[64261] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Tomatoes for Verisign at NANOG 29
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Germann)
Fri Oct 17 21:52:37 2003
Reply-To: <ekgermann@cctec.com>
From: "Eric Germann" <ekgermann@cctec.com>
To: "Kenny Sallee" <k_sallee@yahoo.com>,
"Matt Levine" <matt@deliver3.com>,
"Dan Riley" <dsr@mail.lns.cornell.edu>
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 21:42:57 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20031017200231.91249.qmail@web41509.mail.yahoo.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Wouldn't it be just as easy to pay GoDaddy $9 per year and do a redirect
yourself instead of relying on a verisign that half the knowledgable network
ops community has filtered/blackholed?
Eric
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of
> Kenny Sallee
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 4:03 PM
> To: Matt Levine; Dan Riley
> Cc: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Tomatoes for Verisign at NANOG 29
>
>
>
>
> > Has anybody thought to explore the trademark
> > implications of sitefinder?
> >
> > For example, verisign is returning A records (and
> > subsequently earning
> > revenue from that traffic) for say:
> >
> > COKE-SOFT-DRINK.COM
> > TIDE-DETERGENT.COM
> >
> > etc..
> >
>
> >From another perspective, it could be how Verisign
> plans on making money off this. If they can redirect
> to their own Site Finder site, I'm sure they can
> redirect to other large corporations, who would
> probably pay for that kind of service. Buy this
> service, user types www.coke-soft-drink.com, and gets
> redirected automatically to www.coke.com.
> Corporations now have a much broader reach then
> yesterday. They'd make a deal on the trademark thing,
> if there is one.
>
> Kenny
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
