i can't agree with that
i find a well targetted "parked page" much more relevant and to the point, than many so-called "content pages," relevant and to the point because every bit of information on a well targetted parked page is being displayed because an advertiser believes in it enough to pay to have it displayed
the spyware allegations in the lawsuit are one thing, but to say "parked domain pages" are second rate and useless as the lawsuit claims is ridiculous
the real problem seems to be the way yahoo represented the source of traffic to advertisers, saying ads would be shown on "popular, high quality sites" and "with relevant articles, product reviews, and more"
for goodness sakes, how many "popular, high quality sites" are actually out there to even handle the millions of ads displayed every day
if yahoo had been more upfront on the source of the click throughs they could have avoided at least this part of the lawsuit, and if an advertiser doesn't want his ad displayed on a parked page he can take his business somewhere else, i have no idea though where he would go to find this "popular, high quality site" paradise he is looking for