Home / Blogs

Do "brandsucks.com" Names Really Have a "Destructive Potential"?

Cedric Manara

"'Sucks.com is the rightmost anchor of nearly 20,000 domains registered today. Two thousand domains have 'stinks.com' on the right and about the same number of domains begin with the term 'boycott'," write the authors of the recently released paper The Power of Internet Gripe Sites.

According to their (interesting) study, 35% of the "brandsucks" domains are owned by the brand while 45% are available for registration. They thus advise brand owners "to take a serious look at the traffic that these names garner and the kind of unique marketing opportunity they can afford."

The paper summarizes several UDRP decisions over brandsucks.com names, to warn brand owners. I do not fully agree with their conclusions, as much of the decisions they refer to, date back to 2000 or 2001 (jurisprudence has evolved since then).

The first "brandsucks.com" names were registered last century. Some of them had a lot of publicity when they came into light. Aren't brand managers aware of this phenomenon? To me, they are, and deliberately chose not to register their own "branduscks.com", because they do not think it is as dangerous as the authors of this report sugget. If a company were to register all names that are potentially dangerous, it would be costly (think of ihatebrand, youdetestbrand, heabhorsbrand, sheloathesbrand, consumersarerepulsedbybrand...).

The authors give the example of a brand which set up a website at "itsownbrandsucks.com" where it placed a "Guest Satisfaction Survey" (I will not mention this brand, I am not sure it would be happy with such publicity!). I wonder what how much traffic this website really gets. And a quick look on the Wayback Machine shows that this name had been previously used for at least two years to convey the traffic to the brand.com website…

By Cedric Manara, Law Professor. More blog posts from Cedric Manara can also be read here.

Related topics: Domain Names, Law

WEEKLY WRAP — Get CircleID's Weekly Summary Report by Email:

Comments

"Sucks" domains Daniel R. Tobias  –  Sep 02, 2008 4:19 PM PDT

Though if your intent is to create a noncommercial informational site, a .org or .info domain would make more sense than .com anyway.

To post comments, please login or create an account.

Related Blogs

Related News

Topics

Industry Updates – Sponsored Posts

.ONLINE GA Launches with 28,000 Registrations in the First 30 Minutes

Influential Law Firms Have Become Early Adopters of '.law' TLD

40+ Pioneers Signed on for .TECH, as it Enters EAP Today‚Ä®

WeddingWire Joins Minds + Machines As New TLD '.Wedding' Pioneer

LogicBoxes Introduces DomainBridge

Carlsberg Group Joins Minds + Machines Pioneer Program

In Celebration of Marriage Equality Each New .LGBT Name Donates $20 to the It Gets Better Project

TLD Security, Spec 11 and Business Implications

LogicBoxes Powers .NGO & .ONG Retail and Wholesale Channels for ENSET

Alabama Joins dotVOTE Movement - Announces Alabama.vote for Its Election Site

LogicBoxes Partners With Domains.Green to Setup Retail & Wholesale Channels for .green Domains

New Top-Level Domain .fit Launches, Announces Partnership with the Arnold Sports Festival

Bauer Media Joins Minds + Machines as a .fishing Pioneer

New .vote TLD Used for Arizona Voters

Afilias Releases 160,000+ Names Across 8 New TLDs

Deal Yourself In: .POKER Names Now Open to All

ICANN Business Constituency Elects Elisa Cooper of MarkMonitor as Chair

NSW Government Launches .sydney Domain

New .VOTE and .VOTO Domains Now Available

Verisign Launches New Monthly Blog Series: Top 10 Keywords Registered in .COM and .NET

Sponsored Topics