Ask HN: What's with the .ly domains (or, A Name Is Forever)

[nroach]

The first .ly domain I accessed frequently was bit.ly. For a URL shorter, a .ly domain is arguably a functionally sound choice, to minimize character strokes. Same goes for .to.

But lately, a libyan domain seems to be practically a requirement for trendy startups. Don't know what to call your company? Just tack on a .ly.

Invoice.ly; Post.ly; Embed.ly; Status.ly ... etc.ly

The problem with these domains is that they make terrible trademarks and business names. A good trademark generally doesn't directly describe the actual services, because descriptive terms are not registrable without secondary meaning. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_distinctiveness

Assume for a moment that .com scarcity doesn't apply. It might be just my opinion, but CheapAirlineTickets.com doesn't become more desirable if you just change it to CheapAirlineTickets.ly.

The biggest question in my mind for .ly entrepreneurs is what (if any) plans have been made for your brand 2,5, and 10 years out? Perhaps all the .ly domain registrants expect to have made an exit before the domain becomes stale, but isn't that just pushing the problem onto the prospective buyer?

When I think about the "big dogs" that command the lion's share of traffic today such as Google(.com) or Amazon(.com), I see quality names that can stand alone from their domain suffix. Those brands have staying power.

Can you really say the same for GenericServiceName.ly ?

[troygoode]

The ".ly" suffix is the new "e" prefix. Startups that would be successful with a normal .com suffix will be just as successful with their .ly suffix. Sure, the trend is a little silly - but most of the current ".ly"s will eventually die and we'll be left with the few standouts who we can never imagine with a different name.

See: eBay, eTrade

[spitfire → troygoode]

Don't you mean the trend is sil.ly?

[bigohms]

Most claiming that there is nothing "wrong" with .ly are skewed b/c their demographics and role already in the tech world:read:used to it. The science (if I actually went to the trouble of course of proving this) would show that for purposes of mental recall/processing/action .ly is significantly different from .com. It will take longer to recite and the chance of users making mistakes will be higher (especially if your app's market is >techies only). So why incite the additional burden (and still have to buy the .com now/later)? Go for the path of quickest/least resistance (and drop the $75/year for the .ly solely as brand insurance--along with your big TLD purchase round and 301 all to that fresh new .com).

[AmberShah]

Sorry but I don't see anything wrong with it. Personally I prefer a relevant (if cutesy) name like status.ly and enrolled.in than a made up nonsense name like Google. Besides, success and time will make these names seem normal and in 5 years there will be brand new silly trends to scoff at.

[nroach → AmberShah]

There are two potential problems, one legal and one perceptual. On the legal side, you may run into trademark issues if your name isn't sufficiently different from a generic term. You can already see this problem in Apple's App Store. When you search for "flashlight", you get a lot of generically-named apps. None of them can prevent any of the others from using a confusingly similar name because they're all based off a generic term. The second problem is one of branding. It's the same basic issue as the legal trademark issue, but from a different perspective. In the end, it's about confusion on the part of your customer/buyer. Trademark attempts to use the legal system to prevent confusion. Marketing uses branding and ad-spending to achieve the same goal.

[brianbreslin]

I only bought a .ly domain for the purposes of having a super short domain im.ly (my company is infinimedia), and we don't plan on trademarking or branding that domain.

[helveticaman]

Outside hacker circles, Amazon is always Amazon-dot-com.

[lunchbox]

this should look like code

`this too`

code

d should not be code