Excluding Keyword Categories From Your Parked Pages In Order To Avoid Cybersquatting Violations

Parking companies are handcuffed in many ways by their relationship with Google and Yahoo, who essentially control the framework by which ads are shown on parking pages.  Parking companies, however, now appear to realize the necessity of working with Google and Yahoo to develop options which allow a domain owner to exclude categories of ads which are shown on parked pages.  Based on several conversations with parking companies at the recent T.R.A.F.F.I.C show that keyword category and trademark exclusion will soon be available.

The reason why this functionality is so critical is because domainers risk losing their most valuable domain properties by parking them.  The software for parking companies naturally optimizes the AdWord listings towards the ad categories which end-users click on the most.  If there is trademark-related traffic coming to that page, the most likely ads being clicked on are those related to the trademark.  This model tends to push the parked page towards the most traffic.  When your domain is identical or similar to a trademark holder’s website, this model also tends to push the parked page directly into allegations of cybersquatting. 

I’ve always said that domainers cannot have it both ways.  They cannot rely on the “descriptive” “generic” defense and at the same time park those domains and serve ads which are in the exact same market or category as the trademark holder.  As previously discussed, virtually every generic or descriptive set of words has some trademark issues internationally.  While serving up ads which exploit the trademark holder’s web presence and traffic adds PPC revenue, it creates serious risk of losing that domain in a domain dispute resolution policy proceeding based on allegations of cybersquatting.

We have advised domain portfolio owners to remove parking from their most valuable domain properties in order to avoid that parked page showing up as Exhibit A in a cybersquatting complaint.  We look forward to the day when domainers can actively identify potential trademark problems and exclude those keyword categories from their PPC offerings in order to better insulate themselves against allegations of cybersquatting.  This functionality will be a major step forward for domainers who take the long-term view that their domains will continue to appreciate in value.

If anyone is aware of any domain parking company which includes the functionality noted above, please let us know or post a comment here.  While there have been rumblings of such functionality, we have not seen any in action yet.

Comments

[Enrico S.]

Johnny: A DMCA 'take down' notice approach to parked pages offering ads that infringe trademarks. I love it. This would preserve the domain to the current registrant but preclude use of the generic or descriptive domain in a way which causes consumer confusion. Not a bad approach, if only domainers had any chance at changing the UDRP or ACPA. Call the ICA!

Including the ability to exclude certain types of ads requires, of course, the ability to exclude categories (ie market niches such as 'automotive') from ads being served up on parked pages. This is no doubt a challenge which would require Google and Yahoo to require advertisers to identify their advertising niche, or an algorithm which coudl do so based on keywords and other factors.

[Johnny]

I'm glad you wrote this. This is a fair and balanced view of what is going on.

I would also add that in addition to a function where domainers can remove ads there should be a formal way to notify domainers through the parked pages or parking service that a domain in infringing so as to have a centralized platform for resolving any issues. A domainer could then check in to the "trademark conflicts" page and then make the necessary changes and a notification could then be automatically sent to the complaining party for them to review the site again to make sure everything is satisfactory from their vantage point. We already have UDRP, why not this as a way to resolve issues fast? Non-conforming domainers could then be expunged from particular parking services if they did not resolve the conflicts accordingly.

This is necessary b/c I could go in and check a domain today and then a company runs an ad tomorrow that infringes on a trademark or their own trademark and maybe I would not be able to check that domain for a couple for months or more due to the volume of domains and time constraints involved in monitoring every little last detail of every domain. It needs to work both directions to be effective - IMO.

And.....if you want to take it further it could be something that all parking companies could use, meaning they are all tied to the same database so if a domainer moves a domain in say three years and he or she totally forgot about the infringing ads then the settings made three years ago would "float" to the new parking service where the domain is now parked.

I would LOVE to see this.

Johnny