Subscribe to RSS Feed

02|15|2010 1:56 pm EDT

PCWorld Recommends to Block Information.com

by Frank Michlick in Categories: Up to the Minute - 4 Comments

IDG’s PCWorld just published an article by Jared Newman about 15 Internet Annoyances and how to fix them. Of course the author thinks that parked domains are one of them, even if they may actually get the user to where they want to go. So Newman recommends all domains that involve framed parking on the Oversee.net owned Information.com domain:

13. This Web Site is Bogus

Sometimes when you mistype a URL or click an old, abandoned link, you’ll come upon these junky Web sites filled with useless links, a search bar that returns who-knows-what and a deliciously ironic slogan, “What you need, when you need it.” This is the work of cybersquatters, who occupy Web sites in hopes that you’ll click on those links and make them some money.

The Fix: Firefox users can once again use BlockSite to turn one major cybersquatter’s Web sites into blank pages–just add “*.information.com” to your restricted list. This will foil one major cybersquatter whos sites always refer back to that domain, but unfortunately the same trick doesn’t work in Internet Explorer’s list of restricted sites. No matter what browser you’re in, never give squatters the satisfaction of clicking on anything.

Of course the article also calls anyone who would re-register and park a previously registered and expired domain a cybersquatter, forgetting that the term implies an actual infringement on someones trademark. Maybe we should add journalists who do not do proper research to the list? I guess I could post that as a comment on his article, but then again, that would require registration on the site, which also is one of the annoyances he lists.

Tags: Tags: , , , , , , .

4 Comments

Belmassio

February 15, 2010 @ 2:25 pm EDT

Now that is some disgustingly oblivious reporting by PC World when they don’t even do the research and label every domain investor a cybersquatter.

Hey PC World ….. how about hiring some real reporters that look up definitions? At the least, why don’t you post a retraction regarding this giant oversight? That at least would help maintain your reputation a bit.

Sheesh! Talk about stupidity.

jp

February 15, 2010 @ 2:28 pm EDT

I’ve always felt that information.com thing was a big mistake. Too easy to block! Wonder how long before they change that now.

Andrew

February 15, 2010 @ 4:18 pm EDT

No worries. The person who spends the time to block information.com isn’t going to click on an ad anyway.

Stephen Douglas

February 17, 2010 @ 7:13 am EDT

Don’t worry, boys. I’ll go in there and post a “my grandma is smarter than you” comment. Gotta speak your mind! Don’t be timid like the US Senate!

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks