Let's sue Zango, I'll give $1000 - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

madawgz · 11-05-2006, 08:23 PM

50 zango lawsuits....

will76 · 11-05-2006, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

valid point. I would be more optimistic if I had seen certain big aff.programs step against it, in the contrary though...

There several things that haven't been posted about zango the similar systems even after all these drama threads. For example:

Assuming you have aff.program A taking over #1 bid for their keywords to protect their business. This translates that just a % of the popups will be for this advertiser. Any advertiser can jump and take over 2nd, 3rd etc position with a starting min bid of 1.5cents. Right now I can go and bid on AFF/cams.com/sexsearch.com etc keywords and popup my own ads. So bottom line, do they actually protect their keywords? No, they just hijack sales from their affiliates.

don't forget other sites too... The whole " protect our traffic " is a smoke screen. They are not just buying their keywords (domains names), they are buying several other sites domains as well. How are they protecting their traffic when I go to check my clickcash stats and i get a zango popup from cams.com It shows in the browser they are targeting clickcashdotcom. Or all the times someone goes to sexsearch and a cams or aff popup comes up.

It's bullshit, people have given them several ways they could stop and they keep coming up with excuses. Maybe they feel that AFF has peaked and on its ways down so they will resort to dirty traffic that will only hurt them 10x worse in the long run.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

don't forget other sites too... The whole " protect our traffic " is a smoke screen. They are not just buying their keywords (domains names), they are buying several other sites domains as well.

unless you know something i don't ... zango does not work like that. its basically a ppc engine and you can bid on competitive URL's as keywords. they might be bidding on cams.com - but so are 30 other people. so the net effect in terms of "protecting their traffic" is almost ZERO

will76 · 11-05-2006, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj

I don't think you understand how zango works, they don't run any sites, so there is no way they can get nailed for 2257 violation. All they do is pop a popup when certain event happens. In most cases the event is when someone goes to certain site, popup gets popped. They could just as easily pop a popup when you open winamp to play an mp3, or when you watch a video clip with media player or even each time you start ms word.

I think he means the distribution of the installs, other side of the zango opperation. Zango uses a lot of porn videos to lure people to click play through DRM license boxes that will make you install the zango search assistant (causes all the pop ups) on your computer in order for you to see the "free" porn video. I wonder who's content this is they are buying and if they have a license to use it that way as well as all of their 2257 info documented.

will76 · 11-05-2006, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

unless you know something i don't ... zango does not work like that. its basically a ppc engine and you can bid on competitive URL's as keywords. they might be bidding on cams.com - but so are 30 other people. so the net effect in terms of "protecting their traffic" is almost ZERO

I wasn't disagreeing with you, just adding that their arguement is also baseless because they are not only targeting the urls they own but urls of other companies as well.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 09:20 PM

he.. didn't mean to argue or sound like it (although i usually do anyway) - i meant to just point out that there is no merit at all to an argument like "we are forced to do it" because "doing it" doesn't change a whole lot since many other people are also bidding on cams.com. even having the number one position does mean much if there are 30 people bidding on it.

going further, if many people are bidding on it anyway and it represents such a tiny fraction of traffic as he claims, then its not possible to justify it.

Rattlehead · 11-05-2006, 09:30 PM

Zango does suck ass. I just had to remove it from my neighbors computer. It was fucking up all kinds of shit.

will76 · 11-05-2006, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

You just need to piss off the right people like I posted in another thread. Norm Zadeh for example, who got a settlement from AdultCheck. Show him URLs where AFF is paying them while they use his content.. or see if Zango is popping up over his sites.

Thats a great idea, what are his sites. I can check to see if anything happens.

Along the same lines if you let the religious community and zangos mainstream sponsors know that they are advertising their games to kids with the search assistant included I think it will piss off a lot of people who can do more damage then we can. Who wants to do business with a company that markets their products to kids and causes porn to pop up on their computers, well besides sex search and aff... I don't think many people would be happy about this.

will76 · 11-05-2006, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

he.. didn't mean to argue or sound like it (although i usually do anyway) - i meant to just point out that there is no merit at all to an argument like "we are forced to do it" because "doing it" doesn't change a whole lot since many other people are also bidding on cams.com. even having the number one position does mean much if there are 30 people bidding on it.

going further, if many people are bidding on it anyway and it represents such a tiny fraction of traffic as he claims, then its not possible to justify it.

will76 · 11-05-2006, 10:43 PM

this is just sad.

http://cams.com/go/page/cams_view_ra...h.com_Cams.com

" subclickcash.com_Cams.com "

I log in to check my clickcash stats and this page pops up. Only webmasters go to clickcash.com so why are they targeting that as well ? I seriously doubt any webmasters who are logging into clickcash are going to see this pop up and then go signup to cams.com to watch some chick on cam.

This just started happening a few weeks ago. Way to waste your money Cams.com.

pradaboy · 11-06-2006, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missie

I've talked about lawsuits against adware companies with Kellie and Ben Edelman several times before. Because most adware programs, and that includes zango, do NOT overwrite cookies themselves, it's not a winnable lawsuit for affiliates.

The ones who could sue adware companies, and SHOULD, are affiliate programs/sponsors for adware that display ads over their own sites and totally cover them. ALL these cases have been won or settled before and can/will be won again.

There are way too many ways that affiliates get cheated by adware and those who use these programs to steal. As Ben explained to me, it would be extremely difficult and confusing to try to document every occurrence for every sponsor, WHO popped the ad and stole the sale, explain every technical detail in court of each popup, how it happens, how it works, etc., and trying to put a money value to the amount lost, especially when the adware program itself does nothing wrong in this sense.

Let sponsors sue adware companies, they would win. We, affiliates, probably wouldn't and we'd spend a fortune trying.

CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS FOR AFFILIATES...

I sent Ben the links to the zango threads last month. Ben, Kellie and lawyers consulted on behalf of affiliates (mainstream AND porn) have said that it would be much easier and a more "winnable" case if affiliates sued SPONSORS for breach of contract. All TOS say that if a surfer comes from YOUR link, the commission is payable to YOU. With adware, this part of the affiliate agreement is broken. There has been plenty of proof posted in this forum alone about several sponsors who KNOW about it and are not doing anything to stop it. That's a direct breach of contract, doesn't get any clearer than that.

Sue ONE sponsor as a class action suit and win and see how many sponsors will drop their adware advertising after that.

You have to hurt ONE sponsor where it hurts most to get the ball rolling.

Missie

So why not sue AFF? They seem to be one of the biggest sponsors around not giving a shit about stealing our traffic. I'd be all for it.

Theo · 11-06-2006, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin3

They do own a site, zango.com
You think they have permission for all those flash videos and games on there?

I doubt it

trust me,they do have permission

teksonline · 11-06-2006, 03:30 AM

Quote:

i do what i do for me, for my wife and for our family. thats all.

Exactly what the problem is these days, noone cares about anything but themselves, so tyrants, scammers, punks, bunko artists, thieves, and just
plain fucking greed takes over the world... one nickel at a time

Rhesus · 11-09-2006, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teksonline

Exactly what the problem is these days, noone cares about anything but themselves, so tyrants, scammers, punks, bunko artists, thieves, and just
plain fucking greed takes over the world... one nickel at a time

will76 · 11-13-2006, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pradaboy

So why not sue AFF? They seem to be one of the biggest sponsors around not giving a shit about stealing our traffic. I'd be all for it.

From what I have been told affiliates would have a pretty good case against their sponsor for business interference.

Sponsors would have the best case to sue zango and other sponsors.

marko13 · 11-13-2006, 12:40 AM

very good idea....

11-05-2006, 08:23 PM	#51
madawgz 8.8.8.8 Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Noordermarkt Posts: 30,509	50 zango lawsuits.... __________________ TAEMDLRMSKRJIXMRLSMRJ.

11-05-2006, 09:30 PM	#57
Rattlehead Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Hades Posts: 744	Zango does suck ass. I just had to remove it from my neighbors computer. It was fucking up all kinds of shit. __________________ Wifey Cash - Official Program For Wifey's World

11-13-2006, 12:40 AM	#66
marko13 Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: www.lvpshosting.com Posts: 7,512	very good idea.... __________________ We are responsible for your hosting ... Enjoy in your life. Shared hosting from $3.95 Europe Linux VPS plans from $11.37 http://www.LVPSHosting.com

11-05-2006, 09:20 PM	#56
Pleasurepays BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I live in a pile of boogers Posts: 11,913	he.. didn't mean to argue or sound like it (although i usually do anyway) - i meant to just point out that there is no merit at all to an argument like "we are forced to do it" because "doing it" doesn't change a whole lot since many other people are also bidding on cams.com. even having the number one position does mean much if there are 30 people bidding on it. going further, if many people are bidding on it anyway and it represents such a tiny fraction of traffic as he claims, then its not possible to justify it.

11-05-2006, 10:43 PM	#60
will76 Making $$$$ w/ ClickCash Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Location: USA Posts: 18,037	this is just sad. http://cams.com/go/page/cams_view_ra...h.com_Cams.com " subclickcash.com_Cams.com " I log in to check my clickcash stats and this page pops up. Only webmasters go to clickcash.com so why are they targeting that as well ? I seriously doubt any webmasters who are logging into clickcash are going to see this pop up and then go signup to cams.com to watch some chick on cam. This just started happening a few weeks ago. Way to waste your money Cams.com.