Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Availability Of Any BlogSpot URL That's Not In Use

I've been arguing the plain facts about URL non availability for years - if the BlogSpot URL of your choice is in use, you can't have it. That's not an easy answer for many bloggers, and some don't accept it without a lot of arguing. The other side of the coin is that any available URL is there for the taking, by anybody. Relevance of the name in question, to any physical existence outside the Internet world, has no validity.

Today, we have a query of an issue not previously argued.
I have website "TheNameThatIHave.com". Today, I discovered that somebody else is publishing to "TheNameThatIHave.blogspot.com". That's not right - I should have the right to "TheNameThatIHave.blogspot.com"!


And the answer here is
No, if somebody else has "TheNameThatIHave.blogspot.com", it's their URL. You have no claim to "TheNameThatIHave.blogspot.com", simply by having "TheNameThatIHave.com".


There are multiple top level domains on the Internet, as well as various country based top level domains, and numerous web hosts similar to Blogger. Each domain / host has their own name directory, and assigns / allows assignment of names from its own universe. Assignment of any name in one top level domain / sub domain directory is irrelevant to eligibility to the same, or similar, name in any other directory.

There is no screening, to determine the validity of anybody to publish to "TheNameThatIHave.blogspot.com", for any value of "TheNameThatIHave". If the URL "TheNameThatIHave.blogspot.com" is available for publishing, every blogger has equal claim to take it. If you see it, and you take it, you have it - for eternity. The moment you take it, nobody else has any claim over it - for eternity. If somebody else took it, you have no claim over it - even if you own "TheNameThatIHave.com".

As the well used adages go
First come, first served.
and
You snooze, you lose.


>> Top

5 comments:

Susan said...

I see what you mean. But, would that be true even if the word in the blogspot url were a trademarked term? Could I be pepsi.blogspot.com? Or fordmotorcompany.blogspot.com, if it wasn't already taken? Is that just Pepsi's tough luck that they didn't get it first?

Stanford Griffith said...

Susan, the courts are now starting side with major companies and celebrities that claim URL domains with their names in them belong to them no matter what.

For example, Pepsi might claim that pepsi.com, pepsirocks.com, and ihatepepsi.com are all theirs even if you actually purchased them. A number of recent cases have forced transfer of ownership to the companies.

On the other hand, if your company is called Joe's Market, which is pretty generic, the courts probably wouldn't enforce the same standards because it is so generic.

I except that the same would happen with a Blogspot name if the company were to push it. But that's a legal issue, not something that Blogspot would probably handle automatically.

Chuck said...

Let's get real here. Companies like MercedesBenz, Pepsi, Sony - they own the courts. Their attorneys don't waste time here.

Anybody asking here how to take over "TheNameThatIHave.blogspot.com" doesn't have deep pockets like MercedesBenz, Pepsi, or Sony. And Blogger won't help us, either.

And since I am of the firm opinion that you get search engine reputation from content and readers, not from the blog name (URL), I'll continue to advise you to start your blog now, and use a URL that's available now.

Mesmer7 said...

You guys are also missing an important point. This request is about an "abandoned" URL.

If someone abandons a top-level domain name, that domain name goes up for sale. Anyone can purchase an expired name.

But an abandoned subdomain name on blogspot just sits there. If someone abandons a blog (in this case over 2 years ago) why shouldn't we be able to ask blogger to consider freeing up the address?

M said...

What if the blog address is taken, but there is no actual content on the blog ie. completely blank white page?
Why would this be so and why should I not be able to have that?