VA Tech-related domain names blow in

[slaughterbeck]

In the past five days, hundreds of Virginia Tech-related domain names have been registered that appear to be suspect, security experts warn.

And they further note that these potentially malicious sites have been registered at a quicker clip than those for Hurricane Katrina.

In sizing up the Virginia Tech domain names, which deal with the shooting massacre at the sprawling campus, security researcher SANS Institute noted: "Some of them are used for benevolent purposes. However, a good share of them are parked for auction and even used for fraudulent donations."

SANS, with the aid of outside security researchers, culled through approximately 551 Virginia Tech-related domain names and found only two belonging to a charity and 57 deemed as "innocent" sites. The majority of the VA Tech-related sites, 381, were found to be "parked," with another 42 sites up for sale and 35 as having "questionable" status. Six of the sites were characterized as "fraud."

A dark day for the nation is posed to become darker yet for some.

Source: Com.com

 

[fonzie_007]

When huksters profit off of a tragedy it further reinforces the bad reputation our industry has with the general public.

 

[labrocca]

I personally don't see domainers as any different than the rest of the media such as news organizations that repeat the story and any details learned over and over again. Domainers wouldn't reg these names if the general population didn't visit or search for VT information.

 

[Peter]

I personally don't see domainers as any different than the rest of the media such as news organizations that repeat the story and any details learned over and over again. Domainers wouldn't reg these names if the general population didn't visit or search for VT information.

News providers are providing a service and reporting on the events. Many of the virginia tech domain names that were regged were 100% regged to try to sell on for a profit straight away. The news corporation is not trying to 100% get profit from the tragedy but the domain reg person is.

 

[AzN]

I regged one VA-Tech domain but it's not going to be used for profit
Not all domainers is that greedy

 

[AdoptableDomains]

Unfortunately it's not the few with good intent that get the publicity.

 

[Sir Regalot]

Also:

http://www.thewhir.com/marketwatch/042007_Speculators_Buying_Virginia_Domains.cfm

 

[circa1850]

Only 20 of the many stories I saw and read today on the subject. None paint a very pleasant picture of the domain industry at present. I am confident there will be a tremendous amount of public demand for reform.

We claim it is our right. Yet some have no issue violating the rights of others in pursuit of their fight for their rights.

Some change may come slow. Others will come rapid.

It was just reported that Cho purchased all his magazines on eBay. How quickly do you think eBay will respond to the outcry of selling gun parts before they ban them?

With all the negative press on domain names (and eBay mentioned over and over), how soon do you see ebay pulling the plug on domain names? Possible scenario. eBay love for self and the profit margin will do whatever it takes to appease the masses and keep the cash cow fed.

Legitimate domainers will feel the impact from all of this. From the registars to the parking companies to the ad feeds to the way we conduct business. Look for a federal investigation to sweep in the domain industry into their investigation.

More domain names have been registered over this tragedy in such a short period than any other time in the history of the internet surpassing the Katrina regs.

Here are the 20 (of many articles) I read today:

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/19/HNspammersseizeonshootings_1.html
http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9710857-7.html
http://weblog.infoworld.com/zeroday/archives/2007/04/spammers_tappin.html
http://www.fox19.com/Global/story.asp?S=6392371&nav=0zHF
http://www.cnbc.com/id/18229969
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/VATech/story?id=3060386
http://www.goupstate.com/article/20070420/NEWS/704200346/1051/NEWS01
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/04/godaddy_registe.html
http://www.securecomputing.net.au/news/50106,virginia-tech-massacre-may-spawn-phishing-scams.aspx
http://www.wired.com/culture/education/news/2007/04/vt_domainname
http://www.thewhir.com/
http://www.dailysouthtown.com/news/opinion/editorials/345407,181EDT1.article
http://scmagazine.com/us/news/article/651531/virginia-tech-massacre-may-spawn-phishing-scams
http://www.computing.co.uk/vnunet/news/2187983/security-firms-brace-virgina
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=9042
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/04/18/1176696889800.html?from=top5
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=45598&in_page_id=34
http://www.contracostatimes.com/living/ci_5693847
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/04/owner_of_virgin.html
http://www.roanoke.com/vtreactions/wb/113518
http://www.metimes.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20070418-070559-6758r

 

[goodkarmaco]

Peter,

all business wants to get 100% of their market.

News is big business and like greedy domainers the news is trying to place themselves in every situation that the masses are into. If the masses are looking up information about this tragedy the news organization is right there. Every time they are "right there" you will see pay per click ads.

I guess with all the new registrations, all the places like Godaddy made money too from these names.

I hear a few talk about the "its ok for media as that is their job". That makes no sense to me as they to can make choices. Because the media makes a profit is not a good reason to say its ok for domainers to make money from Virg. tech names. The reason to say itis ok is if you see no problem with it. That is a individual choice.

The reality is every big event will have its domain period for those events. Most will become old memories. A few will become established. Free choice will determine which names become useful.


The reason why some say it is ok is like Labrocca states, domainers wouldn't have these names if people did not click or look for the information. I suppose that when millions of people are clicking on the ppc links found on Aol, Cnn, or Yahoo and bringing in piles of money for those companies that those actions to are based on free choice.

People want information about such sad events. Mourning is a individual experience. It may bother you or me to see ppc ads on pages registered to domain owners, but many are grateful to find revelent links from their search.

 

[RogueWriter]

It is interesting that most of the defense for people registering tragedy domains seems to invoke an all or nothing clause. "If I can't make money off of tragedies, no one can." Yet, a specific tragedy is not the reason for a news station's existence, whereas registering a tragedy domain and putting it up for auction for $25K on eBay provides no value to the population at large and has no ulterior purpose than to fulfill the owner's sense of greed.

There is a difference between providing a legitimate service and taking advantage of people. Taking an all or nothing approach is not a valid argument. That's like saying, "Since we can't catch every criminal, we shouldn't persue any of them."

all business wants to get 100% of their market.

That's not true. I would qualify that as saying, "All business wants to get as much of their market as they are comfortable with." Lending companies set guidelines that restrict who they will sell to. Our family business keeps selling American Manufactured goods, in spite of pressures to promote overseas goods, that would allow us to dominate our niche. Other industries avoid the niches in their market where the profit is minimal, or that perhaps requires them to upgrade their equipment. Going back to our business, if we truly wanted to control the U.S. market, we might be able to do that - but we would have to open up branches in every region/state of the U.S.


Now, if you also throw ethics and morality into it, you won't find the Christian Science Monitor pandering to the adult entertainment niche, because that clearly violates their morality and the morality of their readership. They might gain readership, overall, if they have a swimsuit issue, but the money coming in from adult entertainment would never be enough for them to justify cornering that market.

 

[goodkarmaco]

A single domain registration is not the goal of most domainers. Just like a news organization. Some domainers may have a whole bunch of those types of names.

Actually the term news organization is quite misleading. They are not non- profit organizations. They exist solely for profit.

Rogue writers choice of not importing his products is based on pride for the product they produce and wanting to keep the products made locally. That may be good for your family business. Someday though some other company may do the importing and provide your company with stiff competition. Not always a bad thing I guess as your products may be superior, but the competition is something your family business will have to address if it comes along.

Variety of activities is what is so good about this country. some may take the Christian Science Monitor view and subscribe to that, others want the dirt and grit.

I guess what I am saying is although it may be disgusting to some of us domainers to jump in and register names that are a response to a tragedy, folks have the right to do that, also the public has a right to click on those links if that is their choice. Free choice allows for all views.

 

[DylanButler]

We all have our agenda

 

[Ronald Regging]

I don't mean to belittle the significance of what happened at VT, it truly was a horrible tragedy, but I have to agree that companies profit off the deaths of others everyday, and usually in a "legitimate" manner. If you want to get technical, a lot of companies made a lot of money off of 9/11, but wrapped it up in nice little "patriotic" packaging, which somehow made it completely acceptable. But you find a case of an individual attempting to profit off of a similar situation, and suddenly they're to be held up to higher standards of morality and ethics than giant corporations? Why, because you can relate more to an individual than a corporation? I guess it's easy to pass judgement on an individual when it's something that is generally perceived as wrong by many, but when corporations conceal the same type of unethical profiteering with pretty packaging and PR stunts, we're all on board to support them with our hard earned money.

All I know about tragedies is that a lot of people like to jump on board and start pointing fingers in situations that they otherwise wouldn't even care about, had it not been compounded into a singular event that made it hard to ignore...

Personally I don't care what other people do, I got enough work ahead of me to save my own soul

 

[goodkarmaco]

Slipx,

your points are exactly true.

I am very concerned about name calling and harsh actions towards those who register any tragedy domains. It is very unprofessional. It does not matter if it is in the banking business or in the domain business, we owe others respect. If we do not agree with what they are doing it is fine to say so, but in a polite and respectful way, at least that is how I feel.

Most domainers are very polite folks and are some of the most helpful people I know. The community is small, but a helping hand to others is one attribute that sets us apart from other business groups and I like that.

I really see no benefit in bringing this negative attention to the media, the public and the search engines. Domain owners run their own businesses and each person is a individual. Chastizing them for making money from tragedy seems to me a negative thing to do.

 

[Archangel]

I think a lot of good points were made here http://www.namepros.com/domain-name-discussion/320317-how-sickening-another-ebayer-trying-make.html