Re: [At-Large] Fwd: ALAC Draft Statement :: Domain Monetization
Hi Izumi
Can you take these points under consideration in the draft? Or maybe this
might be a good topic for a poll?
Jacqueline
-----Original Message-----
From: Izumi AIZU [mailto:iza@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 8:33 PM
To: ALAC
Subject: [At-Large] Fwd: ALAC Draft Statement :: Domain Monetization
Dear ALAC,
This came to me a week ago, and awaits my reply.
Any comment is helpful.
Thanks,
izumi
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kevin Ohashi <ohashi@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2007/03/31 5:04
Subject: Re: ALAC Draft Statement :: Domain Monetization
To: iza@xxxxxxx
Cc: ohashi@xxxxxxxxx
Mr. Izumi Aizu,
I recently read this on the ICANN website as part of your draft
statement and had a few questions and disagreements with it in
general. For background purposes I am involved with domain names and
do participate in what you are labeling 'Domain Monetization' on a
small scale.
'It's a fundamentally sleazy business, since the web sites have no
useful content and the way they get the traffic is basically by
tricking people, either via typos or recently expired domains'
No 'useful' content - What gives you the right to determine what is
useful? How do you define use? People obviously click the paid
advertisements on websites such as Google and advertisers pay for
those areas to advertise. If someone searches for a 'digital camera'
and gets a paid search result to Sony for a digital camera or eBay
selling digital cameras didn't they get what they were looking for?
Presumably when one doesn't find what they are looking for they close
the window, go back and look elsewhere. While there may be some
deception in rare instances Google and other Pay-Per-Click advertising
companies such as Yahoo monitor for such fraud and suspend any
accounts deceiving users. Let's look at what is going on - people are
typing in cameras.com (actual ppc page) and clicking on a type of
camera they are interested in and presented with a list of choices,
highest paying advertisers on the keyword. A user then chooses one of
those companies and goes directly to their website. I would think
that is useful. Isn't that the same as typing in google.com,
searching cameras and clicking on a brand? Technically speaking, the
user performed nearly identically except you seem to class using a
domain monetization service vs something like a search engine as
fundmentally sleazy. You pretend the only traffic is typos and
expired domain names. There are a lot of generic domain names, for
instance cameras.com, which are completely generic and receive pure
type in traffic through what is often labeled direct navigation. I am
sure you are not ignorant of this fact but merely don't mention it
because it would weaken your argument, but nonetheless if you want to
present a balanced view and are attempting to look out for the users
of the internet, you should be honest and upfront about everything.
Wouldn't you agree?
'the presence of such website makes web-surfing by ordinary users far
more difficult and confusing than they should be.'
Now you are bordering in on free speech and freedom in general.
Webmasters around the globe publish websites, blogs and media in many
forms and generally are allowed to do so under free speech laws held
in many countries. As a member of EFF you must understand that trying
to control content, censorship, is exactly what your membership with
EFF is against don't you? You are taking your views and imposing them
on many others, what you think would be best use and for the benefit
of the majority. While this may be noble, is it your place to decide?
If I owned dogs.com and put a picture of my dog, I assure you she's
adorable, it doesn't really add much content, perhaps if I surrounded
it with advertisements? Where do you draw the line? I think many of
us can agree that some things are generally objectionable and maybe
shouldn't belong on the internet, many countries have such laws
regarding pornography, but it is still on the internet, the .XXX
proposal was rejected yet again on similar principles. How do you
respond to that?
'It seems clear, however, that it does not improve the user experience
at all.' (reference to domain monetization)
Broad generalization not supported with any evidence. There is
evidence suggesting that this traffic and websites monetizing this
traffic are actually more beneficial to companies than other forms of
advertising. Page 6 of Growth and Sustainability of Direct Search
Traffic (http://www.internetreit.com/ica_growth_4.pdf). Direct
navigation has nearly twice the conversion ratios for advertisers
compared to search engine clicks. Not useful at all? It would seem
to me that these websites offer some of the most valuable resources to
any company marketing on the internet. That seems quite useful,
highly targetted users being sent directly to advertisers of products
they are looking for.
I hope you take the time and consider these points and can respond to
me and explain your position in more depth and with more evidence.
Regards,
Kevin Ohashi
On Domain Monetization
We note that there is a meaningful difference between Domain Tasting
and Domain Monetization. Monetization is a straightforward arbitrage
between the cost of domain registrations and the revenue from as much
pay-per-click traffic as the domain owner can get from people who
visit web sites in the domain. It's a fundamentally sleazy business,
since the web sites have no useful content and the way they get the
traffic is basically by tricking people, either via typos or recently
expired domains. More importantly, the presence of such website makes
web-surfing by ordinary users far more difficult and confusing than
they should be.
We do not think it is appropriate in this case to make ICANN as a
regulator to watch and prohibit the Domain Monetization practices per
se. Instead, on behalf of ordinary Internet users, we call upon those
commercial enterprises such as Google or Overture to take appropriate
measures such as to stop paying for clicks on pages with no content,
thereby dealing with a problem that is not limited to typo and expired
domains. We've seen click arbitrage, people buying Google ads to drive
traffic to pages that are simply other Google ads. This kind of
self-generating traffic for pay-per-click advertising is confusing and
unnecessary for ordinary Internet users and, in the long run, not
healthy for the development of Internet as a whole.
Since Domain monetization is a relatively new phenomena, the impact to
the ordinary users and the wider Internet community is hard to measure
at this point. It seems clear, however, that it does not improve the
user experience at all. We think it is worth to keep watching on how
it develops and may seek for specific actions when we have clearer
understanding of measurable impact.
--
>> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for HyperNetwork Society
Kumon Center, Tama University
* * * * *
<< Writing the Future of the History >>
www.anr.org
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
www.alac.icann.org
www.icannalac.org
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/752 - Release Date: 4/8/2007 8:34
PM
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/752 - Release Date: 4/8/2007 8:34
PM
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
www.alac.icann.org
www.icannalac.org