<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Product Domains &#187; typo domain</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.productdomains.com/tag/typo-domain/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.productdomains.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:03:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Branded Typo Domain Names Cost Companies Millions According To Study</title>
		<link>http://www.productdomains.com/2010/06/23/branded-typo-domain-names-cost-companies-millions-according-to-study/</link>
		<comments>http://www.productdomains.com/2010/06/23/branded-typo-domain-names-cost-companies-millions-according-to-study/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:17:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Product Domains</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybersquatting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fairwinds partners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[typo domain]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.productdomains.com/?p=1240</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[	<style type="text/css">
		</style>
FairWinds Partners released a study about the costs of typosquatting the top 250 trafficked brand domain names. The lengthy report outlines traffic and revenue losses, poor user experiences, and a lot more. The single key take away from the study is that &#8220;typosquatting costs the brands associated with these sites $327 million per year&#8221; &#8211; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<style type="text/css">
		</style><p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-1243" title="typosquatting-costs-millions" src="http://www.productdomains.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/typosquatting-costs-millions.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="300" /></p>
<p>FairWinds Partners <a href="http://fairwindspartners.com/en/newsroom/perspectives/vol-5-issue-2/foreword" target="_blank">released</a> a study about the costs of typosquatting the top 250 trafficked brand domain names. The lengthy report outlines traffic and revenue losses, poor user experiences, and a lot more. The single key take away from the study is that &#8220;typosquatting costs the brands associated with these sites $327 million per year&#8221; &#8211; view the entire study <a href="http://fairwindspartners.com/en/newsroom/perspectives/vol-5-issue-2/foreword" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.productdomains.com/2010/06/23/branded-typo-domain-names-cost-companies-millions-according-to-study/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is TechCrunch Cybersquatting And Redirecting A Twitter Typo Domain?</title>
		<link>http://www.productdomains.com/2009/10/01/is-techcrunch-cybersquatting-and-redirecting-a-twitter-typo-domain/</link>
		<comments>http://www.productdomains.com/2009/10/01/is-techcrunch-cybersquatting-and-redirecting-a-twitter-typo-domain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:01:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Product Domains</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybersquatting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[techcrunch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[typo domain]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.productdomains.com/?p=186</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[	<style type="text/css">
		</style>
Typo domains come in a variety of forms but one of the most common besides misspellings is &#8220;www&#8221; added to the actual domain such as: wwwtwitter.com notice that it&#8217;s all one word, which is the domain that is redirecting to TechCrunch. According to a whois lookup the domain is registered GoDaddy, created 11/04/2007 with an [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<style type="text/css">
		</style><p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-185" title="techcrunch-twitter-typo" src="http://www.productdomains.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/techcrunch-twitter-typo.jpg" alt="techcrunch-twitter-typo" width="600" height="300" /></p>
<p>Typo domains come in a variety of forms but one of the most common besides misspellings is &#8220;www&#8221; added to the actual domain such as: <a href="http://www.wwwtwitter.com" target="_blank">wwwtwitter.com</a> notice that it&#8217;s all one word, which is the domain that is redirecting to TechCrunch. According to a <a href="http://whois.domaintools.com/wwwtwitter.com" target="_blank">whois lookup</a> the domain is registered GoDaddy, created 11/04/2007 with an expiration of 11/04/2014. It also has Domains by Proxy privacy protection and is also sitting on GoDaddy&#8217;s name servers meaning that the redirect is setup within the owners GoDaddy domain control panel.</p>
<p>The term twitter is trademarked and should be easy for Twitter to get via UDRP, but the question remains. Does TechCrunch, who frequently blogs about the company own this domain or is it someone else that owns the domain and is doing the redirecting?</p>
<p>Either way it doesn&#8217;t reflect well on domainers.</p>
<p><strong>Update:</strong><br />
Six days after this was published TechCrunch wrote <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/07/wwwtwitter-com-best-website-ever/" target="_blank">their own post</a> on the topic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.productdomains.com/2009/10/01/is-techcrunch-cybersquatting-and-redirecting-a-twitter-typo-domain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
