- Impact
- 32,415
Source SEDO.com
| Schilling's Re-Routing Patent
Frank Schilling, owner of one of the world's largest domain portfolios
By Monica Ibrahim, Customer Support Team
Frank Schilling, owner of one of the world’s largest domain portfolios, originally filed for a patent application in May 2001 with attorney John Berryhill, with the idea of recovering traffic lost to error pages that resolve when top-level domains (TLDs) are mistyped (i.e. .CIM, .CPN, .DOM etc., returning traffic solely to the .COM domain). This patent named the “Generic Top-Level Domain Re-Routing System” in April 2006, could play an important role not just for domainers but for the industry as a whole.
Currently , for example, if you want to buy a book the first place you may look online is books.com, owned by Barnes & Noble. But what happens when, in your haste to get that hot-off-the-press New York Times bestseller in time for your beach vacation, you mistype the domain, typing books.cim instead? Depending on your browser type, any number of landing pages could resolve. With an Internet Explorer (IE)browser, a Google search page resolves with sponsored listings while Microsoft ads resolve on most error pages when using the FireFox browser. The party that comes out on top here is Google or Microsoft, effectively monetizing on traffic meant for a developed site. In the end, Barnes & Noble doesn’t get the business they deserve and you’re stuck on the beach, sans the book you want.
This unfortunate predicament is the driving force behind Schilling’s push to pass his re-routing patent, with hopes of getting more parties involved in capitalizing on lost traffic. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has publicized recent plans to introduce new generic top-level domains, with no knowing how many new TLDs will be implemented. With the .COM, .NET and .ORG extensions being the most desired for parking and business operations, one may dispute the value of ICANN’s anticipated TLDs. However, Schilling believes that offering misspelled extensions would also be valuable investments for domain owners and website operators. In a chance to explain his logic, he states, “Imagine if you had 50 misspelling TLDs of .COM (i.e. CPM, .DOM, .XOM, .CON) that could "only" return traffic to the correct .COM version … like an ON/OFF switch. The domain couldn't point to a third location, it could only return traffic to the correct .COM or .NET for variants like .NERT, .NETT .MET etc.”
Every party involved would stand a profit according to Schilling. “ICANN gets revenues from new TLDs, registrants get real value for their domain purchase in the form of recovered traffic, hundreds of millions of variant "shadow domain names" get sold, and everyone is happy.” Well, maybe not everyone involved. Since Microsoft and Google, presently receive the full benefit of lost traffic from domain owners through the Firefox and IE browsers, they will most likely protest the passing of Schillings’s re-routing patent.
Moreover, not much has been considered with regards to potential trademark infringements that could arise should Schilling’s patent pass and when the new extensions arrive. What happens when more than one business feels they own the rights to one of the new domains and it’s TLD and both feel it should automatically redirect to their domain. Also, who’s to say cars.cim, a possible new extension, should redirect to cars.com instead of cars.co.uk or cars.co.com, the future Columbian TLD?
Many things must be considered before the passing of the “Generic top-level domain re-routing system” patent. One thing’s certain though; Schilling’s patent would benefit ICANN and many current domain owners. In Schilling’s opinion, “This is just a way of taking [lost traffic] back and paying for the Internet's infrastructure in the process.” With no set timeframe as to when new extensions will be introduced, the question still remains if Schilling has a chance at getting his patent approved, due to some of the aforementioned concerns. “The patent could launch with or without ICANN, but it will take ICANN to make it useful” Schilling ultimately suggests.
| Schilling's Re-Routing Patent
Frank Schilling, owner of one of the world's largest domain portfolios
By Monica Ibrahim, Customer Support Team
Frank Schilling, owner of one of the world’s largest domain portfolios, originally filed for a patent application in May 2001 with attorney John Berryhill, with the idea of recovering traffic lost to error pages that resolve when top-level domains (TLDs) are mistyped (i.e. .CIM, .CPN, .DOM etc., returning traffic solely to the .COM domain). This patent named the “Generic Top-Level Domain Re-Routing System” in April 2006, could play an important role not just for domainers but for the industry as a whole.
Currently , for example, if you want to buy a book the first place you may look online is books.com, owned by Barnes & Noble. But what happens when, in your haste to get that hot-off-the-press New York Times bestseller in time for your beach vacation, you mistype the domain, typing books.cim instead? Depending on your browser type, any number of landing pages could resolve. With an Internet Explorer (IE)browser, a Google search page resolves with sponsored listings while Microsoft ads resolve on most error pages when using the FireFox browser. The party that comes out on top here is Google or Microsoft, effectively monetizing on traffic meant for a developed site. In the end, Barnes & Noble doesn’t get the business they deserve and you’re stuck on the beach, sans the book you want.
This unfortunate predicament is the driving force behind Schilling’s push to pass his re-routing patent, with hopes of getting more parties involved in capitalizing on lost traffic. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has publicized recent plans to introduce new generic top-level domains, with no knowing how many new TLDs will be implemented. With the .COM, .NET and .ORG extensions being the most desired for parking and business operations, one may dispute the value of ICANN’s anticipated TLDs. However, Schilling believes that offering misspelled extensions would also be valuable investments for domain owners and website operators. In a chance to explain his logic, he states, “Imagine if you had 50 misspelling TLDs of .COM (i.e. CPM, .DOM, .XOM, .CON) that could "only" return traffic to the correct .COM version … like an ON/OFF switch. The domain couldn't point to a third location, it could only return traffic to the correct .COM or .NET for variants like .NERT, .NETT .MET etc.”
Every party involved would stand a profit according to Schilling. “ICANN gets revenues from new TLDs, registrants get real value for their domain purchase in the form of recovered traffic, hundreds of millions of variant "shadow domain names" get sold, and everyone is happy.” Well, maybe not everyone involved. Since Microsoft and Google, presently receive the full benefit of lost traffic from domain owners through the Firefox and IE browsers, they will most likely protest the passing of Schillings’s re-routing patent.
Moreover, not much has been considered with regards to potential trademark infringements that could arise should Schilling’s patent pass and when the new extensions arrive. What happens when more than one business feels they own the rights to one of the new domains and it’s TLD and both feel it should automatically redirect to their domain. Also, who’s to say cars.cim, a possible new extension, should redirect to cars.com instead of cars.co.uk or cars.co.com, the future Columbian TLD?
Many things must be considered before the passing of the “Generic top-level domain re-routing system” patent. One thing’s certain though; Schilling’s patent would benefit ICANN and many current domain owners. In Schilling’s opinion, “This is just a way of taking [lost traffic] back and paying for the Internet's infrastructure in the process.” With no set timeframe as to when new extensions will be introduced, the question still remains if Schilling has a chance at getting his patent approved, due to some of the aforementioned concerns. “The patent could launch with or without ICANN, but it will take ICANN to make it useful” Schilling ultimately suggests.
