Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Missie
LOLOL Not sure what kind of answer you expect to get, as long as you don't expect the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I'll bet that you'll get a lot of dancing around the bush.
|
actually, my zango rep was pretty upfront about it and gave me straight up answers to my questions... in a nutshell, what kellie claimed above regarding 180/zango popping up the exact same site, thus superseding the first referrer's info
server side, is absolutely true.. he didn't deny it.. (i guess the difference between my zango response and evulvmedia's letter may be that my questions were exact and couldn't be misconstrued)
and as i alluded to above, this adds "interesting implications" because zango permits sponsors to bid on
their own sites!!!... doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what's wrong with that picture..
as for a solution, i can see kellie's perspective that nailing them in court may be difficult for a number of reasons: burden of proof, lack of unity/resolve on the part of affiliates/sponsors, immature internet regulations/laws (likely stemming from ignorance), etc.. while not necessarily impossible, i think a more probable solution would be self-regulation.. similar to how many sponsors utilize NATS because of their 'no shave' reputation, i believe something similar may surface for this "piggy-back-cookie-stomping" issue.. (pssst NATS... u guys listening?)
will, seems like we're playing a lot of icq tag... give email a try, might have more luck.. with regards to legal action, u gonna set up a mailing list for those interested? i don't check gfy religiously, unfortunately..
ok, i'm off to remove all my zango promotions now and do a little surfer education..
