How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands
Posted January 08, 2009, in Apple, Branding, Copyright Law, Domain Names, Erik's Favorites, For Sale, Google, How To, Internet Law, Marketing, Microsoft, Social Networking, Startups, Technology, Trademark Law, Twitter by Erik J. Heels (permalink: http://www.erikjheels.com/1298.html)
A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy.
The Problem
Of the top 100 global brands, 93% have had their Twitter usernames taken by somebody else (i.e. Twittersquatted).
Twittersquatting, like cybersquatting, is when somebody registers a company's trademark (or a famous person's name) as a Twitter username with the intent of profiting or causing confusion. Other possible names for this practice include username squatting, usernamesquatting, squitting, usersquatting, and brandsquatting.
But username squatting is not limited to Twitter. It exists on any service that uses name-based accounts. Check your brand on Usernamecheck.com to see just how widespread the problem is. I am picking on Twitter because it is rapidly growing in popularity and because Twitter's dispute resolution policy is particularly poor:
5. You may not use the Twitter.com service for any illegal or unauthorized purpose. International users agree to comply with all local laws regarding online conduct and acceptable content.
…
10. You must not, in the use of Twitter, violate any laws in your jurisdiction (including but not limited to copyright laws).
…
1. We reserve the right to modify or terminate the Twitter.com service for any reason, without notice at any time.
…
6. We reserve the right to reclaim usernames on behalf of businesses or individuals that hold legal claim or trademark on those usernames.
This policy raises more questions than it answers, creates more problems than it solves. Twitter "reserves the right" to "reclaim" squatted usernames? Does the account owner have any rights? Does the trademark owners? How are the disputes initiated?
Today, trying to reclaim a squatted username on Twitter is a hit-or-miss proposition.
This is a huge problem for trademark owners and social media companies alike. For trademark owners, their names are being taken by others, causing confusion in the marketplace and harming the trademark owner's brand. For social media companies like Twitter, disputes about usernames are likely consuming valuable company resources.
And let's not forget innocent users. There should be no presumption of guilt in any username policy.
A standard policy exists for resolving trademark disputes (e.g. cybersquatting) for most registered domain names, namely the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). I am hereby calling on the top social networking companies (Google, Twitter, MySpace, WordPress.com, and Microsoft) to create a UURP – Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. Disputes will occur with our without good policies. Making a standardized policy will make dispute resolution less expensive.
A Username Dispute Resolution Policy is at least as important as OpenID, and many of the above are already cooperating on that initiative.
Domain Names ARE Usernames On Twitter
Confusion is not just likely with Twittersquatting, it is certain. Because on many Twitter clients, domain names are the functional equivalent of Twitter usernames.
Let's use my username as an example. Many Twitter clients (such as TweetDeck) automatically convert any string containing "@example" into a link to Example's Twitter account. So @example becomes http://twitter.com/example. This means that anytime anyone Tweets about an email address, a link is created to the corresponding Twitter account. So erikjheels@erikjheels.com becomes erikjheels@erikjheels.com, where @erikjheels becomes a link to http://twitter.com/ErikJHeels.
In other words, in many Twitter clients, the owner of the top-level domain name is assumed to be the owners of the corresponding Twitter account.
Top 100 Brands On Twitter – Fail and Epic Fail
With the top 100 brands, unfortunately, this is simply not the case. Most of the top brands on Twitter have been registered by squatters. Here is a breakdown of the top 100 global brands (as ranked by Interbrand):
brand | website | website grade (97% pass) | Twitter grade (93% fail) | |
Accenture | pass | pass | ||
adidas | pass | FAIL | ||
AIG | pass | FAIL | ||
Allianz | pass | FAIL | ||
amazon.com | pass | FAIL | ||
American Express | pass | FAIL | ||
Apple | pass | FAIL | ||
Armani | pass | FAIL | ||
Audi | pass | FAIL | ||
Avon | pass | FAIL | ||
AXA | pass | FAIL | ||
BlackBerry | pass | pass | ||
BMW | pass | FAIL | ||
BP | pass | FAIL | ||
Budweiser | pass | FAIL | ||
Canon | pass | FAIL | ||
Cartier | pass | FAIL | ||
Caterpillar | pass | FAIL | ||
Chanel | pass | FAIL | ||
Cisco | pass | FAIL | ||
Citi | pass | FAIL | ||
Coca-Cola | pass | FAIL | ||
Colgate | pass | FAIL | ||
Danone | pass | FAIL | ||
Dell | pass | FAIL | ||
Disney | pass | FAIL | ||
Duracell | pass | FAIL | ||
eBay | pass | FAIL | ||
FedEx | pass | FAIL | ||
Ferrari | pass | FAIL | ||
Ford | pass | FAIL | ||
Gap | pass | FAIL | ||
GE | pass | FAIL | ||
Gillette | pass | FAIL | ||
Goldman Sachs | pass | FAIL | ||
pass | FAIL | |||
Gucci | pass | FAIL | ||
H & M | EPIC FAIL | FAIL | ||
Harley-Davidson | pass | pass | ||
Heinz | pass | FAIL | ||
Hennessy | pass | FAIL | ||
Hermes | pass | FAIL | ||
Hewlett-Packard | pass | FAIL | ||
Honda | pass | FAIL | ||
HSBC | pass | FAIL | ||
Hyundai | pass | FAIL | ||
IBM | pass | FAIL | ||
Ikea | pass | FAIL | ||
ING | pass | FAIL | ||
Intel | pass | FAIL | ||
J.P. Morgan | pass | FAIL | ||
Johnson & Johnson | pass | EPIC FAIL | ||
Kellogg's | pass | FAIL | ||
KFC | pass | FAIL | ||
Kleenex | pass | FAIL | ||
L'Oreal | pass | FAIL | ||
Lexus | pass | FAIL | ||
Louis Vuitton | pass | FAIL | ||
Marlboro | pass | FAIL | ||
Marriott | pass | FAIL | ||
McDonald's | pass | FAIL | ||
Mercedes | pass | FAIL | ||
Merrill Lynch | pass | FAIL | ||
Microsoft | pass | FAIL | ||
Moet & Chandon | EPIC FAIL | EPIC FAIL | ||
Morgan Stanley | pass | FAIL | ||
Motorola | pass | FAIL | ||
MTV | pass | FAIL | ||
Nescafe | pass | FAIL | ||
Nestle | pass | FAIL | ||
Nike | pass | FAIL | ||
Nintendo | pass | FAIL | ||
Nivea | pass | FAIL | ||
Nokia | pass | FAIL | ||
Oracle | pass | pass | ||
Panasonic | pass | FAIL | ||
Pepsi | pass | FAIL | ||
Philips | pass | FAIL | ||
Pizza Hut | pass | FAIL | ||
Porsche | pass | FAIL | ||
Prada | pass | FAIL | ||
Rolex | pass | FAIL | ||
Samsung | pass | FAIL | ||
SAP | pass | EPIC FAIL | ||
Shell | pass | FAIL | ||
Siemens | pass | FAIL | ||
Smirnoff | pass | FAIL | ||
Sony | pass | FAIL | ||
Starbucks | pass | pass | ||
Thomson Reuters | pass | pass | ||
Tiffany & Co. | pass | FAIL | ||
Toyota | pass | FAIL | ||
UBS | pass | EPIC FAIL | ||
UPS | pass | FAIL | ||
Visa | pass | FAIL | ||
Volkswagen | pass | FAIL | ||
Wrigley's | EPIC FAIL | FAIL | ||
Xerox | pass | FAIL | ||
Yahoo! | pass | pass | ||
Zara | pass | FAIL |
I've never heard of some of these companies. Perhaps next year's chart should consider how clued each company is about its Internet presence before declaring them "top brands."
To create domain names from brands, I removed all punctuation, changed "&" symbols to "and," and eliminated all spaces. In other words, I crated the most obvious domain name for each brand.
Companies need to think more about how their brands work in the Internet age. FedEx got lucky. They started out as Federal Express before the Internet was all the rage then rebranded to FedEx. Today, they are FedEx. Nobody refers to them as Federal Express. American Express should follow this model and rebrand as AMEX. Since that's what everybody calls them. (And "that's what you call us anyway" was part of FedEx's rebranding media campaign.) Other brands on this list need work, primarily because they are too long. Twitter usernames are limited to 15 characters, for example.
Grading:
- Any company that doesn't own it's dot-com domain name in 2009 gets a grade of EPIC FAIL. Use the UDRP or buy it. But own your brand at least as a dot-com domain name.
- Any company whose brand is longer than 15 characters (maximum Twitter username length) gets a grade of EPIC FAIL. Get a shorter brand.
- Any company that doesn't have a Twitter username and whose username was unregistered at the time of this survey gets a grade of EPIC FAIL. It's one thing to let your username go to a squatter, it's another to not even try. (Twitter may be "reserving" some of the unregistered three-letter usernames.)
- Any company that doesn't have the Twitter username that corresponds to its most obvious domain name gets a grade of FAIL.
Of the top 100 brands, only seven get a passing grade: Accenture, BlackBerry, Harley-Davidson, Oracle, Starbucks, Thomson Reuters, and Yahoo! And of these, only Starbucks and Oracle appear to be engaging in meaningful conversations on Twitter.
How To Spot A Twittersquatter
Sometimes it's easy to spot a squatter, like when they brag about it as the squatter of the Goldman Sachs trademark has done:
squitter – someone (like me) who registers a brand name twitter handle for safekeeping and future profit
But sometimes Twittersquatting is harder to spot. Like when I do it to make a point.
For this article, I registered MoetAndChandon as an account on Twitter to (1) demonstrate how easy it is to create fake Twitter accounts that look real, (2) call attention to the problem of username squatting in general and Twittersquatting in particular, and (3) demonstrate the need for a Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy on all username-based social networks.
I will, of course, turn this account over to Twitter or Moet & Chandon as soon as possible after publishing this article.
How To Be A Twittersquatter
Step 1 – Create a fake account, preferably with a matching email account that you can create with any web-based email provider. (Note that I used my actual email address, thus doing an exceedingly poor job of hiding my true identity. It's as if I'm trying to make a point or something. Just like Wired Magazine's Joshua Quittner did in 1994 by registering mcdonalds.com.)
Step 2 – Invite your friends! You can skip this step. Nobody wants to be friends with a squatter.
Step 3 – Start Tweeting! But be careful. Your first Tweet is important. Make it a good one.
Step 4 – If your victim's website sucks, try looking to their press releases for fodder for your – I mean their – first Tweet.
Step 5 – Tweet it!
Step 6 – Make it look legit! Add good bio info, a link to the victim's website, perhaps some a copyrighted background image and trademarked avatar. You'll note that I skipped this step, but here's what your first Tweet looks like:
Congratulations, you are now a Twittersquatter.
Summary
I anticipate being misquoted and misunderstood, so for those with attention spans of 140 characters or less, here is a summary of my main points:
- Domain names became popular. Cybersquatting started. Then the UDRP helped resolve domain name disputes.
- Usernames have become popular. Username squatting (including, but not limited to, Twittersqatting) has started. A Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy (UURP) is needed to resolve username disputes.
- Branding on the Internet is no longer limited to dot-com websites. Usernames are also valuable.
- Twitter, in particular, needs to address this issue immediately. Twittersquatting is easy to do, widespread, and costly to remedy.
- 97% of the top 100 brands score a passing grade for protecting their brands as domain names.
- 93% of the top 100 brands score a failing grade for protecting their usernames on Twitter.
This is a solvable problem. Let's solve it.
Related posts:
- FreeTrademarksForStartups.com: Free Trademarks For Startups
The best time for entrepreneurs to start a new business is during a recession. - Madrid Protocol: Affordable International Trademarks For Startups
The Madrid Protocol is a great option for startups who want foreign trademark protection but don't want to file trademarks in separate countries. - Domain Name Law
White hat domainers are not black hat cybersquatters. - Drawing That Explains Copyright Law
Copyright rights, unregulated uses, and fair use.
del.icio.us
Digg
email
Facebook
Google Bookmarks
LinkedIn
Ping.fm
Print
StumbleUpon
Slashdot
Twitter
Tumblr
Reddit
This is a fantastic article! I was just discussing with some of my clients, the need to reserve their username on Twitter. I totally agree with you and I sincerely hope that Twitter heeds your advice.
Best!
“How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands” http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
Personal names of public figures is an issues as well. For politicians, celebrities, etc., their name is their brand. For example, the Twitter account DevalPatrick is used by a GOP website critical of Governor Patrick.
There's quite a bit of advice in the marketing world about reserving your brand in various social sites, but you are right, that's just not enough.
See also:
http://www.moviemarketingmadness.com/blog/2009/01/09/a-better-way-to-run-the-username-railroad/
Spreading the word about username squatting: http://is.gd/eUKT
[...] social networks. My friend Erik Heels has a proposal to do something about it- namely to create a uniform username dispute resolution policy promoted by the major social networking [...]
Spreading the word about username squatting: http://is.gd/eUKT RT @ErikJHeels:
RT @ErikJHeels http://is.gd/eUKT
RT @ErikJHeels Spreading the word about username squatting: http://is.gd/eUKT
RT @ErikJHeels A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. http://is.gd/eUKT
See also:
http://snaps.jangro.com/twittersquatting-is-a-big-prob
[...] By now just about everyone is aware of domain squatting, users who buy a web site domain name thinking or knowing that someone else will want it in the future, hoping to get money for it. But with the rise in popularity of services like Twitter, the problem is spreading to usernames as well. How bad is it? Consider this: 93 of the top 100 global brands aren't in control of their brand name on Twitter, blogger Erik J. Heels points out. [...]
Hello Erik, a really interesting survey and one that's repeated the world over – in the UK we went through the FTSE100 the other month and found only 8/100 had taken their Twitter IDs:
http://bit.ly/QHmC
See also:
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090109/1548133348.shtml
Why not to lose your corp name http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq talked to clients about it months ago. Thanks @parislemon for the link
My article on Twittersquatting http://is.gd/eUKT (aka brandjacking) got picked up by @venturebeat http://is.gd/f4AV (via @park3).
In Web 2.0, titles are more important than ever. My 1st choice ends up as the title, 2nd as the subtitle: http://is.gd/eUKT
@sharonhayes Crazy busy, dominated by the Twittersquatting http://is.gd/eUKT thing (and coverage in @techdirt and @venturebeat).
@sharonhayes Crazy busy, dominated by the Twittersquatting http://is.gd/eUKT thing (and coverage in @techdirt and @venturebeat).
Reading: How to twittersquat brands http://bit.ly/LaYi
Hi Erik, this survey is great and frightening at the same time. Unfortunately is also proves that most big brands still don't have social media on their radar screen. If worse comes to worse, the twittersquatters will not only cause confusion, but also start to shape the image of the brand, whose trademark they registered as their username, in a way most probably not intended by that brand.
I prefer to call it 'Sqwitting' ;)
Here's a list of the top 100 brand names used on twitter; the majority of which are being squatted on. http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Interesting look at Twittersquatting brand names: http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
badass post eric. good showing on techmeme as well. this is an issue. i have several brands registered on twitter (no massively popular brands, just ones I am fond of) just so they will have them somewhere down the road. its potentially a good networking opportunity as well. when the company realizes they need that twitter username, they have to open a dialogue. if you treat the situation the right way and are not profiteering, it can be a positive connection.
i can't imagine how much work this post took, nice work.
Greeting @Jacrose,
Thanks. It's kind of a mess. It took five years from when Quittner's cybersquatting piece on mcdonalds.com appeared in Wired until the UDRP was enacted.
We can't afford to wait that long with Twittersquatting.
Regards,
Erik
See also:
http://www.techmeme.com/090110/p6
This is an awesome article and I will post links to it from my Twitter-related blog, where I am often found complaining about corporate brand-jacking on Twitter.
My question is, how to get this information to the right person that cares at these top companies? There are a number of us serving as their brand advocates everyday, but they have to take action and show they want to remedy this as well. Great research here – I appreciate the time I know it took you!!
Fantastic post!!! I am updating my 'major brands and twitter' post with a link. Super well done. :)
http://thebrandbuilder.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/to-tweet-or-not-to-tweet-why-are-so-many-major-brands-still-not-on-twitter/
You know I just read a blog post about somebody doing this to Burger King, and they were suing the squatter. My sister also told me that years ago, when websites were just popping up, people were registering domain names like Micky Mouse and Donald Duck knowing that Disney would eventually want them and have to pay for them. When Disney didn't want to play along, these people threatened to post porn on those sites, thereby, blackmailing Disney to comply. I'm actually surprised the probelm is more widespread. But maybe I'm speaking too soon, based on what you've said here.
How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands http://bit.ly/LaYi Any company that doesn't own it's .com domain name in 2009 gets grade of EPIC FAIL
How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands. http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
RT @NickLongo: How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands. http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
RT @NickLongo How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands. http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq (that's new to me – Twittersquat)
93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
Great find by @NickLongo How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands. http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
@NickLongo @KrisColvin Here's one more: add @boeing to the twittersquatted/Epic FAIL brands list http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @NickLongo: How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands. http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
RE: Andrew303 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else http://bit.ly/LaYi welcome @vormtaal
93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi (via @Andrew303)
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
Looks like you took my post and expanded on it Eric. Good to hear this all from a legal perspective.
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
Greetings Adam,
Actually, I hadn't seen your article (http://www.domainnamenews.com/miscellaneous/the-top-100-global-brands-still-dont-get-online-media/3570) until now. To find the Interbrand article on the top 100 global brands, I ran this search:
http://www.google.com/search?q=top+100+brands
The Interbrand article was the #1 result:
http://www.interbrand.com/best_global_brands.aspx
Thanks for reading.
Regards,
Erik
@jandrewstein It's a problem. How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands
http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Hi Erik – Your post raises a lot of good points. Brands need to be aware of platforms like Twitter and need to take the steps necessary to secure their trade names, etc.
I'd just like to point out that my company, crayon, owns @Panasonic on Twitter – Panasonic is a client and the account is reserved for their use, precisely so it can't be twittersquatted. When Panasonic is ready to join the Twitter conversation, they're all set.
We routinely check and secure brand names on Twitter and sometimes help to reclaim them if they're already taken, as soon as we start working with a client. So most of our clients should be safe.
Greg Verdino
Chief Strategy Officer
crayon,LLC
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands @ErikJHeels "Of the top 100 global brands, 93% have had their Twitter usernames taken by somebody else (i.e. Twittersquatted)." (tags: marketing brands squatting Twitter branding) Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)links for 2008-08-28Search Cloudlet helps find what you're looking for – with tagsMicrosoft to Announce Verizon Wireless DealVerizon: Microsoft beats Google StatusKathryn is off out to enjoy the sunshine. Twitter feedkcorrick: But will new Microsoft deals with Dell and Verizon improve LiveSearch results? Probably not. Read memo to staff http://icanhaz.com/microdealkcorrick: In '07 Google had 1 million advertisers speding av $16,000, now estimated to be 1.5 mil according to NYT blog: http://icanhaz.com/googlemillkcorrick: Really enjoyed the Cildo Meirles exhibition at Tate today. Shame it was the last day as wd've liked to take others. http://icanhaz.com/cildo [...]
[...] By now just about everyone is aware of domain squatters — users who buy a web site domain name thinking or knowing that someone else will want it in the future, hoping to get money for it. But with the rise in popularity of services like Twitter, the problem is spreading to usernames as well. How bad is it? Consider this: 93 of the top 100 global brands aren’t in control of their brand names on Twitter, blogger Erik J. Heels points out. [...]
Great blog post by Erik J. Heels on brand jacking http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Excellent article on twittersquatting @erikjheels – How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands.. http://bit.ly/LaYi ..we've been warned!
Erik .. . great minds think alike I guess. I got the idea after seeing @disney was used by an individual and also noticed @bmw was as well. I think it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
In case you didn't see we also did a few other pieces. One about the similarities the user names have to domains and one regarding an apparent attempt to "reverse username hijack" that ended up being resolved. Hope you can check it out and I welcome your feedback given your expertise in the area. I enjoy reading your tweets and blog now.
btw we got a pretty lengthy response from Intel after my post . . . seems that some of the brands you and I listed do actually have control, they just don't do anything with the user name. From the response from Intel, they haven't come up with a way to use the brand but they have a pretty good representation of individual employees on Twitter
@stevegarfield just talking about Twittersquating. Thanks for http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298 on the subject.
Twittersquatting http://is.gd/eUKT gone viral. Thank for RTs: @guy1067 @twittea @brandjacking @connector80120 @jorgebarba @StationDispatch
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands @ErikJHeels – How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands [...]
Most of the top brands on Twitter have been registered by squatters (see chart at bottom) – http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Was wondering when someone was going to coin the term Twittersquatting http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Retweeting @conosco: #LINK 93 of top 100 brands don't control their Twitter name » VentureBeat – http://is.gd/f4AV + http://is.gd/eUKT
[...] questione è consigliata la lettura del post da cui ha preso origine questa discussione, scritto da Erik J. Heels, in cui si auspica anche l'adozione di un Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy, ossia [...]
RT @Andrew303: 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
RT @BryanPerson @jowyang How about all the top brands that *aren't* tweeting or which have been Twittersquatted? http://is.gd/eUKT
TwitterSquatting Explained. 93 of top 100 Global brands don't have ownership of their domain. http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
[...] on social networking sites has become even more important. It come as a surprise then that 93 out of the 100 top global brands have not secured their names on [...]
In Case You Missed This Earlier: How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands http://bit.ly/LaYi
Top brands: Twitter is not just about gaining marketing advantage, it's about avoiding damage to brand http://is.gd/eUKT (via @Armano)
[...] Erik J. Heels has a great post on "How to Twittersquat the Top 100 Brands." What you learn is that 93 of the top 100 global brands have had their Twitter user names taken by [...]
Is Twitter name squatting the next domain name squatting? Only 7 of Top 100 brands own their Twitter username: http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Of the top 100 global brands, 93% have had their Twitter usernames taken by somebody else (i.e. Twittersquatted) http://bit.ly/LaYi
people taking a company's twitter name. disgraceful http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Anticipating the rise in twittersquatting litigation after reading http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
RT (though edited for space) @sitepointmatt Is Twitter name squatting the next domain name squatting? http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
[...] famous person's name) as a Twitter username with the intent of profiting or causing confusion.read more | digg [...]
[...] for a few weeks only now and following for the most part businesses that are tweeting (attempts at twittersquatting aside), particularly those tweeting from a customer service, help and support point of [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]
Erik,
Just a quick comment. Wrigley's is not Wrigley's, the correct name of the company is Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company, colloquially known as just "Wrigley." They own the domain name (but not the Twitter account).
Greetings Arne,
Your brand is what people call you. Federal Express was FedEx long before they "officially" rebranded. American Express is AMEX but hasn't got the memo. Wrigley's is Wrigley's because people call them Wrigley's.
Incidentally, I got the text for the names of the brands from the alt tags for the graphics used in the Interbrand article. So Interbrand calls 'em Wrigley's too.
Regards,
Erik
How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Do you own your brand on twitter? RT @seotips2go How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Of the top 100 global brands, 93% have had their Twitter usernames taken by somebody else (i.e. Twittersquatted) http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
RT @Brittany_Lane Of the top 100 global brands, 93% have had their Twitter usernames taken by somebody else http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
??????????????????? – How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands @ErikJHeels [del.icio.us] http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
@thebrandbuilder Are you serious? With Fortune 500??? They need to read http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298 LMAO!
Reading about "twittersquatting" (AKA: identity theft) on brand names at http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
See also:
http://www.womma.org/blog/2009/01/squatters-displace-real-brands-on-twitter/
Is your brand twittersquatted? 93 of top 100 brands don't control their Twitter name http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq
[...] Heels points out in a blog post, that 93 of the top 100 companies in the world, don't own thier Twitter names. It might be advisable to check that yours [...]
See also:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/twitter_may_have_business_model.php
[...] that would make the service fairly pointless. Put that together with the fact that, according to a study by trademark attorney Erik J. Heels, 93 of the top 100 US brand names don't appear to have control over their brand names on [...]
[...] that would make the service fairly pointless. Put that together with the fact that, according to a study by trademark attorney Erik J. Heels, 93 of the top 100 US brand names don't appear to have control over their brand names on [...]
I think you misunderstand what the word epic means. You might want to check a dictionary.
93 of the top 100 US brand names don't appear to have control over their brand names on Twitter. http://bit.ly/LaYi
Out of the top 100 global brands, only 7 actually control their name on Twitter. Does your company/org? http://is.gd/eUKT
[...] that would make the service fairly pointless. Put that together with the fact that, according to a study by trademark attorney Erik J. Heels, 93 of the top 100 US brand names don't appear to have control over their brand names on [...]
Greetings Charlie Hayes,
I think you are suffering from an awareness fail. An epic awareness fail. But thanks for your comment.
Regards,
Erik
[...] that would make the service fairly pointless. Put that together with the fact that, according to a study by trademark attorney Erik J. Heels, 93 of the top 100 US brand names don't appear to have control over their brand names on [...]
RT @Andrew303 93% of the top 100 brands have had their twitter name taken by somebody else (twittersquatting) http://bit.ly/LaYi
Astonishing: 93 of top 100 brands don’t control their Twitter name. http://tinyurl.com/7b3fft. more here: http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Currently Browsing: http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298 How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands
@tm4smallbiz, I suspected. r-t 93 of top 100 brands not control their Twitter name.http://tinyurl.com/7b3fft, http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Reading: "How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands @ErikJHeels" ( http://tinyurl.com/9c2vxq )
Of the top 100 global brands, 93% have had their Twitter usernames taken by somebody else http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
interesting article… http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298 – i have "twittersquated" Luton Town – not sure how valuable this will be though!!
@DanCall sent me an interesting link on tweetsquatters and brands http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
RT @jakrose: 93 of top 100 Brands do not own their Twitter Username http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Astonishing parallel to web a la 1995?RT @jakrose: 93 of top 100 Brands do not own their Twitter Username http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
Twittersquatted? Has your name been hijacked by a Twittersquatter? http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
How to Twittersquat … http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
@stevecla on Twitter Domain Squatting in the UK + table of top 50 brands http://bit.ly/yk0f following up http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
See also:
http://blogs.msdn.com/stevecla01/archive/2009/01/30/twitter-domain-squatting-in-the-uk.aspx
@GeorgeSeybold see @erikjheels blog post on Twittersquatting: http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
@goclio @dougcornelious Erik Heels had a good post about twitter-squatting < http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298 >
@hulamom Check out. http://is.gd/eUKT I'm not sure how successful Twitter is in squashing the Twitter-squatters, but keep us informed.
@paulceaston Since Twitter names not under UDRP, TM owners have no overarching dispute settlement arena; we need one: http://is.gd/eUKT
[...] that would make the service fairly pointless. Put that together with the fact that, according to a study by trademark attorney Erik J. Heels, 93 of the top 100 US brand names don't appear to have control over their brand names on [...]
[...] studys also show that Twittersquating, when brand names are hijacked is also a problem on [...]
[...] studys also show that Twittersquating, when brand names are hijacked is also a problem on [...]
[...] and on Twitter. Twitter is affected by Twittersquatting where peoples names and an estimated top 100 brands have been [...]
[...] and on Twitter. Twitter is affected by Twittersquatting where peoples names and an estimated top 100 brands have been [...]
You haven't heard of all of the companies that are mentioned?
You're kidding, right?
Greetings,
No, I'm not kidding. I haven't heard of many of these companies. That not a failure on my part. It a failure of the brand. It's also not surprising, since many company stink at branding. Branding is like name association. When you hear the brand, you should think of a word or two for which that brand stands. BMW = cars. Rolex = watches. AIG = thieves. You get the picture.
But these brands are empty for me, creating no immediate associate to any product or service, and I suspect I'm not alone:
Accenture
Allianz
AXA
Danone
H & M
Hermes
Zara
See also:
* How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands
A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy.
http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298
* The Brand Wars Are Coming, The Brand Wars Are Coming!
How to defend your brands on the Internet.
http://erikjheels.com/?p=777
* Trademarks and Brands
All brands are trademarks but not all trademarks are brands.
http://erikjheels.com/?p=617
* Book Review: The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding
By Al Ries and Laura Ries.
http://erikjheels.com/?p=618
* Just Say Moo – How To Name And Brand Your Product To Make It Stand Out From The Crowd
Good branding can separate your cow from the other cattle.
http://erikjheels.com/?p=236
Thanks for your comment.
Regards,
Erik
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]
You not recognising these brands is neither a failing on your part, nor on their part. Branding of the sort that you mention works if the consumer is in the market space that the brand intends to occupy. In insurance, for example, AXA is a huge – and I mean H U G E – name. But if you're not into stuff about insurance (like any sane person ;-)) then you may not have heard of them. H&M, Hérmes and Zara are huge fashion brands in Europe – Hérmes alone took 1.76Bn Euros in sales last year. I live in Europe so I know the brands well. Ask most Germans and they'll tell you that BMW stands as much as for motorcycles as they do for cars. Does that mean that BMW are doing a lousy job at branding?
One of my pastimes is high-end hi-fi. Dominant brands are companies such as Wilson, Naim, Linn, Koetsu and Krell. If you're into high-end audio, then you'll immediately recognise these brands. If you're not, then you won't. And I'm sure that the companies that I mention are fine with that.
The vast majority of Europeans are not aware of US brands such as Banana Republic, Walgreens, J.Crew or Scion. Does this mean that these US companies are failing at promoting their brand?
I don't believe that just because an individual doesn't make a mental association when a particular company is mentioned, that it means the company in question is necessarily doing a bad job at branding. There are millions of companies out there, but only a fraction of them will ever have resonance with me. There's simply no way that I could have a distinct mental association with so many brands. And nor should I, since maybe 90% of those companies sell products or services that have no interest for me.
Hey, just my 0.02c. Regardless, I enjoyed your post!
American Express can't use AMEX because it is trademarked by NYSE. They aquired the name from the America Stock Exchange which pre-dates American Express.
[...] also known as social media identity theft, where peoples names and an estimated top 100 brands have been [...]
[...] have the problem others have had from fake Twitter accounts in their name or their company name. Twittersquatting offers a serious challenge to any business marketing strategy and probably a more serious challenge to businesses which [...]
[...] January 2009, attorney and engineer Erik J. Heels wrote a blog post discussing the failure of an overwhelming majority of the top 100 brands in securing their brand [...]
lol never really thought how bad this was till i read this. However i cant see twitter sticking around for long so i dont think the celbs or companys are that bothered about getting thier accounts
[...] Ook is het belangrijk om je bedrijfsnaam zo snel mogelijk vast te zetten. Zo zijn de bedrijfsnamen van de Twitter accounts @Campina, @Heineken, @Unox, @Andrelon en @Amstel allemaal in handen van personen die niets met de bedrijven te maken hebben. Het schijnt zelfs dat 93 van de 100 meest bekende merken niet de juiste Twitter account in bezit hebben. Zeker een gemiste kans voor die jongens. Een lijst hiervan vind je hier. [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]
[...] Oracle, Starbucks, Thomson Reuters, and Yahoo all received a "pass." 3Source: http://erikjheels.com/?p=1298. See link for a full list of the 100 [...]
[...] to the continued proliferation of Twittersquatting and the relative ease of acting as a "brand impostor," just how are we to know that a [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands (1/8/2009) [...]
[...] voor hun marketingafdeling voor het grijpen ligt. Een onderzoek van de Engelsman Erik Heels toont aan dat 93 van de 100 topmerken niet beschikken over hun eigen [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands (1/8/2009) A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]
[...] How To Twittersquat The Top 100 Brands A call for the creation of the Uniform Username Dispute Resolution Policy. [...]