IT.COM

Parkingcrew new GTC/TOS

NameSilo
Watch
Impact
52
Yesterday when I logged in to my account, I had to agree to new GTC before I could have access to my account.

Reading through the terms, #11 seemed surprising.

After agreeing to the terms, I no longer have access to them. Can someone log into their account & before clicking 'agree' take a screen shot & post it up. I would like a copy.

Thank you.
 
1
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
upload_2017-7-6_14-51-7.png
 
0
•••
Thanks.

Seems like one side is getting picked on.
 
0
•••
making an already deadish "business" for most, even deader.

is it safe to predict total death of parking companies for any time soon? may be!

the final run for survival by them will be decrease of our profits.. so they can maintain theirs.. and they will be able to call it natural rpc decrease and get away with it.. and none of us will ever really know or be able to something bout it...

I say this for all park companies of course. .not just pc.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
This is what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket. all my domain names got cut off with parking crew,Ten years, made them so much cash. Pressure, big thumb. Anyway it crack down by google you can't blame them.
 
0
•••
0
•••
And don't tell me about trademark infringements this and that, generic and non-genric, polices..blah blah,
you forget the greatest infringement is people's privacy, which google rapes everyone, every day on genocidal scale. data gathering. What about your TOS
 
0
•••
what happened marly?
I understand you made a ton of money to PC and they made it for you in 10 years.. and now.. no one is making no one money no more? I knew parking was dead art
 
0
•••
Alcy, you right its dead. Time get 8 billion users to install adblockers on their web browsers and teach the
oppressors a lesson, shrink their profit , because look, if I'm not making money anymore so why should they...who's with me?
 
0
•••
They just informed you about the new Google terms...
If you don't like it - use ZeroClick...
 
0
•••
Google is whitelisted by the ad blockers that allow whitelists.

Donny
 
1
•••
So I assume ultra liberal sites are excluded too? :)

Just seems to me like a way to get out of paying.
 
1
•••
I am wondering what this "notice" is really about. Didn't all ggl-based parking companies explicitly prohibit traffic generation to parked domains, including but not limited to forwarding of one domain to another, even before this "notice"? Of course it was "public" face, as, privately, many companies elected not to notice unnatural domain traffic in the best case, or - in the worst case - approved "traffic arbitrage" if the customer makes them aware that the traffic is generated and how. I myself experienced this (once got a new account manager at a large ggl-based parking company, and he routinely - as a part of his hello-introduction - asked me about this so that he could mark my domains internally as receiving good traffic).

The whole notice lacks common sense. For example how can one digitally sign "no bot traffc whatsoever" condition in current environment where parked (and any other domains) are bombarded with bots that are either looking to hack the site (requesting wp-login.php and similar urls) or simply grabbing everything? Ggl may or may not like it, but this is what really happens.

I am especially worried about "8" (the entire domain need to be parked). Should this be interpreted as they want to shut above.com parking manager down, since above.com customers are doing exactly the opposite - if the traffic is distributed between various parking companies, no parking company can say that the "entire" domain is parked with them... The same applies to inhouse parking management solutions (I also have one), which in my case is technically the same as above.com but the distribution rules are much more complicated

I'd prefer to interpret "8" as no-no for hosting companies to show parked domain ads on 404 pages if the hosting customer failed or forgot to setup one. Isn't it what a number of large hosting companies are still doing, or at least were doing some time ago? In particular, Endurance-owned hosters

As a side note, the whole "notice" may well be parkingcrew-specific and should probably not be interpreted as another "global bad news" from ggl. (are there any good news from them for domainers at all?). It may well be that ggl noticed too many bad business arriving from parkingcrew customers, but elected to send such a notice first, instead of shutting them down immediately as they did with domainsponsor... The time will tell
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Explanation I got was...
"The update is more for users who try to drive traffic via cloaking or other methods to domain parked pages and letting them know that it’s not okay and we intend to terminate & claw back any revenue generated from their account. "
I also thought these methods already violated G's TOS and therefore wouldn't requiring rehashing but in lieu of the Rook/DS event, further parking company CYA is not surprising.
 
0
•••
0
•••
The cloaking part is very true. People would put a content page on www.domain.com and then buy traffic from Google or Bing and then send it to ww19.domain.com which went to a parking page. Both Adwords and Bing Ads do not allow you to cloak, so this clarifies that you can not cloak.

Donny
 
1
•••
The cloaking part is very true. People would put a content page on www.domain.com and then buy traffic from Google or Bing and then send it to ww19.domain.com which went to a parking page. Both Adwords and Bing Ads do not allow you to cloak, so this clarifies that you can not cloak.

Donny

I don't understand the point of paying for traffic from google Or Bing to point to a parking page?

You are far more likely to lose money on that deal if you are paying google for PPC.
 
0
•••
where I find this new TOS in my account?
 
0
•••
Back