Typosquatting
Typosquatting, also called URL hijacking, is a form of cybersquatting which relies on mistakes such as typographical errors made by Internet users when inputting a website address into a web browser. Should a user accidentally enter an incorrect website address, they may be led to an alternative website owned by a cybersquatter.[1]
Contents |
[edit] Overview
The typosquatter's URL will usually be one of four kinds, all similar to the victim site address:
(In the following, the intended website is "example.com")
- A common misspelling, or foreign language spelling, of the intended site: exemple.com
- A misspelling based on typing errors: xample.com or examlpe.com
- A differently phrased domain name: examples.com
- A different top-level domain: example.org
Once in the typosquatter's site, the user may also be tricked into thinking that they are in fact in the real site; through the use of copied or similar logos, website layouts or content.
[edit] Examples
A famous example of Typosquatting is Goggle.com, an extremely dangerous website which infects the user with spyware. Another similar website is yuube.com, which is similar to goggle.com except it targets YouTube users.[2] Similarly, www.airfrance.com has been typosquatted by www.arifrance.com, diverting users to a website peddling discount travel.[3]
[edit] In United States law
In the United States, the 1999 Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) contains a clause (Section 3(a), amending 15 USC 1117 to include sub-section (d)(2)(B)(ii)) aimed at combatting typosquatting.[4][5]
However, on April 17, 2006, controversial evangelist Jerry Falwell failed to get the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision allowing Christopher Lamparello to use "www.fallwell.com". Relying on a plausible misspelling of Falwell's name, Lamparello's gripe site presents misdirected visitors with scriptural references that counter the fundamentalist preacher's scathing rebukes against homosexuality. In Lamparello v. Falwell, the high court let stand a 2005 Fourth Circuit finding that "the use of a mark in a domain name for a gripe site criticizing the markholder does not constitute cybersquatting."
[edit] WIPO resolution procedure
Under the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP), trademark holders can file a case at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) against typosquatters (as with cybersquatters in general).[3] The complainant has to show that the registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to their trademark, that the registrant has no legitimate interest in the domain name, and that the domain name is being used in bad faith.[3]
[edit] See also
- Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act
- Damerau–Levenshtein distance
- DNS
- IDN homograph attack
- Mousetrapping
- Phishing
- UDRP
[edit] References
- ^ Microsoft Strider project with screenshots of typosquatted domains.
- ^ "Internet". The Times Of India. 5 May 2010. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/infotech/internet/Typosquatters-roam-unchecked-in-India/articleshow/5884936.cms.
- ^ a b c Kelly M. Slavitt: Protecting Your Intellectual Property from Domain Name Typosquatters (2004)
- ^ "Anti-CyberSquatting Protection Act." US Library of Congress, Thomas.loc.gov, accessed 24 October 2008.
- ^ "Without typosquatters, how far would Google fall?" Cade Metz, The Register, Theregister.co.uk, accessed 24 October 2008.
[edit] External links
- Jim Giles: Typos may earn Google $500m a year New Scientist, 17 February 2010 (reporting research by Ben Edelman and Tyler Moore: Measuring Typosquatting Perpetrators and Funders)
- "The Internet Commerce Association Code of Conduct". InternetCommerce.org. http://internetcommerce.org/internet_commerce_association_announces_member_code_of_conduct_affirming_its_commitment_to_best_practices. Retrieved 2007-09-13. "The Internet Commerce Association’s (ICA) Member Code of Conduct expresses the ICA’s recognition of the responsibilities of its members to the intellectual property, domain name, and at large Internet communities and will guide members in conducting their domain name investment and development activities with professionalism, respect and integrity."
- "The Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse to Combat Cybersquatting". ComplianceAndPrivacy.com. http://complianceandprivacy.com/News-CADNA-campaign.html. Retrieved 2007-09-20. "With growing ease and profitability, sophisticated cybersquatters are exploiting a flaw in the domain name registration process whereby domain names are registered and subsequently dropped, risk free, within an accepted 5-day grace period."
|
|||||||||||
