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

sacX · 11-05-2006, 12:39 AM

Ok these guys deserve to go down.

I don't want to organise it, because I live so far away and I have no experience with suing folk (hey, I'm not american!

)

But if we have enough people contribute, and some leadership then surely we have the power here to take those scamsters.

Anyone with me?

Mr. Marks · 11-05-2006, 12:52 AM

Global Class Action

Bro Media - BANNED FOR LIFE · 11-05-2006, 12:53 AM

good idea man!

After Shock Media · 11-05-2006, 01:03 AM

Any decent lawyer who understands and specializes in class action lawsuits would not have a big issue taking it on if they felt it was winnable or that Zango will quickly settle. They just typically want around 40 to 60% of everything.

MaddCaz · 11-05-2006, 01:06 AM

fuck they do???

Mr. Marks · 11-05-2006, 01:08 AM

I'd sue for the PRINCIPLE and....besides, these types of cases are usually taken on contingency basis. Let the lawyers get the huge chunk of change, I just want a precedent set that normal contract principles prevent these types of installs from being "voluntary".

Jakke PNG · 11-05-2006, 01:26 AM

I'd rather sue rapidshare and the lot.

Kimo · 11-05-2006, 01:33 AM

fuck zango

Mr. Marks · 11-05-2006, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeenGodFather

I'd rather sue rapidshare and the lot.

Some fools using RS were trying to pimp my network, I turned the tables on them. Let's just say everytime they play the files I get traffic

xclusive · 11-05-2006, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeenGodFather

I'd rather sue rapidshare and the lot.

I agree but what about going after them all? Have lawyers on retainer for things that could harm the industry.

gooddomains · 11-05-2006, 01:52 AM

got zango ?

Ace_luffy · 11-05-2006, 02:07 AM

that's not good to zango.. i guess!

Manowar · 11-05-2006, 03:10 AM

after today's FTC ruling i'd say anything is possible

Brujah · 11-05-2006, 10:03 AM

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.

fris · 11-05-2006, 10:06 AM

serious business

SleazyDream · 11-05-2006, 10:06 AM

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.

that's almost exactly where zango will get nailed - they are using other's content with concent - 2257 violation

sacX · 11-05-2006, 02:56 PM

bump....

madawgz · 11-05-2006, 03:06 PM

hmmmm thats an idea...maybe zango will one day dissapear

gfx3 · 11-05-2006, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeenGodFather

I'd rather sue rapidshare and the lot.

True

there are even some services who pay people to upload porn on their free file hosting network, so guys like Squishypimp who want to earn 5$ start uploading all the paysite content they can get their hands on to make 15$. That is what damages conversion ratios these days

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 03:14 PM

zango? why not sue the companies that use zango to take your joins away from you, their very own affiliates without compensation. zango is one company of hundreds doing the same thing. thinking you can change the world by attacking any one of them is both foolish and naive.

sacX · 11-05-2006, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

zango? why not sue the companies that use zango to take your joins away from you, their very own affiliates without compensation. zango is one company of hundreds doing the same thing. thinking you can change the world by attacking any one of them is both foolish and naive.

If you get a ruling against one then it makes it harder for others to emulate.

woj · 11-05-2006, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SleazyDream

that's almost exactly where zango will get nailed - they are using other's content with concent - 2257 violation

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.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacX

If you get a ruling against one then it makes it harder for others to emulate.

the things they are doing that cause people to lose money is legal. being upset and not liking it does not change that fact.

.... i wasn't thinking... trying to rally a bunch of 1/2 retarded, hugely independent, idiot pornographers together to fight a $500,000 - $1,000,000 legal fight with zango to vent frustration, makes perfect sense and is totally logical.

;)

sacX · 11-05-2006, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

the things they are doing that cause people to lose money is legal. being upset and not liking it does not change that fact.

.... i wasn't thinking... trying to rally a bunch of 1/2 retarded, hugely independent, idiot pornographers together to fight a $500,000 - $1,000,000 legal fight with zango to vent frustration, makes perfect sense and is totally logical.

;)

Well, actually whether it's legal is very debatable, interfering with people's business is not legal.

Most likely it wouldn't require that sort of money because class action lawyers take on this sort of stuff for large percentage of the settlement. It's not beyond this board to actually achieve things when enough people care about it. If enough people do is at the moment a moot point.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacX

Well, actually whether it's legal is very debatable, interfering with people's business is not legal.

Most likely it wouldn't require that sort of money because class action lawyers take on this sort of stuff for large percentage of the settlement. It's not beyond this board to actually achieve things when enough people care about it. If enough people do is at the moment a moot point.

i dont think that the legality of anything they are doing is debatable. its a matter of public record. there are laws, there is case law, there is precedence, there have been government investigations, there has been lawsuits, there have been rulings, judgements and settlements.

They have been under significant government scrutiny and have the best legal representation in the country. First you have to spend ... how much? Probably 10-20K just to have attorneys assess the situation fully and give you an opinion on it. Then what? who is going to pay to fight assuming everyone can get on board with a weak case against them? Acacia got right in everyones face and claimed to own the rights to video/audio on the web and were suing people.. yet people did jack shit except for 11 companies and the few that sent cash. Some here know for sure, but i would venture to guess that the legal bill is probably over 1.5 mil by now. If people counldn't get on board to face an obvious, direct threat, then they definately won't get on board to face a threat where no one can know for sure if it affects them at all.

sacX · 11-05-2006, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

i dont think that the legality of anything they are doing is debatable. its a matter of public record. there are laws, there is case law, there is precedence, there have been government investigations, there has been lawsuits, there have been rulings, judgements and settlements.

They have been under significant government scrutiny and have the best legal representation in the country. First you have to spend ... how much? Probably 10-20K just to have attorneys assess the situation fully and give you an opinion on it. Then what? who is going to pay to fight assuming everyone can get on board with a weak case against them? Acacia got right in everyones face and claimed to own the rights to video/audio on the web and were suing people.. yet people did jack shit except for 11 companies and the few that sent cash. Some here know for sure, but i would venture to guess that the legal bill is probably over 1.5 mil by now. If people counldn't get on board to face an obvious, direct threat, then they definately won't get on board to face a threat where no one can know for sure if it affects them at all.

the previous cases are from the perspective of the hapless users who have been tricked into installing Zango or their previous incarnations. This is a different gripe.

Uh people know for sure Zango affects them, do you even know how it works?

Theo · 11-05-2006, 04:34 PM

zango is untouchable

Rhesus · 11-05-2006, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

zango is untouchable

What makes you say so?

Theo · 11-05-2006, 04:51 PM

the latest FTC regulation, their clients list, their capital + their ability to further raise when needed. Mainstream industry pretty much autoregulated their aff. programs and prohibits the use of it for sales/leads generation after they gave up on rest means of fighting it.

sacX · 11-05-2006, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

the latest FTC regulation, their clients list, their capital + their ability to further raise when needed. Mainstream industry pretty much autoregulated their aff. programs and prohibits the use of it for sales/leads generation after they gave up on rest means of fighting it.

their capital is exactly what makes them a target and the FTC settlement only relates to deceptive installation practices.

Theo · 11-05-2006, 05:06 PM

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.

$5 submissions · 11-05-2006, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfx3

True

there are even some services who pay people to upload porn on their free file hosting network, so guys like Squishypimp who want to earn 5$ start uploading all the paysite content they can get their hands on to make 15$. That is what damages conversion ratios these days

You just described several of the most high traffic surfer forums. RS is killing adult webmasters' income. In addition to the weekly or more frequent network password postings.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacX

the previous cases are from the perspective of the hapless users who have been tricked into installing Zango or their previous incarnations. This is a different gripe.

Uh people know for sure Zango affects them, do you even know how it works?

yeah, i know how it works.... and i have a zango account. you have yet to clarify which US law is being broken or what your specific grievance is that you feel is defensible in court.

Theo · 11-05-2006, 05:22 PM

Pleasurepays is right. When FTC goes after you they examine many things and believe me they know zango/180s better than anyone of us. The company that has historykill was hammered by FTC no that long time ago. If you see the report that followed their case it was unbeliable,they had incredible details and pointed out all type of misleading actions that were taking place. For example misleading banners. Do I need to remind you how adult dating sites work these days? With deceiving fake geoads that show ppl that dont exist in those areas and charging surfers money to provide their contact. Enough said..

warlock5 · 11-05-2006, 05:22 PM

Guys, the end is near. McDonalds is hiring.

sacX · 11-05-2006, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

yeah, i know how it works.... and i have a zango account. you have yet to clarify which US law is being broken or what your specific grievance is that you feel is defensible in court.

I'm not a lawyer, that would be their job. It is clear they're stealing.

The FTC were most likely investigating a specific complaint from the installed users point of view. I very much doubt they considered the webmaster point of view at all. Zango surely won't have provided them with any information they didnt' have to.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacX

I'm not a lawyer, that would be their job. It is clear they're stealing.

ok... back to the beginning... how are they stealing? you are the one saying there is a case to be made, so .... ? how are they stealing?

i know how zango works. how is zango stealing?

sacX · 11-05-2006, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

ok... back to the beginning... how are they stealing? you are the one saying there is a case to be made, so .... ? how are they stealing?

i know how zango works. how is zango stealing?

I buy advertising -> people click advertising -> people land on my site -> Zango popup obscures my site.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacX

I buy advertising -> people click advertising -> people land on my site -> Zango popup obscures my site.

again... what law is being broken? you don't own or control the surfers computer. the surfer does. what law is being broken?

i could use that same logic to argue that power outages and crappy hardware, frozen computers and any number of things affect a surfers ability to reach my site. why sue zango? sue god.

sacX · 11-05-2006, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

again... what law is being broken? you don't own or control the surfers computer. the surfer does. what law is being broken?

i could use that same logic to argue that power outages and crappy hardware, frozen computers and any number of things affect a surfers ability to reach my site. why sue zango? sue god.

uh those don't even compare. For one Zango's popups are wilful interference. Like I said I'm not a lawyer, but if this was happening 'in the real world' there's no doubt it would be illegal.

You're obviously a Zango fan, I'm glad to know you're happy to indulge in unethical promotional methods.

sacX · 11-05-2006, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

again... what law is being broken? you don't own or control the surfers computer. the surfer does. what law is being broken?

i could use that same logic to argue that power outages and crappy hardware, frozen computers and any number of things affect a surfers ability to reach my site. why sue zango? sue god.

"Mid-last year, a US federal judge in Alexandria, Virginia, ordered Gator to temporarily stop displaying pop-up advertising over Web publishers' pages without their permission on the grounds that the ads violated their copyrights and stole revenue from ad sales."

Here's a link to the Gator case http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement...2130156,00.htm

CaptainHowdy · 11-05-2006, 06:00 PM

GET THOSE FUCKERS

!!

nico-t · 11-05-2006, 06:12 PM

guba guba guba

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacX

uh those don't even compare. For one Zango's popups are wilful interference. Like I said I'm not a lawyer, but if this was happening 'in the real world' there's no doubt it would be illegal.

You're obviously a Zango fan, I'm glad to know you're happy to indulge in unethical promotional methods.

dude? are you serious? i was trying to ask a simple question... all you had to do was answer it. you are the one saying "lets sue them" i was only asking you "for what exactly" to which you had no reply. your parting remarks are not "your obviously a zango fan.." --.... well, i like to think i am a fan of logic.

the link you provided offers a clear reason and possible grounds for a lawsuit. thats all i was asking about.

since you care... please know that i could care less if zango exists or doesn't. i dont use them, i just wanted to see it and know what it is... particularly since i drive by their office everyday. i dont worry about others, i adapt. i am not going to waste my time trying to change the world when my time can be better invested in adapting my business to current realities, matter what they are. i am not a crusader. i do what i do for me, for my wife and for our family. thats all.

Rhesus · 11-05-2006, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

dude? are you serious? i was trying to ask a simple question... all you had to do was answer it. you are the one saying "lets sue them" i was only asking you "for what exactly" to which you had no reply. your parting remarks are not "your obviously a zango fan.." --.... well, i like to think i am a fan of logic.

the link you provided offers a clear reason and possible grounds for a lawsuit. thats all i was asking about.

since you care... please know that i could care less if zango exists or doesn't. i dont use them, i just wanted to see it and know what it is... particularly since i drive by their office everyday. i dont worry about others, i adapt. i am not going to waste my time trying to change the world when my time can be better invested in adapting my business to current realities, matter what they are. i am not a crusader. i do what i do for me, for my wife and for our family. thats all.

How narrow-minded and short-sighted...

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhesus

How narrow-minded and short-sighted...

i can either devote my time to worrying about the near infinite number of things that i can't change, that affect me directly or indirectly.. or i can effectively worry about myself, make changes in a heartbeat and keep on moving.

the world needs crusaders. i'm just not going to be one of them.

Missie · 11-05-2006, 06:26 PM

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

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missie

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

exactly. people are pissed at zango... but in all the recent BS, its the sponsor that is stealing. that is an easier case to make than the idea of trying to go after zango for what is probably going to be a fairly convoluted claim, insanely expensive to argue and its going to center on issues which have already been under intense legal scrutiny anyway.

Pleasurepays · 11-05-2006, 06:43 PM

FREE LEGENDARY LARS!! He was forced to steal. He should be suing Zango. Maybe he needs a "Help Lars Do The Right Thing" fund?

Martin3 · 11-05-2006, 06:57 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.

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

I doubt it

11-05-2006, 01:03 AM	#4
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	Any decent lawyer who understands and specializes in class action lawsuits would not have a big issue taking it on if they felt it was winnable or that Zango will quickly settle. They just typically want around 40 to 60% of everything. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

11-05-2006, 01:06 AM	#5
MaddCaz Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Illinois Posts: 9,483	fuck they do??? __________________ BigCocks.com - MatureWomen.com - Tranny.com - DrunkGirls.com - TeenGirls.com - MonsterCock.com and many more... Click here to see them all!

11-05-2006, 01:26 AM	#7
Jakke PNG ex-TeenGodFather Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Suomi Finland Perkele Posts: 20,306	I'd rather sue rapidshare and the lot. __________________ ..and I'm off.

11-05-2006, 01:33 AM	#8
Kimo ... Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Maryland ICQ:87038677 Posts: 11,542	fuck zango __________________ ...

11-05-2006, 02:07 AM	#12
Ace_luffy www.creationcrew.com Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM Posts: 12,179	that's not good to zango.. i guess! __________________ ++ Adult and Mainstream Websites Designs \| 10 banners for only $50 \| html5 Banners ++ email : [email protected] Telegram : https://t.me/creationcrew \| HTML5/Responsive Site - Div/CSS - ElevatedX - NATs - Wordpress

11-05-2006, 12:39 AM	#1
sacX Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,998	Let's sue Zango, I'll give $1000 Ok these guys deserve to go down. I don't want to organise it, because I live so far away and I have no experience with suing folk (hey, I'm not american! ) But if we have enough people contribute, and some leadership then surely we have the power here to take those scamsters. Anyone with me? __________________ Have Asian Language Traffic?

11-05-2006, 12:52 AM	#2
Mr. Marks Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Wherever I want Posts: 7,517	Global Class Action

11-05-2006, 12:53 AM	#3
Bro Media - BANNED FOR LIFE MOBILE PORN: IMOBILEPORN Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Tinseltown NL Posts: 16,502	good idea man!

11-05-2006, 01:08 AM	#6
Mr. Marks Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Wherever I want Posts: 7,517	I'd sue for the PRINCIPLE and....besides, these types of cases are usually taken on contingency basis. Let the lawyers get the huge chunk of change, I just want a precedent set that normal contract principles prevent these types of installs from being "voluntary".

11-05-2006, 01:52 AM	#11
gooddomains Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,127	got zango ?

11-05-2006, 03:10 AM	#13
Manowar jellyfish Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 71,528	after today's FTC ruling i'd say anything is possible

11-05-2006, 10:03 AM	#14
Brujah Beer Money Baron Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: brujah / gmail Posts: 22,157	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. __________________ Free Premium Domain Lists and Tools at Clickmojo.com For Sale: Obscenity.com

11-05-2006, 10:06 AM	#15
fris Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 55,262	serious business __________________ Since 1999: 69 Adult Industry awards for Best Hosting Company and professional excellence. WP Stuff

11-05-2006, 02:56 PM	#17
sacX Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,998	bump.... __________________ Have Asian Language Traffic?

11-05-2006, 03:06 PM	#18
madawgz 8.8.8.8 Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Noordermarkt Posts: 30,509	hmmmm thats an idea...maybe zango will one day dissapear __________________ TAEMDLRMSKRJIXMRLSMRJ.

11-05-2006, 03:14 PM	#20
Pleasurepays BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I live in a pile of boogers Posts: 11,913	zango? why not sue the companies that use zango to take your joins away from you, their very own affiliates without compensation. zango is one company of hundreds doing the same thing. thinking you can change the world by attacking any one of them is both foolish and naive.

11-05-2006, 04:34 PM	#27
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,524	zango is untouchable

11-05-2006, 04:51 PM	#29
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,524	the latest FTC regulation, their clients list, their capital + their ability to further raise when needed. Mainstream industry pretty much autoregulated their aff. programs and prohibits the use of it for sales/leads generation after they gave up on rest means of fighting it.

11-05-2006, 05:06 PM	#31
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,524	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.

11-05-2006, 05:22 PM	#34
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,524	Pleasurepays is right. When FTC goes after you they examine many things and believe me they know zango/180s better than anyone of us. The company that has historykill was hammered by FTC no that long time ago. If you see the report that followed their case it was unbeliable,they had incredible details and pointed out all type of misleading actions that were taking place. For example misleading banners. Do I need to remind you how adult dating sites work these days? With deceiving fake geoads that show ppl that dont exist in those areas and charging surfers money to provide their contact. Enough said..

11-05-2006, 05:22 PM	#35
warlock5 Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Uranus Posts: 2,808	Guys, the end is near. McDonalds is hiring.

11-05-2006, 06:00 PM	#42
CaptainHowdy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Happy in the dark. Posts: 93,042	GET THOSE FUCKERS !! __________________ FLASH SALE INSANITY! deal with a 100% Trusted Seller Buy Traffic Spots on a High-Quality Network 1 Year or Lifetime — That’s Right, Until the Internet Explodes!

11-05-2006, 06:12 PM	#43
nico-t emperor of my world Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: nethalands Posts: 29,903	guba guba guba

11-05-2006, 06:26 PM	#47
Missie Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 372	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 __________________ Looking for a clean sponsor that won't steal from you?check them out here!

11-05-2006, 06:43 PM	#49
Pleasurepays BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I live in a pile of boogers Posts: 11,913	FREE LEGENDARY LARS!! He was forced to steal. He should be suing Zango. Maybe he needs a "Help Lars Do The Right Thing" fund?