3 ms·

Google owned duck.com redirects to Google.com. How is this legal?

16 points by ausvisaissues 10y ago

Here is the DNS information: https://whois.icann.org/en/lookup?name=duck.com How can this be legal, since clearly the name is similar to a rival search engine?

willcate 10y ago
Old news: http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/01/30/we-bet-you-dont-know-who-owns-duck-com-and-what-it-redirects-to/ http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/01/30/we-bet-you-dont-kno...
detaro 10y ago
"duck" also is a common english word, and quite far from any of the trademarks or domains owned by DDG. They don't display content that could confuse a user. If this were illegal, a single trademark would block way to many different words. It's not particularly nice of Google (e.g. they could sell the domain or just leave it pointing to nothing if they don't have fittingly named product/project right now), but it shouldn't be illegal.
mikejb 10y ago
Preface: I have only little knowledge aboud DNS records. Feel free to correct or add any information. Here is what 10 minutes on the internet got me: - According to Wikipedia [0] DDG started 2008 - The whois record shows 1995 as creation date (I assume this is the first time someone registered it back then?) - According to [1] the Domain changed owners 3 times (since 2002); These records indicate Google bought the domain latest in 2010 - According to [2] DuckDuckGo Traffic 2010 was between 40k-80k quries per day (~0.5 - 1 QPS) Unfortunately, this doesn't allow (me) to draw a clear conclusion. (If duck.go were bought in 2005 or 2015, it would have been more clear...) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuckDuckGo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuckDuckGo [1] http://whoisrequest.com/history/ http://whoisrequest.com/history/ [2] https://duckduckgo.com/traffic.html https://duckduckgo.com/traffic.html
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  https://web.archive.org/web/20101002183258/http://duck.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20101002183258/http://duck.com/ in October 2010 it still had the website for a software development company. The redirect was added shortly after in 2010: https://web.archive.org/web/20101203075708/http://www.duck.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20101203075708/http://www.duck.c... I don't think there's even malice. They probably bought the domain and "parked" it by doing a 301 to Google.com - that's it.
  - lucideer 10y ago
    It apparently came to them when they acquired the Duck Corporation[0], but I think it seems slightly naïve to assume no malice in setting up the redirect. Google own many many domains that do not redirect to google.com or similar. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_Corporation
roschdal 10y ago
Google is being evil here.
ktta 10y ago
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3524164 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3524164
joe563323 10y ago
The question is not legal its about ethical. Why Google Why ?
Raed667 10y ago
This has bad-faith written all over it. I think a court would agree.
mrmffh 10y ago
How is it illegal?
type0 10y ago
This is really unfortunate, it makes duck.co to loose visitors to google.
tw04 10y ago
This is more than a little bit silly. Duck.com used to be owned by On2 Technologies which made video compression software. Google acquired On2 and got duck.com as part of the deal. It's not like they went out and just bought the domain. And they definitely didn't spend $106 MILLION on a video compression company just to get the domain. This is entirely legal. http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2009/08/google-to-acquire-on2-technologies_05.html http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2009/08/google-to-acquire-on... https://web.archive.org/web/20080301180912/http://www.duck.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20080301180912/http://www.duck.c...

16 points by ausvisaissues 10y ago

Here is the DNS information: https://whois.icann.org/en/lookup?name=duck.com How can this be legal, since clearly the name is similar to a rival search engine?

willcate 10y ago

Old news: http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/01/30/we-bet-you-dont-know-who-owns-duck-com-and-what-it-redirects-to/ http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/01/30/we-bet-you-dont-kno...

detaro 10y ago

"duck" also is a common english word, and quite far from any of the trademarks or domains owned by DDG. They don't display content that could confuse a user. If this were illegal, a single trademark would block way to many different words. It's not particularly nice of Google (e.g. they could sell the domain or just leave it pointing to nothing if they don't have fittingly named product/project right now), but it shouldn't be illegal.

mikejb 10y ago

Preface: I have only little knowledge aboud DNS records. Feel free to correct or add any information. Here is what 10 minutes on the internet got me: - According to Wikipedia [0] DDG started 2008 - The whois record shows 1995 as creation date (I assume this is the first time someone registered it back then?) - According to [1] the Domain changed owners 3 times (since 2002); These records indicate Google bought the domain latest in 2010 - According to [2] DuckDuckGo Traffic 2010 was between 40k-80k quries per day (~0.5 - 1 QPS) Unfortunately, this doesn't allow (me) to draw a clear conclusion. (If duck.go were bought in 2005 or 2015, it would have been more clear...) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuckDuckGo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuckDuckGo [1] http://whoisrequest.com/history/ http://whoisrequest.com/history/ [2] https://duckduckgo.com/traffic.html https://duckduckgo.com/traffic.html

NetStrikeForce 10y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20101002183258/http://duck.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20101002183258/http://duck.com/ in October 2010 it still had the website for a software development company. The redirect was added shortly after in 2010: https://web.archive.org/web/20101203075708/http://www.duck.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20101203075708/http://www.duck.c... I don't think there's even malice. They probably bought the domain and "parked" it by doing a 301 to Google.com - that's it.
- lucideer 10y ago
  It apparently came to them when they acquired the Duck Corporation[0], but I think it seems slightly naïve to assume no malice in setting up the redirect. Google own many many domains that do not redirect to google.com or similar. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_Corporation

roschdal 10y ago

Google is being evil here.

ktta 10y ago

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3524164 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3524164

joe563323 10y ago

The question is not legal its about ethical. Why Google Why ?

Raed667 10y ago

This has bad-faith written all over it. I think a court would agree.

mrmffh 10y ago

How is it illegal?

type0 10y ago

This is really unfortunate, it makes duck.co to loose visitors to google.

tw04 10y ago

This is more than a little bit silly. Duck.com used to be owned by On2 Technologies which made video compression software. Google acquired On2 and got duck.com as part of the deal. It's not like they went out and just bought the domain. And they definitely didn't spend $106 MILLION on a video compression company just to get the domain. This is entirely legal. http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2009/08/google-to-acquire-on2-technologies_05.html http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2009/08/google-to-acquire-on... https://web.archive.org/web/20080301180912/http://www.duck.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20080301180912/http://www.duck.c...