Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bank of America Buying Abusive Domain Names

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the get-out-your-thesaurus dept.

The Internet 249

Nite_Hawk writes "Bank of America has snapped up hundreds of abusive domain names for its senior executives and board members in what is being perceived as a defensive strategy against the future publication of damaging insider info from whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. According to Domain Name Wire, the US bank has been aggressively registering domain names including its board of directors' and senior executives' names followed by 'sucks' and 'blows.'"

cancel ×

249 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Everyone does it (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654726)

Google, Microsoft and all other large companies do the same. What is the news angle exactly?

Re:Everyone does it (5, Insightful)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654798)

Well, the first sentence of the two-sentence summary suggests that what makes this newsworthy is the fact it's being done defensively ahead of a major wikileak.

Re:Everyone does it (5, Funny)

Fluffeh (1273756) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654822)

Well, the first sentence of the two-sentence summary suggests that what makes this newsworthy is the fact it's being done defensively ahead of a major wikileak.

Yes, but I wonder if they are buying domains like: Wewentbroke.com, bankgobyebye.com, Wetookyourmoney.com and my personal favorite: Wethoughtboombutwentbust.com

Re:Everyone does it (4, Insightful)

zotz (3951) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655156)

Indeed.

Or:

reallysucks.com

reallytrulysucks.com

reallytrulysucksbigtime.com

superreallytrulysucksbigtime.com

and so on....

Lots of buying to do there... I don't see how such defensive strategies can work... Am I missing something?

Re:Everyone does it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655238)

wehadababyitsaboy.com

Re:Everyone does it (1)

ocdscouter (1922930) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655430)

Sorry, wrong number.

Re:Everyone does it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655656)

GladToHearThatYourWifeMyMistressIsGood.com

Re:Everyone does it (2)

Thing 1 (178996) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655408)

Agreed: tagged "wastingmoremoney"

Re:Everyone does it (0)

Galestar (1473827) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654864)

It could possibly, remotely, involve Wikileaks.. hence it is fit for slashdot frontpage.

Re:Everyone does it (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654940)

It could possibly, likely, involve Wikileaks

Fix'd. It might be a coincidence, but considering Wikileaks say they have dirt on Bank of America, and that said bank took actions against Wikileaks, I'd be surprised if this weren't related to the leaks.

Re:Everyone does it (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655224)

I just registered, "bankofamericahasbeeneffingyouinthearse.com". Soon the fun begins!

Re:Everyone does it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655200)

Google, Microsoft and all other large companies do the same. What is the news angle exactly?

I have yet to see those companies register "" let alone for someone who is not a figurehead.

Can you give an example?

BTW I believe this goes against some countries cybersquatting laws. 'Twould be funny to see them lose BrianMoynihanSucks.com in court to a group that wanted to use it for it's intended purpose.

Re:Everyone does it (1)

Will.Woodhull (1038600) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655630)

Maybe this is news because it represents an entirely new way for banks to invest in futures? Think about how much Brian.MoynihanSucks.com might be worth in six months.

Although 4chan, 7chan, l33tsp34k and such have demonstrated that for any name that can be represented in the latin alphabet there are innumerable insulting misspellings that can get be coined.

Which does rather suggest that BOA is not very good at being clever. And if you think about it, you probably don't want to do business with a bank that thinks it is clever. (Especially if it is not as clever as it thinks it is.)

Grep this bitchez! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654754)

*sucks.com the name pattern of lolcats everywhere. Get ready!

Good luck with that (5, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654772)

Good luck grabbing every possible abusive word and all variations. "Sucks" is hardly the only word in existence that can be used to mean you smoke cock or gobble knob.

Re:Good luck with that (4, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654844)

I don't even think it matters.

Honestly, if people can't start up "xSucks.com" they'll go and register something like "truthX" and spew their hate there.

By trying to keep from them from abusive and probably discreditable domain names, you're probably just going to push them into ones that will cause wider contraversy.

Let's start a nice slow golf clap for the Bank of America.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

jroc242 (1397083) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654918)

They are just inviting people to create a domain name with one that they didn't register. The fact that this article exist and therefore brings attention to what they are doing shows that they are making things worse. (assuming that they are doing this because they had issue with this in the past)

Re:Good luck with that (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654960)

bankofamericameetstreisandeffect.com appears to be available ... and possibly quite relevant

Re:Good luck with that (1)

by (1706743) (1706744) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654954)

By trying to keep from them from abusive and probably discreditable domain names, you're probably just going to push them into ones that will cause wider contraversy.

I disagree, as does Ms. Streisand [wikipedia.org]

Oh wait...

Re:Good luck with that (4, Insightful)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655026)

Considering their motive is indirect censorship and their target market that they wish would not see the offending material is amongst the veritable hordes of Facebook/Twitter/MySpace zombies out there this is incredibly stupid.

URL shortener exist for a reason. It makes posting to Facebook and Twitter that much easier. Not to mention, it would be pretty hard for BoFA to prevent people from forming Facebook groups.

Domain names are just one of the ways we use to communicate locations, and find them, on the Internet now.

Foolish and a waste of money.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

LBBP (1964526) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655328)

... Foolish and a waste of money.

+1

Re:Good luck with that (2)

byuu (1455609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655438)

Honestly, if people can't start up "xSucks.com" they'll go and register something like "truthX" and spew their hate there.

The owner of sucks.com should start selling subdomain redirects for $~3/yr.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655716)

interestingly the owner of sucks.com doesn't seem to be using it for anything (whois doesn't even list any nameservers for the domain)

Re:Good luck with that (2)

ShaunC (203807) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654922)

Indeed, BrianMoynihanVacuumsRoosters.com looks available.

Re:Good luck with that (4, Interesting)

KublaiKhan (522918) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655194)

It would be an interesting sort of crowd-sourced protest, if a lot of aggrieved people bought abusive domains and pointed them at a protest site existing pretty much specifically to collect them.

Domain registrars would make a mint off of such a protest...and it would be much more 'socially acceptable' than your typical DDoSing.

First registrar to announce splitting the proceeds of such actions with, say, Child's Play or the Red Cross could gain instant credibility with a large segment of the abusive-domain-buying public.

Further, it would sap the banks' resources as their PR people frantically attempt to mitigate the consequences of the protests. Now that we know they'll preemptively buy domains, too, it provides interesting opportunities for cybersquatting...

Re:Good luck with that (4, Interesting)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654976)

The really insidious strategy would be to register , and actually run your *sucks site, allowing user generated content, but with subtle manipulation and censorship, making it the number one destination for haters.

Er, hope I didn't just give anyone ideas.

Re:And what about content? (1)

symbolic (11752) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655024)

The domain is really secondary to content, because when people search, the search looks at pretty much everything other than the domain name. Silly (criminally rich) bankers.

Re:Good luck with that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655066)

Obviously you need to be able to register regular expressions in DNS.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

Ramirozz (758009) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655192)

Yeah, that talks really bad about their marketing and policies... if they manage money the same way... wait... oh

Re:Good luck with that (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655258)

Hope they did 'sux' and 'blowz' as well...

OTOH... (5, Funny)

msauve (701917) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654778)

Maybe they're just preparing themselves for some future "truth in lending" legislation.

They can't afford them all (5, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654782)

Yesterday [boingboing.net] it was noted that they can do this but getting all of those available will exceed their available cash. Seems like a waste of time and energy.

Re:They can't afford them all (1)

clone52431 (1805862) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654832)

Yeah, did they also register *bl0ws? *blo.ws? *sux.ck?

Re:They can't afford them all (1)

countSudoku() (1047544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654938)

Those three along with criminalbankdouchebagsonthelooseagainohfuckme.com and .net.

Re:They can't afford them all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655150)

Yep.

$ whois piratebankofamerica.info
NOT FOUND

Re:They can't afford them all (1)

fracai (796392) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655164)

Not .org? I suppose they would leave that out as they aren't a non-profit and are strict about these sorts of things.

Cory Doctorow's math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654968)

From Doctorow's blog:

In a stunning tribute to the financial acumen of BofA's C-suite, they seem to have missed the fact that total combinations of $FIRSTNAME/INITIAL + $LASTNAME + [blows|sucks|crook|thief|fraudster].[com|net|org|ws|info|cc|ca|ch|whatever] multiplied by, say, $5/domain/year exceeds the total capital reserves of the bank.

Let's say there is a scandal and that 5 executives or directors will get the lion's share of bad publicity. OK, make that ten. And each can have three variations on their name: last name only, first and last, first, middle initial, and last. Oh right, and you can use hyphens to separate each word, or not (but no hybrid, which would be too hard for people to remember). And let's raise the $5 registration fee to $10, to be safe.

So we get:

10 (executives) x 3 (name variations) x 5 (derogatives) x 10 (domain suffixes) x 2 (word separators) x 10 USD =

30,000 USD

IANAFA, but I'll go on a limb and estimate that $30,000 will not exhaust the present-day reserves of Bank of America.

Re:Cory Doctorow's math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655064)

Except you need to bump your derogatives up from 5 to approx 50,000. The price tag is now $300,000,000 per year.

And that 50,000 is a conservative figure. I'm pretty sure Doctorow gave five as an example, not a comprehensive list.

Re:Cory Doctorow's math (1)

QRDeNameland (873957) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655332)

Except you need to bump your derogatives up from 5 to approx 50,000. The price tag is now $300,000,000 per year.

And that 50,000 is a conservative figure. I'm pretty sure Doctorow gave five as an example, not a comprehensive list.

That's not to even mention compound derogatives...i.e., bankofamericaareabunchof[shit|fuck|ass|scum|dick|cunt][heads|bags|hats|holes|wads|buckets].[com|net|org|ws|info|cc|ca|ch|whatever].

Oh, and after you buy up all those, don't forget....bankruptofamerica.com.

Re:They can't afford them all (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655232)

Given the fact that every time their Liabilities exceed their Assets the Federal Reserve steps in and either buys up their assets at higher than market value or allows them to forgo the mark to market rules, I don't think this will be a problem for them. They essentially have an unlimited cash supply.

Re:They can't afford them all (5, Interesting)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655470)

I'm proud to report that a friend of mine grabbed http://www.bankofamericasucks.org/ [bankofamericasucks.org] before BoA got to it. Currently it's just a redirect to an IT World article, but oh, the possibilities ... especially since she works for a hosting company.

I wonder (1)

al0ha (1262684) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654784)

>> According to Domain Name Wire, the US bank has been aggressively registering domain names including its board of Directors' and senior executives' names followed by "sucks" and "blows."'

I wonder if they also covered the Director and senior executive names - sucksandblows dot whatever... Or how about name-lovestheshaft dot whatever...

What a colossal waste of money, as an investor I am pissed-off at this idiotic attempt at censorship.

Pointless (4, Insightful)

Angst Badger (8636) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654786)

The nearly endless variety of insulting phrases that begin with [name] [verb] [...] makes it impractical to register more than a tiny proportion of them, and no matter how extensive, it's easy to think of alternatives.

[name]stealsyourmoney.com comes to mind in the context of BoA long before it would occur to me to register [name]sucks.com, much less [name]sucksass.com, [name]sucksthebigone.com, and -- in the spirit of Bill Hicks -- [name]suckssatansscalycock.com.

Re:Pointless (4, Insightful)

Beerdood (1451859) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655080)

Exactly.. People aren't going to type in "bankofamericasucks.com" or "BOA-blows.com" into their URL. They're going to google for scam related information, making this domain buying completely useless. The exact URL is completely meaningless.

Go google "scientology" as an example. The 3rd result is "xenu.net" - a site who's sole purpose is to bring down the COS. Didn't need the word "scientology" anywhere in that URL.

Re:Pointless (3, Informative)

Beerdood (1451859) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655198)

Exactly.. People aren't going to type in "bankofamericasucks.com" or "BOA-blows.com" into their URL. .

Ok... so I just realized that bankofamericasucks.com actually goes to a gripe site for the bank... so uh, I guess if people still type this in, they'll still go to a gripe site by typing in the most obvious URL anyway!! Makes this whole venture seem even more ridiculous!

Re:Pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655122)

If I was marketing or operations VP for a company that had serious revenue, I would probably register:

  • bigcosucks.com
  • bigco-sucks.com
  • bigcosucks.net
  • bigco-sucks.net
  • bigcosucks.org
  • bigcoblows.com
  • bigcoblows.net

and make them all redirect to the main site, bigco.com. That's an investment of seven domain names.

Sure, people can get inventive and set up shop at "bigcosux.com" or"bigco-are-creeps.com", or many many others but these are hard to remember and probably won't be entered randomly in the URL bar.

Won't matter (2)

trollertron3000 (1940942) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654790)

With a team of SEO geeks it won't even matter.

Re:Won't matter (1)

coolmadsi (823103) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654828)

With a team of SEO geeks it won't even matter.

You make a good point, it has been mentioned that they won't be able to feasibly buy all possible combinations, so I initially thought that they might just be trying to flood search engine results with empty or misleading or incorrect pages, but your comment fairly effectively counters my idea.

"Sucks" and "blows" not the only pejoratives (4, Interesting)

a Flatbed Darkly (1964478) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654804)

There's astounding variety in dyslogistics; humanity's capacity to insult extends far beyond the simple "x sucks", "y blows", and often enters far more explicit territory. What makes them think that "sucks" and "blows" are the preferred verbal weapon of the domain-registering masses? If anything, this will only cause a rise in popularity of other insulting verbs.

Re:"Sucks" and "blows" not the only pejoratives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654858)

They're not even thinking of concatentation:
billybobsucksdick.com
billybobsuckscock.com
billybobenthusiasticallysucksmultiplecocks.com
billybobperformsoralsexualintercourse.com
billybobiskindofajerk.com
billybobaccidentallytheeconomy.com

CAPTCHA: dozens
Yes, I can think of dozens of these.

Re:"Sucks" and "blows" not the only pejoratives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655286)

"What makes them think that "sucks" and "blows" are the preferred verbal weapon of the domain-registering masses?"

Maybe it's some kind of fraud involving vacuum cleaner manufacturers or services?

bobsucks.com (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654814)

Bob, the bad news is that your year-end bonus and stock options will be a wee bit smaller than last year.

The good news is that bobsucks.com won't be displaying a long list reasons for other companies not to hire you.

Suits are so smart! (2)

NitzJaaron (733621) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654830)

I can imagine the board meeting where the idea was thrown out: Corp Douche 1: "They're going to be angry when they learn about the kind of things we've done. They're probably going to write letters and e-mails and setup 'BoASucks.com'." Corp Douche 2: "Well, we can ignore the mail. But websites? Oh my... the web! I hear there's a lot of people there and they say mean things about us! We can't let them do that!" Corp Douche 3: "We can cut them off at the knees! Let's buy up all the 'sucks' and 'blows' website names before they get to them! Public relations disaster averted!" *All of the Corp Douches clap*

Not the scandal we thought? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654834)

Perhaps the Wikileaks release on BofA won't be what we all thought - maybe it will be the Wall Street version of Lemonparty. I mean, they're focusing AWFULLY HARD on sucking and blowing...

Interesting way to spend all that money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654838)

Interesting way to spend all that money they are making off of their customers, isn't it?

Kind of smells of desperation?

Sucks and Blows are American curse words now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654846)

Hoover, Rainbow, and Dirt Devil will see you in court.

LOL -- a losing battle: too many options (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654850)

"the US bank has been aggressively registering domain names including its board of Directors' and senior executives' names followed by "sucks" and "blows.""

SeniorExecutiveNameSucks.com -- taken.

Probably not taken:

YouSuckSeniorExecutiveName.com
SeniorExecutiveNameSux.com
SeniorExecutiveNameBlowz.com
SeniorExecutiveNameIsLame.com
SeniorExecutiveNameFail.com
SeniorExecutiveNameCrime.com
SeniorExecutiveNameNerfherder.com

Re:LOL -- a losing battle: too many options (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655128)

Before going for the sucks and blows they probably should have started with the ones like:

bofaleaks.com (OK, so they got that one)
bofa-leaks.com
bofaleaks.org
bofaleaks.net
findbofaleaks.com

etc.

Re:LOL -- a losing battle: too many options (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655172)

Then there's:

SeniorExecutiveNameSucks.org
SeniorExecutiveNameSucks.net
SeniorExecutiveNameSucks.de
SeniorExecutiveNameSucks.me.uk (I like this one)

as well as

SeniorExecutiveNameIsABastard.com
IHateSeniorExecutiveName.com

Admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654856)

Sounds like an admission of guilt, if you ask me.

Clean slate... (0)

colin_n (50370) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654872)

The only thing I have with bank of america is credit card debt. I hope that disappears in the whole wikileakageddon bank of americassplosion.

Re:Clean slate... (4, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654972)

The only thing I have with bank of america is credit card debt. I hope that disappears in the whole wikileakageddon bank of americassplosion.

don't bet on it, your debt might be one of their few assets when this is over. :p

Re:Clean slate... (3, Informative)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655320)

You're making a classic mistake; I've heard about it being made in reverse (by someone who used to work in a bank getting a job in a company that wasn't a bank).

If you were a business, that debt would go on your list of liabilities. You'd like it to disappear of its own accord with no action from you.

You would also have a list of assets, and you certainly wouldn't let them disappear of their own accord.

The important thing is that if you are the bank, other people's debts appear in your list of assets. And other people's assets (ie. bank accounts in credit) appear in your list of debts.

Re:Clean slate... (3, Interesting)

PRMan (959735) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655482)

I knew somebody who actually had their mortgage bank (a "small" shop) go out of business, but which sold all their loans off at a slight loss at the end before going bankrupt. The guy's file actually got lost in the office and the bankruptcy proceeded and completed without anyone finding it. The bills quit coming and nobody ever asked for money. He finally went to the courthouse and since the company had gone bankrupt without selling his loan, he owned the house free and clear.

I wouldn't hold my breath, but it's not without precedent.

Unless... (4, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654874)

BOA is a bunch of angels compared to the rest of the financial community, they should probably be investing in security rather than PR...

There is a steady stream of "$PERSON$ loses job/house, kills family, self, occasionally neighbors and/or a cop or two" stories in the US. Given the number of dodgy forclosures BOA is believed to be involved in, including some cases where they didn't even own the loan, or where there was no loan, I could easily imagine some of their more visible people becoming part of dissatisfied customers' blood drenched exits.

The really high level guys probably already take precautions; but a bank the size of BOA probably has a lot of fat around the middle...

Re:Unless... (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655116)

Quiet man! You're speaking sense here, actual security? FOB's? What? You're insane!

Waste of time... (3, Insightful)

hellkyng (1920978) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654876)

This is like putting buckets over your flowers in advance of a hurricane...while living in New Orleans.

On the other hand it is really interesting they are scared enough about the Wikileaks release to take these fairly absurd measures. I wonder what public opinion of Wikileaks will be like if they expose some serious corruption in a major bank.

They will never win (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654902)

I just registered bankofamericasucksandblows.com ! Suck and blow on that!

Planning a new product launch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654914)

Perhaps they really are that desperate for money.

let's see an intelligent post (2)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654924)

How could a person or group express an opinion that would get the highest possible google rank when a person searches for BoA?
That is what this is all about, isn't it?

Re:let's see an intelligent post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655214)

Search Engine Optimization or SEO is the way that works. Flat out if you know what the search engines like, and build lots of it into your clean HTML CSS page, you'll rank very well. Miss any point along the way and you'll lag the rest.

-Long Time SEO Guru

Re:let's see an intelligent post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655344)

Well, text search or image search? Images of BOAs are plenty and some juicy.

Just Making Themselves Look Worse (5, Interesting)

mikeb39 (670045) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654936)

This seems to be pretty close to admitting that their senior execs have done things that would cause public outrage. Seems like a smarter strategy would have been just to shut up completely about it until seeing what these leaks actually contain. But, I suppose if you know beyond a doubt you will be proven guilty and held to account for something, you might as well prepare for it.

Re:Just Making Themselves Look Worse (4, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654990)

This seems to be pretty close to admitting that their senior execs have done things that would cause public outrage. Seems like a smarter strategy would have been just to shut up completely about it until seeing what these leaks actually contain. But, I suppose if you know beyond a doubt you will be proven guilty and held to account for something, you might as well prepare for it.

There is one prepatory step that will apparently never occur to them: admit they have done wrong, identify the people they have wronged, make it right by giving them full compensation, and document that they have done so.

Re:Just Making Themselves Look Worse (4, Insightful)

ring-eldest (866342) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655086)

There is one prepatory step that will apparently never occur to them: admit they have done wrong, identify the people they have wronged, make it right by giving them full compensation, and document that they have done so.

That's a sucker's bet. These people are PROFESSIONALS. They'll go with the tried-and-true method and round up some scapegoats, of course.

Re:Just Making Themselves Look Worse (1)

causality (777677) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655118)

These people are PROFESSIONALS.

Sure. They're just like our politicians: the best that money can buy.

Re:Just Making Themselves Look Worse (0)

MichaelKristopeit328 (1963774) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655110)

right.... because if you aren't guilty, WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO HIDE, right?

what if they also registered the executives names with a "-IS-THE-GREATEST.COM" suffix? would that be pretty close to admitting that their senior execs were the greatest? would you be forced to believe such a thing due to you rampant hypocritically ignorant paranoia?

you're an idiot.

Wonder if it's still availible? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654956)

Did they snatch up "Bank Of Assholes" or had they already trademarked that name?

Available - they can't get em all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34654982)

BrianTMoynihanSux.com/net/org
BrianTMoynihanBlovvs (two v's)
BrianTMoynihanBlos
BrianTMoynihanSuks

Good luck with that (1)

ewhenn (647989) | more than 3 years ago | (#34654998)

BrianMoynihanIsADick.com is still available. They'd need to register thousands and thousands of names, not just a couple hundred.

Umm whistle blower??? (1)

Prince Vegeta SSJ4 (718736) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655018)

looks like someone may be blowing more than whistles?

They missed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655022)

Re:They missed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655218)

How about:-
thievingaholesboa.info
bankofamericaanalleakage.com
truthaboutbankofamerica.com
firstupagainstthewallbankofamerica.com

and - all the existing ones as *.*.au

Here's a novel idea... (2)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655076)

Instead of trying to silence criticism, how about resolving problems people have with your institution?

Re:Here's a novel idea... (1)

PRMan (959735) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655506)

With BofA's history? That'll cost more than a few thousand domain names...

Cheaper? (1)

theamarand (794542) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655082)

You'd think it would just be cheaper to sue - or threaten to sue (the ISP?) - anyone creating a defamatory web-site for defamation of character. Lawyer letters to the ISP of "offending" web-sites are generally effective, especially from a Big Bank.

Re:Cheaper? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655196)

I am not a Lawyer, but I think Libel suits don't take the sites down until a verdict is reached.

Lol, do they understand how language works? (1)

cfalcon (779563) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655154)

For each $NAME in @EXECS
$NAMEsucks.com
$NAMEblows.com
(repeat for org, net, etc)

Ok, whew! I think we got them all!

$NAMEsucksass.com
$NAMEsucksshit.com
(repeat for anything else to suck: goats, whatever, just stay on the legal side and don't make a claim that could be claimed in court to be slander/libel)
$NAME_is_a_fuckwit.com

Honestly, I could keep going. People don't just type names in and add sucks and see what comes up, but if one of these execs is caught doing something illegal you can bet that appropriate domains will be reaching the top of google searches for the name with a quickness.

bankofamericasucks.com (2)

IceFox (18179) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655202)

Someone suggests that it is because their customers are finding out about the domain bankofamericasucks.com which has a forum and existing comments by customers and employees.

Seems like a honest strategy (1)

KBrown (7190) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655206)

to be the first ones to be prepared to show to the rest of the world how much their executices suck.

Oh yeah... (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655216)

...there's a clever move., ihatebofa.com, or bofasux.net, or bofarobberbarons.org, or...

All points to remember when they crash the market (1)

company suckup (1351563) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655230)

again looking for another bailout. I'd be happy as a clam if Wikileaks or something equal to that brought them all down, with no Goldman Sachs politician able to save their sorry asses.

What about other languages .... (1)

scharkalvin (72228) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655252)

After all some people swear in French, German, etc. Maybe even Pig Latin!

Re:What about other languages .... (1)

PRMan (959735) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655510)

Ah, there you're wrong. They're Bank of America. Americans don't speak other languages...

Re:What about other languages .... (1)

ocdscouter (1922930) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655568)

Eh, Pig Latin is kinda unwieldy for domain names in my opinion (and depending on your dialect). To illustrate: [BOA]uckssay.com; [BOA]owsblay.com; ankbayofayamericaayukssayandayowsblay.com

Taking Sites Down (3, Insightful)

theamarand (794542) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655434)

I have personally experienced the taking-down of sites and content by ISPs which were legally bullied (cease and desist orders) by large companies to make the site/content go away. It's possible that for every one site/piece of content that I've seen taken down outside of due process, short-circuiting the burden of proof, there may be many other sites where the ISP referred the matter to a legal department and determined that it was just corporate bullying, and took no action.

In my personal experience, when a big company threatens to take action against a smaller company, unless it's a high-profile case that the EFF is willing to tackle, the smaller company seems to fold and remove the site/content. It simply costs too much to battle it out in court, so the big guy often wins.

Does anyone have any experience with a smaller company telling a larger company to go suck eggs and successfully fighting a suit or threat to sue? Maybe I'm just cynical....

Wont this backfires on them. I hope so. (1)

JohnRoss1968 (574825) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655534)

If they start buying all of these domain names like BofAsucks etc... , Wouldn't those sites show up on Google?
It would be very funny if that were the case.
Imagine a prospective customer typing Bank Of America into Google and getting nothing but page after page of BofAsucks.com type websites.
If I saw that I would have to reconsider banking with them.

I thought you couldnt swear in a domain name? (1)

kaptink (699820) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655582)

I thought you couldnt use naughty language in the ICANN name system?

  Domain Name: FUCKBRIANMOYNIHAN.COM
            Created on: 22-Dec-10
            Expires on: 22-Dec-11
            Last Updated on: 22-Dec-10

brianmoynihanisadickhead.com is still up for grabs though

*gets popcorn* (1)

SupremoMan (912191) | more than 3 years ago | (#34655612)

I like where this is going
*gets popcorn*

Trying to hide the stench already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34655722)

Why are they so worried? Such pristine and fine bank like that surely has nothing illegal to hide, right?!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>