Danny Sullivan on Verisign's Site Finder

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Delivered-To: dfarber+ () ux13 sp cs cmu edu
> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:07:06 -0400
> From: Paul Levy <PLEVY () citizen org>
> Subject: Danny Sullivan on Verisign's Site Finder
> To: dave () farber net
>
> Without necessarily endorsing his position, I thought you might want to
> pass on the following comments from search engine guru Danny Sullivan on
> the controversy over the Verisign Site Finder, published in the Serach
> Day newsletter.  (forwarded with his permission)
>
> Paul Alan Levy
> Public Citizen Litigation Group
> 1600 - 20th Street, N.W.
> Washington, D.C. 20009
> (202) 588-1000
> http://www.citizen.org/litigation/litigation.html
>
> >>> "Search Day" <reply-5242-1943-8a08fde102 () nl internet com> 09/17/03
> 02:11PM >>>
>
> Search Engine Watch: Tips About Internet Search Engines & Search Engine
> Submission
>
>
>
>  VeriSign's New Site Finder Redirects Bad Domain Traffic
>
> By  ( mailto:danny () calafia com )  Danny Sullivan
>
>
> VeriSign is now resolving requests for non-existent .COM and .NET
> domains to an error page that features a search engine that it operates
> called ( http://sitefinder.verisign.com/ ) Site Finder, a move that's
> quickly raised controversy.
>
>
> Previously, such bad requests would have resulted in an error that in
> turn would be handled in different ways by various browsers.
>
>
> For example, consider a request for the non-existent ww.amazon.co.uk
> web site. Entering that into Internet Explorer produces an error page
> saying, "We can't find ww.amazon.co.uk." The page provides an option to
> search the web using the Microsoft-owned MSN Search service. It's also
> offers the helpful message, "Did you intend to go to one of these
> similar Web addresses?" with the correct www.amazon.co.uk site listed as
> a link.
>
>
> You can still see the error message shown above in Internet Explorer
> because the domain I used in the example does NOT end in .COM or .NET.
> For those domains, a change that VeriSign made on Monday means you'll be
> redirected to its search engine (if this isn't yet happening for you,
> it's because it will take a few days for the new system to fully
> propagate across the web).
>
>
> The move, only days old, is already proving controversial. VeriSign is
> being accused of hijacking traffic, though who exactly "owns" the
> traffic to non-existent domains is entirely unclear.
>
>
> Indeed, back when Netscape introduced "Smart Browsing," it faced
> accusations from .COM domain owners that it was somehow robbing them of
> traffic. For example, prominent blogger Dave Winer at the time was
> disturbed that those entering just the word "scripting" were not
> resolved to his web site of scripting.com. My past story from that time,
>  (
> http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/article.php/2166461 ) Netscape
> Smart Browsing Available, Debated, explains the situation in more
> detail.
>
>
> Today, it's Internet Explorer that dominates the browser marketshare.
> IE has its own
> (http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/article.php/2164691 )
> mechanisms for dealing with bad domains or when a particular page no
> longer exists (my past story
> (http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/article.php/2164691 ) Searching
> & Navigating Via Internet Explorer covers this, though the RealNames
> system no longer operates). If anyone is being "robbed" by VeriSign,
> it's Microsoft -- yet Microsoft itself has come under accusations of
> somehow robbing people of traffic because of its own resolution
> systems.
>
>
> In general, the main concern shouldn't be on who owns the traffic but
> whether the user experience is being improved. VeriSign argues that it
> is.
>
>
> "Like many registries, we are continually exploring how to enhance the
> internet user experience, and Site Finder does that for millions of
> users each day. And it reintroduces consistency into the mistyped domain
> name experience, since Site Finder is implemented uniformly regardless
> of the particular application," said Christopher Parente, senior manager
> of naming and directory services with VeriSign.
>
>
> I've been generally impressed with how Internet Explorer handles
> things. It remains to be seen whether VeriSign will live up to or exceed
> that standard. To get an early measure, I tried a few queries:
> wwwww.amazon.com:  (
> http://search.msn.com/dnserror.aspx?FORM=DNSAS&q=wwwww.amazon.com )
> MSN failed but ( http://sitefinder.verisign.com/lpc?url=wwwww.amazon.com
> ) VeriSign
> succeeded in suggesting www.amazon.com as a useful
> alternativewww.serchenginewatch.com:
> Both  (
> http://search.msn.com/dnserror.aspx?FORM=DNSAS&q=www.serchenginewatch.com
> ) MSN
> and ( http://sitefinder.verisign.com/lpc?url=www.serchenginewatch.com )
> VeriSign succeeded in suggesting www.searchenginewatch.com as a useful
> alternativeggoogle.com: Both  (
> http://search.msn.com/dnserror.aspx?FORM=DNSAS&q=ggoogle.com ) MSN and
> (http://sitefinder.verisign.com/lpc?url=ggoogle.com ) VeriSign succeeded
> in listing www.google.com as a useful   alternative wwww.quicken.com:
> Both  (
> http://search.msn.com/dnserror.aspx?FORM=DNSAS&q=wwww.quicken.com ) MSN
> and (
> http://sitefinder.verisign.com/lpc?url=wwww.quicken.com ) VeriSign
> listed the
> www.quicken.com site as a useful alternative
>
> Overall, VeriSign certainly appears no worse than what MSN was
> offering. My main disagreement is that the alternative addresses,
> presented under the "Did You Mean" heading, appear only after you see a
> search box. The same is true with MSN. In both cases, it would be better
> to flip-flop the order.
>
>
> I do dislike that the VeriSign service feels more commercial than what
> MSN does. The VeriSign error page offers a "Search Popular Categories"
> option. Since it was navigational request that originally generated the
> page, rather than a search request, offering this type of suggestive
> sell to browse paid listings from Overture feels exploitive rather than
> useful.
>
>
> While the user experience remains a main concern, the VeriSign move
> also has raised some other issues, in particular whether the change will
> have an impact on other internet aspects, such as how mail gets resolved
> and security issues. You can find a rundown about these issues in some
> of the stories below. The first two have some reaction from AOL and MSN,
> and the last ones touch on implementation issues.
>  (
> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/aptech_story.asp?category=1700&slug=Internet
>
> Typos ) Service finds Web sites even if mistyped, AP (
> http://www.iht.com/articles/110084.html ) A wave of Web profits in
> guiding lost surfers, New York Times (
> http://news.com.com/2100-1032-5077530.html ) VeriSign redirects error
> pages, News.com ( http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1063691303 )
> VeriSign Hijacks Unused Domains, BetaNews, BetaNews (
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/09/16/0034210&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=95&tid=98&tid=99
> ) Resolving Everything: VeriSign Adds Wildcards, Slashdot
> (http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,60473,00.html ) ISC to
> Cut Off Site Finder, Wired (
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19860-2003Sep16.html )
> Software
> Aimed at Blocking VeriSign's Search Program, AP
>
> Ultimately, it will be interesting to see how MSN and AOL respond. My
> assumption is that both parties might be able to configure their systems
> to avoid the new VeriSign errors pages, if they so choose.
>
>
> I asked MSN if Microsoft could override what VeriSign but didn't get a
> response to the question. Instead, MSN offered a general comment on the
> situation.
>
> "MSN remains 100 percent committed to providing our customers with the
> most relevant search results. VeriSign's decision to redirect traffic
> from misspelled queries isn't of great concern to us, because the amount
> of traffic driven to MSN search through misspelled queries is
> insignificant. We are also focused on generating traffic from satisfied
> and repeat consumers rather than counting on mistyped query traffic,"
> said MSN product manager Karen Redetzki.
>
>  A  (
> http://searchenginewatch.com/_subscribers/articles/article.php/3078301
> ) longer,
> more detailed version of this article is
> available to Search Engine Watch members.
>   (
> http://searchenginewatch.com/benefits/article.php?source=0309-verisign
> ) Click here to
> learn more about becoming a member

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/