domains or something (but even then it would STILL be copyright, it just wouldn't be copyrighted to ME!)

 

[Edwin]

What if the author is in fact a dissolved company? Who's going to chase you up on that basis?

The fact that somebody may not "chase you" for something does absolutely nothing to change the legality (or in this case, the illegality) of the proposed action.