Comments on: The man who owns the Internet

The man who owns the Internet

MetaMonkey — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:14:16 -0800

Meet Kevin Ham, the man who owns the Internet

By: imperium

imperium — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:24:48 -0800

Quick, Matt, register metafilter.cm before this guy gets his hands on your clickcents!

By: dios

dios — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:27:43 -0800

more like .con am i rite?

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:27:58 -0800

When rusty cargo ships and tankers packed to the gills with starving refugees from broken nations start washing up on the shores of N. America, I hope someone directs them to people like this guy first so they can have a decent meal. I mean literal cannibalism, of course.

By: Faint of Butt

Faint of Butt — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:28:47 -0800

He's a squatter. I can't wait until he gets sued into oblivion over trademark infringements.

By: maryh

maryh — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:30:37 -0800

Quick, Matt, register metafilter.cm before this guy gets his hands on your clickcents! Too late.

By: acro

acro — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:34:28 -0800

metafilter.com metafilter.cno metafilter.com metafilter.com merafilter.com metafiler.com metailfllter.com

By: champthom

champthom — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:41:23 -0800

If he owns the Internet, does that make him King of the Internet? If so, he should at least wear a crown and cape, maybe carry around a scepter.

By: MarshallPoe

MarshallPoe — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:42:26 -0800

Um, yes, but he squats on names for a living. Not, I imagine, terribly interesting or rewarding work. Though he seems like a nice fellow.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:44:14 -0800

Wow, he owns the internet, and I have never once visited any of his sites.

By: uri

uri — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:50:39 -0800

bookmarks > this guy

By: Thorzdad

Thorzdad — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:53:35 -0800

Not, I imagine, terribly interesting or rewarding work. Unless you count that 300 million as "rewarding", of course. As an aside...I am really fascinated (and just a little dismayed) by the idea that they actually hold auctions for domain names. I don't know why...but I am.

By: CitrusFreak12

CitrusFreak12 — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:54:45 -0800

Really well written article. Given the topic, I'm surprised I was as sucked into it as I was.

By: Nahum Tate

Nahum Tate — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:57:08 -0800

Do these guys not realize that 99% of the people reading about them are going to think they're a-holes? Why would you agree to be profiled for something like this? And, no Paul Sloan, Ham is not a "devout Christian". He's friction. He's a guy who trained to be a doctor, then ditched that when buying misspelled domain names proved to be more lucrative.

By: brundlefly

brundlefly — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:00:46 -0800

Nahum Tate writes "Ham is not a 'devout Christian'. He's friction. He's a guy who trained to be a doctor, then ditched that when buying misspelled domain names proved to be more lucrative." That's contradictory? You must have some director's cut of the Bible I haven't read.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:03:06 -0800

Given the topic, I'm surprised I was as sucked into it as I was. Me too. (I can't believe) I read the whole thing. Good post!

By: acro

acro — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:05:04 -0800

Whois owns ur metafiler.com? CEO demand Media, owner of enom inc. (enom, whois)

By: NinjaTadpole

NinjaTadpole — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:06:09 -0800

Mmmm: kingparasite.com

By: John Kenneth Fisher

John Kenneth Fisher — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:06:20 -0800

I thought Henry van Statten owned the Internet... Anyway, look, sleazy, needs to be punched in the face, blah blah. But seriously, that .cm thing, kind of brilliant. Hate to admit it, but.. it kind of is. Oh, still evil though.

By: smallerdemon

smallerdemon — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:12:46 -0800

Damn, John Kenneth Fisher beat me to the obvious answer. :) Which makes me happy I'm not the only nerd that was thinking about posting that.

By: 23skidoo

23skidoo — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:15:32 -0800

That's contradictory? You must have some director's cut of the Bible I haven't read. Leviticus 29:16 " And if a man shall forsake his educated profession for a life of riches, then he shall be an abomination unto the LORD, and his name shall be mocked by people on The Internets for totally not being a devout Christian, but instead being a complete asswad."

By: wuwei

wuwei — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:25:55 -0800

Whatever. If he was one of those guys who was only in medicine for the money, then I'm glad that he chose a more lucrative path. There's nothing worse than going to the orthodontist and realizing that he's just a disgruntled, frustrated, greedy SOB who is unhappy that he couldn't make more money. I'd rather see guys like that end up like Ham or working on Wall Street.

By: Samuel Farrow

Samuel Farrow — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:37:04 -0800

$31,000 to add Christianrock.com to his collection There is an opportunity gone begging. Dammit.

By: nonmyopicdave

nonmyopicdave — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:40:51 -0800

I don't get http://agoga.com/. All links and searches lead back to agoga.com. Where are the actual advertisers?

By: wendell

wendell — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:47:22 -0800

Maybe this dude owns the internet, but it's zefrank (two threads earlier) who pwns the internet. Him and cortex.

By: airguitar

airguitar — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:00:23 -0800

There's nothing worse than going to the orthodontist and realizing that he's just a disgruntled, frustrated, greedy SOB who is unhappy that he couldn't make more money. I know that guy. He works in Dallas.

By: Mr.Encyclopedia

Mr.Encyclopedia — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:00:32 -0800

I, for one, welcome my new Internet Landlord.

By: gottabefunky

gottabefunky — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:20:51 -0800

Ham recalls that it was about this time -- 1992 or 1993 -- that he was introduced to the Web. A church friend told him about a powerful new medium that could be used to spread the gospel. Glad that worked out for him. Yes I am jealous about someone earning enough money to buy a small country by doing absolutely NOTHING that adds to the happiness level of the world.

By: saturnine

saturnine — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:35:35 -0800

His last name is Ham. Ham! *snigger* I'm sorry, I'll read the article now.

By: cell divide

cell divide — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:37:37 -0800

I don't get http://agoga.com/. All links and searches lead back to agoga.com. Where are the actual advertisers? All the links on the topic pages are advertiser links, the URL starts with agoga.com probably because that's how they help track the outbound links internally.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:40:20 -0800

I wish the $70 to buy a domain name hadn't been so much money back when I was in college. Was there any better investment back in 1996 or so?

By: juv3nal

juv3nal — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:53:05 -0800

I, for one, welcome my new Internet ~~Land~~slumlord. fixed that for ya.

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Tue, 22 May 2007 16:59:50 -0800

That's funny, I don't remember writing a cheque to this guy for using the internet...

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Tue, 22 May 2007 17:02:49 -0800

Why do I find myself oddly disgusted at Yahoo for this?

By: camcgee

camcgee — Tue, 22 May 2007 17:57:20 -0800

I don't get http://agoga.com/. All links and searches lead back to agoga.com. Where are the actual advertisers? Seems not to work in Firefox. Suck it, Ham.

By: Mitheral

Mitheral — Tue, 22 May 2007 18:35:09 -0800

gottabefunky writes "Yes I am jealous about someone earning enough money to buy a small country by doing absolutely NOTHING that adds to the happiness level of the world." This guy actually breaks the intent of 404 feedback loop so he's a net negative on the global happiness scale.

By: sparkzy

sparkzy — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:17:27 -0800

bottomfeeder.cm

By: localroger

localroger — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:30:53 -0800

More like the owner of the typonet.

By: true

true — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:47:51 -0800

He doesn't actually seem that shady - at least his link farms serve up reasonably reputable links that are related to the topics being entered and not giant piles of spyware. Honestly, if you enter "weddingshoes.com" and get a page consisting of yahoo's ads for wedding shoes did you really get that screwed?

By: jacobian

jacobian — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:59:02 -0800

So, I know I'm gonna get flamed like there's no tomorrow, but I gotta say it: I don't know why everyone's hating on this guy. In the '70s, my wife's parents bought a house in downtown Palo Alto; I think they paid the princely sum of $75k. Today that same house is worth millions, if not tens of millions. Real estate in desirable areas is expensive. How is, say, weddingshopping.com any different? It's a desirable piece of "real estate" that's worth more than a URL out in the sticks (would that be ".info"?) Domain names are a commodity just like real estate, pork belly futures, and a million other things; the value of a commodity is set by the market. This is grade-school economics, folks; how is this guy any more slimy than someone who invests in any other commodity?

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Tue, 22 May 2007 20:20:32 -0800

Domain names are a commodity just like real estate This notion has perhaps crippled the Internet to some degree. This may the source of contention.

By: Heywood Mogroot

Heywood Mogroot — Tue, 22 May 2007 21:12:22 -0800

Today that same house is worth millions Speaking as a Georgist, let me say that's your problem right there, mistaking the land for the actual property (the fixed improvements thereon). Georgists see land-squatting to be similar as name squatting. Your parents didn't create the land, or the value of the land, yet they are profiting from it. This profit has to, eventually, come from someone who is actually productive, or via inflationary means like the free money loans that have been popular as of late.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Tue, 22 May 2007 21:16:43 -0800

What's so special about land in Georgia?

By: anthill

anthill — Tue, 22 May 2007 21:22:41 -0800

This guy really is a piece of shit. Not in a pejorative sense.

By: spiderwire

spiderwire — Tue, 22 May 2007 21:51:02 -0800

what's really impressive is that in addition to the cameroon re-reroute deal, they charge $799 for a domain name -- it's basically blackmail money, b/c the only people who could possible want a .cm domain name are people with already valuable web properties trying to protect them. ok, maybe impressive isn't the right word.

By: purephase

purephase — Tue, 22 May 2007 22:25:38 -0800

I realize that "owning the internet" is not intended in the literal sense, but it is completely ridiculous. He doesn't "own" shit. He owns typos that return ad-revenue and squats on names that force legitimate business owners to pay to pay his exhortation fees to use. The only thing that makes this any different from other organized crime is the lack of laws enforcing it and the stupid fedoras. Oh, and there just has to be some kind of pyramid scheme involved in this somehow. It just screams it.

By: dglynn

dglynn — Tue, 22 May 2007 22:44:07 -0800

This too shall pass. Some of it reminds me of the baseball card "investment" craze. Now baseball cards have value to collectors, but speculators pay more. They also create a market bringing in more speculators. Until someone points out that the market is 99% speculators, then the price falls. Don't begrudge him his $300M. It was hard won from other speculators like himself, and it probably means he will have the greatest paper losses for risking the most in this market.

By: spiderwire

spiderwire — Tue, 22 May 2007 22:54:51 -0800

dglynn: i think that you're eliding some of the human costs here. i'm actually fairly agnostic on most online advertising -- people should take responsibility for what they buy -- but in this case, i think there's an ancillary issue of people owning domains or related domains. specifically, i find the practice of trading on other's brands to be pretty heinous from an IP perspective -- and profiting off of google.cm is the worst type of parasitism. unlike, say, store-brand coke, it's not profiting off of people's decision to choose a cheaper alternative, but their mistake in accidentally not selecting the original product. i don't see why a trademark suit shouldn't be able to prevent this sort of practice. i don't have a problem with domain brokering per se, but the practice of domain-squatting is different, and entirely unacceptable. it probably speaks more to our moronic domain-assignment practices more than anything else, but that's not really much of an excuse.

By: BostonJake

BostonJake — Tue, 22 May 2007 23:08:34 -0800

I just registered whowasadoctorbutnowownstheinternethamhamham.com Its like money in the bank

By: orgvol

orgvol — Tue, 22 May 2007 23:55:47 -0800

I might just get Muffleuppaglobbadupp.com. NOW that is money in the bank.

By: borq

borq — Wed, 23 May 2007 01:04:07 -0800

lamest of teh web. to much credit could we use another word then 'squatting', squatting originates in the need of housing, this mollusc is more of a burglar

By: moonbiter

moonbiter — Wed, 23 May 2007 02:32:59 -0800

Just for fun, if you're on Windows and it annoys you to be redirected to agoga.com, you can do this:

Go to \WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc
Open the hosts file in a text editor,
Add this line: 127.0.0.1 agoga.com

Not that I have anything against this guy. He's not making any money off of me. But still.

By: tackandgybe

tackandgybe — Wed, 23 May 2007 05:24:16 -0800

I don't get http://agoga.com/. All links and searches lead back to agoga.com. Where are the actual advertisers? Seems not to work in Firefox. Suck it, Ham. If you turn on cookies it works.

By: skepticallypleased

skepticallypleased — Wed, 23 May 2007 05:25:12 -0800

At some point, advertisers have to realize they are not getting all they feel they are getting from "clickcents". The people who mistype, not-bookmark webpages and then click on strange sites like agoga.com -- How can a large percentage of that market actually be buying justifiable sums of an advertiser's product? I would feel most internet users know a strange site when they see one. The "devout" Christian thing is troubling too. I can't remember Jesus ever talking about a squatting scheme based off in the least siphoning a source of funds from a poorer third world country.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Wed, 23 May 2007 05:36:18 -0800

I think you're overrating the average internet user. I mean, I don't click on any text links, ever, but Google makes a lot of money out of it and it's not by tricking people into clicking.

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Wed, 23 May 2007 07:43:16 -0800

exhortation fees Come on, you can do it! You can pay me the money! Go go go! You can pay, I know you can! You the man!

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Wed, 23 May 2007 09:09:12 -0800

Someone should tell Ham that jesusichrist.com is still available.