Webwork
msg:4104654 | 7:20 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Add these two newly registered "likely voice of the oppostion" domains to the list:
Domain Name: JCPENNYSUCKS.COM
Registrar: CSC CORPORATE DOMAINS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.corporatedomains.com
Referral URL: [cscglobal.com...]
Name Server: NS.JCPENNEY.COM
Name Server: NS2.JCPENNEY.COM
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Domain Name: JCPSUCKS.COM
Registrar: CSC CORPORATE DOMAINS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.corporatedomains.com
Referral URL: [cscglobal.com...]
Name Server: NS.JCPENNEY.COM
Name Server: NS2.JCPENNEY.COM
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Updated Date: 25-mar-2010
Creation Date: 25-mar-2010
Expiration Date: 25-mar-2013
Updated Date: 25-mar-2010
Creation Date: 25-mar-2010
Expiration Date: 25-mar-2013
Interesting that JCP is so late to the game of preemptively registering their "sucks" name. :P
Is the list in post#1 akin to JCP cybersquatting on the union organizers likely domains?
If you were organizing for the union and wanted to get a message out into the Web how might you use this list? [edited by: Webwork at 7:42 pm (utc) on Mar 25, 2010]
|
buckworks
msg:4104666 | 7:40 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Is it valid to assume that "anti-union" equates to "anti-working man/woman"?
This is an interesting list, but I'm not sure what it achieves.
|
maximillianos
msg:4104679 | 7:51 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Seems like a waste of time/money/resources. What about adding a hyphen, the list becomes infinite...
This is not a solution, just a waste. In my opinion... =)
|
arieng
msg:4104681 | 7:57 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
I agree that this was a bad idea, probably from somewhere in their legal department. What I really have a hard time fathoming is why they attached their name to them. Why not just register them anonymously with no one the wiser?
|
Webwork
msg:4104683 | 7:59 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
I'll venture that JCP spent ~$1,000+ on this move.
Will it actually stop anything from happening online? VERY doubtful.
IF that's the case then is the "word list" (domains) and what may be represented in registering those words, potentially detrimental to JCP?
Do people in Web reputation management actually think these things through?
|
CyBerAliEn
msg:4104705 | 8:27 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Considering that the average person won't know anything about this, and even if they did know... they probably don't care.
It seems odd and stupid to me. But hey, its a cheap way to try and block a few potential websites if that is their goal. I imagine the idea is something incompetent management thought up.
Regardless... you can register whatever you want, and they have very reasonable grounds for trying to grab domains with their name. I really don't see the point for useful discussion... its a pretty stupid idea, but I don't see an underlying conspiracy to crush the unions and the workforce.
|
artek
msg:4104712 | 8:35 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Smart move. It is called Trademark protection and it costs nothing.
|
Lance912
msg:4104720 | 8:42 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Yeah, props to JC Penney.
I don't think it really matters, what some disgruntled union members write on a website shouldn't matter, but $1k is a drop in the bucket to a company like JC Penney, so maybe it prevents some guy making a website and getting TV exposure for it.
|
trillianjedi
msg:4104721 | 8:43 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Standard issue smart move isn't it? Just pre-emptive protection over a trademark.
Unless I'm missing something. I thought we were all doing this..... ?
<edit>
| what may be represented in registering those words, potentially detrimental to JCP? |
|
OK, I get you. Spotted what I'm missing. So in registering these domains there's a potential backfire. Possibly. I think most people would take the view it's just self-protection, given the amount of press that these kinds of domains have had. So I don't see how it could backfire, other than this thread making the homepage here ;)
|
Webwork
msg:4104727 | 8:49 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Is Penney's registration of:
JCP-RWDSULOCAL3.COM
JCP-RWDSU3.COM
JCPENNEY-RWDSU3.COM
JCPMANHATTANUNION.COM
JCPQUEENSUNION.COM
JCPORGANIZE.COM
VOTEUNIONJCPENNEY.COM
VOTEUNIONJCP.COM
really trademark protection in action?
I don't think so. These types of domain registration look more like JCP treading on the brand of the union, a/k/a the union label. RWDSU = Retail Wholesale and Department Store Union.
What about calling the act of registering domain names that are likely online union organizing "locations" the latest version of "union busting [en.wikipedia.org]"?
FWIW, I'm neither for nor against unions, but I am a big fan of people organizing when they share common concerns that may be addressed more effectively if they join their voices.
I'm also a big fan of Web addresses that send a message.
Notice the messages-in-a-domain that JCP just attempted to seize control of? [edited by: Webwork at 9:19 pm (utc) on Mar 25, 2010]
|
rbarker
msg:4104729 | 8:51 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Is it valid to assume that "anti-union" equates to "anti-working man/woman"?
Thanks BW.
|
hutcheson
msg:4104732 | 8:57 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
I can see the union organizers meeting now: "What do we do, Penney's registered all the Penney's-related domain names? I guess we'll just have to close up shop....wait, wait a minute! I've got an idea! We're the pallet-stackers-organized of queens, right? We could buy the domain name "PSOOQ.org", right? And large portions of the sky wouldn't fall...would it?
Some other dude pipes up: "And ... we could register other domains, if we wanted: highpayforpalletstacking.com and dontworkforpennies.com..."
'Course, if there's nobody that bright in the union, it DESERVES to be busted....
|
freejung
msg:4104744 | 9:02 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Humans are very creative. Union organizers will just come up with some other way to describe their opposition: jcpstrike.com or picketjcp.com or protestjcp.com or... the possibilities are endless, and trying to preempt them just makes JCP look silly IMO.
Workingforpennies.com is a good one though, too bad they got that.
|
Webwork
msg:4104752 | 9:13 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Talk about countermeasures, including co-opting another entity's "brand" by registering their name as a domain . . .
"Make The Road [maketheroad.org]" is clearly a reference to a community organizing organization - MakeTheRoad.org - that is organizaing people to support workers organizing for better wages, etc.
82 MAKE-THE-ROAD-JCP.COM
83 MAKE-THE-ROAD-JCP.NET
84 MAKE-THE-ROAD-JCP.ORG
85 MAKE-THE-ROAD-JCPENNEY.COM
86 MAKE-THE-ROAD-JCPENNEY.NET
87 MAKE-THE-ROAD-JCPENNEY.ORG
88 MAKETHEROADJCP.COM
89 MAKETHEROADJCP.NET
90 MAKETHEROADJCP.ORG
91 MAKETHEROADJCPENNEY.COM
92 MAKETHEROADJCPENNEY.NET
93 MAKETHEROADJCPENNEY.ORG
94 MTRJCP.COM
95 MTRJCP.NET
96 MTRJCP.ORG
97 MTRJCPENNEY.COM
98 MTRJCPENNEY.NET
99 MTRJCPENNEY.ORG
Is it brand protection or is it squatting on someone else's brand?
Does JCP have the right to co-opt Make The Road's name? Seems a bit . . off . . to me.
|
trillianjedi
msg:4104759 | 9:26 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
| Does JCP have the right to co-opt Make The Road's name? Seems a bit . . off . . to me. |
|
It does a bit...
| Is it brand protection or is it squatting on someone else's brand? |
|
Hard to call.
If I was JCP, I think I'd take the view that I'd rather own these than let the other side get their hands on them.
So still seems like a sensible move to me. They may also be in possession of some intelligence that we don't know about. Pre-emptive moves are frequently based on intelligence of some kind.
|
Webwork
msg:4104789 | 9:50 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Sensible move? What if, by doing this, JCP establishes the precedent/standard for others now registering JCP's name and appending whatever they wish to it? Might JCP fall prey, in the future, to the "good for the goose, good for the gander" rule?
Sometimes, when I see an interesting activity - one that might be a bellweather - I just . . gets the urge . . to engage the issue. ;)
Clearly the labor/management fight is being taken to the virtual streets . . where virtual barricades are now being erected on certain roads . .
Interesting times.
|
walkman
msg:4104790 | 9:53 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
That's less than $1000 a year. How can it be dumb :) ?
|
rbarker
msg:4104798 | 10:01 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
I own a slew of domains I don't want competitors owning. It's a smart idea from my chair. Very cheap and easy to do.
|
incrediBILL
msg:4104881 | 11:53 pm on Mar 25, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Of course with all that "protection" someone could just register the .us or .info domains.
The .us could be amusing such as:
JCPENNEYWONTPAY.US
JCPENNEYHATES.US
JCPENNEYFIRED.US
You get the idea ;)
|
Freedom
msg:4104911 | 1:43 am on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
When the union rep gets dragged out for the obligatory tv interview, its harder to remember names they dont have on that list- if they allow his url.
Bush registered 200 names b4 he ran 4 pres 1st time.
|
StoutFiles
msg:4104937 | 2:57 am on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Incredibly dumb by JCP.
The possible combinations are just about endless; if anything it just makes people WANT to start a negative JCP site when they hear about this stupidity. Which is just what the OP did.
Webwork, you should contact them and sell those domains back to them at a high price, they're stupid enough to meet your demands.
|
smallcompany
msg:4104941 | 3:10 am on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
This looks like something they know it is going to happen and so they're trying to secure as much (enemy's) ammunition as they can. Somebody who follows their other moves may know more which would fit this new domains related activity.
It's like when you're going into the war, being aware of the fact you're the one causing it, knowing you're going after resources which mean money. Before you jump into it, you prepare well from all perspectives you could think of.
Today's capitalism is about capitalizing on the work of others. Not much different then feudalism. It just has some strong gloves on its hands.
Most of the companies (read owners) would be the happiest if they would have people work for free. Oh, is that called slavery?
No, I'm not union guy, I believe that many unions today are just another type of corp being there for somebody's profit.
Just like some non-profit organizations being there to collect money for researches that they don't want to find the cure - ever.
All this has gone just too far. Or I'm mistaking as it has always been like this, for thousands of years.
Technically, I agree with folks that said this company will not achieve much or anything with this.
|
JS_Harris
msg:4104999 | 6:13 am on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
JCPENNEYWONTPAY.US
JCPENNEYHATES.US
JCPENNEYFIRED.US |
|
Those are funny. The whole thing is a colossal waste of time and energy... but funny.
Actually, the person doing the planning on which names to buy needs to read these forums more. Searching for "JCPENNEY union" in Googles keyword tool returns "union employees" as the 3rd most search for term at 5,000+ a month and "jcpenneyunionemployees" as a dot com is available, lol. Just buying all those names draws attention to the cause, dumb!
|
caribguy
msg:4105039 | 8:44 am on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Waiting for the "pink slip" sale. Sometimes a preemptive move only serves to show your hand to your opponent. I think this might have just happened.
|
piatkow
msg:4105067 | 9:43 am on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Interesting underling question which is being skated over. They are registering format:
trademark1 + trademark2 where trademark1 is their own and trademark2 is somebody elses. I would be interested to see the judgement if it came to court.
|
chicagohh
msg:4105216 | 2:54 pm on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Why should JCP wait around for someone else to purchase these domains?
|
trillianjedi
msg:4105220 | 3:00 pm on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
| Why should JCP wait around for someone else to purchase these domains? |
|
I think the point being made by the "it's dumb" people in this thread is that they can't possibly buy them all (there are thousands of combo's) so in effect there's no point buying any. And actually buying any just indicates to the public what it is you're trying to prevent.
I have to say I'm also coming around to that line of thinking.
I think there are some obvious ones that are worth having, but the majority are perhaps irrelevant and wouldn't prevent a problem.
|
jecasc
msg:4105222 | 3:01 pm on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Quite stupid move. Reminds me of German Telekom who started advertising it's products under names like
T-Mobile, T-Home, T-Systems and so on and also started registering domain names like T-Beutel.de =T(ea)Bag or T-Wurst.de [en.wikipedia.org].
The Union could for example simply register any of those domains with a .us top-level or by adding a year, like:
JCPRESPECT2010.NET
|
Hugene
msg:4105230 | 3:22 pm on Mar 26, 2010 (gmt 0) |
That's really dirty of JCP. Thankfully, like everyone is saying here, there are so many ways to get around their deceptive techniques, hyphens being my favorite.
|
| This 34 message thread spans 2 pages: 34 ( [1] 2 ) > > |
|
|
