[bshimmin]

Why does https://www.directlyrics.com have a TITLE of "Azlyrics" and an H1 of "Azlyrics" but http://www.azlyrics.com seems to be an entirely unrelated web site? The latter is typically what I end up at when I search for song lyrics if I click one of the first few links (though if I want to read some amusing analysis, usually there is a Genius.com link a few below).

[yvoschaap2]

Yes, good eye. A great example of continuious testing SEO opportunities.

What if Google would start ranking directlyrics on specific 'azlyrics' queries? I haven't seen it happen yet, but if it worked... expect it to be reverted next week.

[bshimmin]

Right, so you're using one of your competitors' names quite prominently on your own site? And, er, you think that's ok?

[logfromblammo]

It's AZLyrics's responsibility to police their own trademarks, so it's okay, unless they say it is not in a C&D letter.

So it's legally okay, as far as we know.

Still a dick move, though. It's not okay in my opinion. But I'm not the one who may gain or lose thousands of dollars by deciding whether or not to do it, either. I can't say for certain whether it would be okay or not from outside my comfy judgment armchair.

[ScottBurson]

It's blatant, intentional trademark infringement for direct commercial gain. IANAL, but I would think this might result in something quite a bit more expensive than a C&D -- like a lawsuit with punitive damages.

ETA: and now the site owner is on record here on HN stating that the intent was to steal search traffic. I'm sure this is a cutthroat business ... but this is an open invitation for one's own throat to be cut.

[logfromblammo]

The USPTO trademark search system (TESS [0]) reveals that "azlyrics" is not a registered trademark [in the US].

If the company hasn't registered it, and doesn't enforce it, it is not a trademark.

[0] http://tess2.uspto.gov/

[yvoschaap2]

So many lawyers here on HN, I forgot...

[ScottBurson]

It's not us you need to worry about. Good luck!

[wumbolad]

Yeah man these people are crazy

[rhizome]

On "initial interest confusion":

http://www.klemchuk.com/30-trademark-infringement-by-meta-ta...

[ChristianBundy]

Yeah, that's incredibly shady.

[jethro_tell]

The whole thing is pretty parasitic.

'How I let other people create so I don't have to work'

[kornish]

Reminds me of how some companies will take out Adwords for direct competitors' names to show up in the top of search results for their competitors.

[JCharante]

So you're putting the name of a competitor on your site to see if it improves your seo? You're a madlad! I wonder if it'll work.