CJ.com class action lawsuit because of their acceptance of "adware" traffic.

[will76]

I had posted this in another thread but don't think many people noticed it.


http://www.cjclassaction.com/

CJ.com is being sued becaused they allowed their affiliates to use "adware" one of the companies being Zango. From my understanding, it looks like CJ affiliates were using companies like Zango to target other CJ affiliates. CJ still profited so they were basically turning a blind eye and allowing it to happen.

If you don't want to read the whole thing, at least read this part:

http://www.cjclassaction.com/Carrier...aint_Final.pdf

skip down to the part " B. Adware and Affiliate Commission theft".

It explains how "adware" works and the process in which affiliates have their traffic stolen. Sounds very familar to what AFF was doing, but imo AFF's affiliates would have had a much better case. AFF, the company ADMITTED they were doing this, and taking money from their affiliates. So there wouldn't be an issue of neglagence, where they had to prove they weren't letting rouge affiliates get away with it, when in fact it was themselves doing it. Anyway, its an interesting read and something that all sponsors who allow zango traffic, or who participate in buying zango traffic themselves should take notice. Yes, I hope you get fucked.

Would be nice to see this start a pattarn and catch up to some companies.

[Snake Doctor]

Will be interesting to see if a sponsor program can be held liable for something like this

[chuvii]

rules? there's no any rules! matrix has you...

[spacedog]

Oh boy..

I'd love to see Zango sued for billions & sent out of business..

[will76]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Will be interesting to see if a sponsor program can be held liable for something like this

seems pretty plausable to me. In CJ's case it looks like they were letting certain affiliates steal from other affiliates, which naturally anything like that would violate their TOS. Using AFF as an example where the sponsor themselves were stealing traffic and sales from their own affiliates, i would think it would be a slam dunk especially with all of Lars' admission here. Lucky for Lars I never did send them a substantial amount of traffic, or I would be leading the cause on that one.

[Flynn]

I love it. It sounds like a great big circular ass fuck.

[will76]

Originally Posted by Flynn

I love it. It sounds like a great big circular ass fuck.

oh yeah, i am sure it is going to be fun can't wait to see this one unfold and the after effects it has on other companies.

[RawAlex]

Paging Legendary Lars. Lars, your ship has just come in.

[will76]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Paging Legendary Lars. Lars, your ship has just come in.

It sure sets the path for a slam dunk case imo against AFF by AFF affiliates who were cheated out of millions of dollars.

[RawAlex]

I am a big believer that very soon, one or more large affiliate programs will be caught out with a shave or milking device, and they will end up on the end of a class action suit. I could also see where that sort of thing could actually lead to interstate fraud charges.

[chupacabra]

however much AFF deserves a good fucking, i must admit i'd love to see CJ go down in flames over this sort of thing... mostly due to their early roots of content theft and how much they must have made off my content back then. i really could care less that they "went legit" once money was coming in... once a thief, always a thief..

[DaddyHalbucks]

Wow, that could be a major thing.

[Barefootsies]

Originally Posted by will76

seems pretty plausable to me. In CJ's case it looks like they were letting certain affiliates steal from other affiliates, which naturally anything like that would violate their TOS. Using AFF as an example where the sponsor themselves were stealing traffic and sales from their own affiliates, i would think it would be a slam dunk especially with all of Lars' admission here. Lucky for Lars I never did send them a substantial amount of traffic, or I would be leading the cause on that one.

[will76]

bump... .

[NTSS]

Good find Will76!

I hope the fuckers get hit hard! I havent been doing well lately with cj.

Food for thought:
"Jung LLP and Hagens Berman LLP are representing affiliates and merchants across the country who have been harmed by adware practices. Please contact Nassiri & Jung LLP to discuss your legal rights at no cost or obligation."

Some think that just becuase this is adult that they can do whatever the fuck they want! hmmmm?

[V_RocKs]

When a company stops it shows good faith...

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

I am a big believer that very soon, one or more large affiliate programs will be caught out with a shave or milking device

Did somebody say milk?

[will76]

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

When a company stops it shows good faith...

either you are not too bright or I am just by chance only seeing your retarded posts lately.

BTW, last i checked they were at it again.

[thonglife]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Did somebody say milk?

Hmmm....

[will76]

bump...........

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

When a company stops it shows good faith...

No, it means they were caught!

[Gnus]

Nice find will.

Gary

[p1mpdogg]

if a sponso publicly and privatly refuses to allow or atleast has attempted to stop any and all zango related traffic, theya rent going to be held liable.

im the fucker that is trying to stop them

[p1mpdogg]

well me and a hanful of other programs.

dont shit on the ppl trying to help the industry. i may be a dick and according to that idiot lenny aparantly i shave based on a photshopped screen cap that he insists on psoting, but that is all bullshit. i pay more and cionvert better than most sponsors on here. so you figure thatout for yourself.

anyways back to my point. ppl like Far-L and myself and others are paying money out of our own pockets to fuck up zango and atleast try and put a dent into this. what are you guys doing to stop this? nothing. so back off the sponsor being liable crap unless its blatant like those sccumbags at AFF is doing

[papill0n]

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

When a company stops it shows good faith...

no man it means they have been busted and have no other option

[Probono]

Thanks Will I am now a party to the cj.com class action. If anything actually occurs I will post it.

[Gnus]

Here's a bump to make sponsors aware that they could be slapped with a lawsuit for allowing shit like this go on. For instance SBR, AFF, SexSearch, and others.

Gary

[will76]

Originally Posted by p1mpdogg

well me and a hanful of other programs.

dont shit on the ppl trying to help the industry. i may be a dick and according to that idiot lenny aparantly i shave based on a photshopped screen cap that he insists on psoting, but that is all bullshit. i pay more and cionvert better than most sponsors on here. so you figure thatout for yourself.

anyways back to my point. ppl like Far-L and myself and others are paying money out of our own pockets to fuck up zango and atleast try and put a dent into this. what are you guys doing to stop this? nothing. so back off the sponsor being liable crap unless its blatant like those sccumbags at AFF is doing

I take it you didn't read the case. The only reason CJ is being sued is because they allowed some of their affiliates to use zango which was causing harm to their other affiliates. If you do not allow your affiliates to use zango, and you ban them as soon as you find out, then you would not be sued. No on is attacking random sponsors trying to hold them accountable, only the ones that openly accept zango traffic and do very little, to nothing about it.

No one would sue you nor would they have a case if they did. It is the companies like AFF, Sex Search, SBR, that their own affiliates should be sueing.

[will76]

bump....

[NTSS]

bump this bitch back to the top!

Look out mutha fuckers

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by p1mpdogg

well me and a hanful of other programs.

dont shit on the ppl trying to help the industry. i may be a dick and according to that idiot lenny aparantly i shave based on a photshopped screen cap that he insists on psoting, but that is all bullshit. i pay more and cionvert better than most sponsors on here. so you figure thatout for yourself.

anyways back to my point. ppl like Far-L and myself and others are paying money out of our own pockets to fuck up zango and atleast try and put a dent into this. what are you guys doing to stop this? nothing. so back off the sponsor being liable crap unless its blatant like those sccumbags at AFF is doing

Don't hurt yourself trying to pat yourself on the back. Had you not have been told to go look, you might never have known (or cared) that Zango was fucking your affiliates over. This even though the subject has been discussed ad nauseum on this board. I can't beleive that program owners haven't take the time to infect a PC and carefully monitor the effects of such adware on their own sites.

But hey, give yourself a gold star out of petty cash and keep up the good job. Just don't let any milk get on it, because it kills the glue.

[kenny]

Anybody reading these motions?

http://www.cjclassaction.com/Carrier_MTD_Order.pdf

http://www.cjclassaction.com/SRC_MTD_Order.pdf

Anyway this will probably take forever because the defendants will keep filing motions

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by kenny

Anybody reading these motions?

http://www.cjclassaction.com/Carrier_MTD_Order.pdf

http://www.cjclassaction.com/SRC_MTD_Order.pdf

Anyway this will probably take forever because the defendants will keep filing motions

Lars needs to read that first one closely, especially around page 7 & 8.

[kenny]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

I am a big believer that very soon, one or more large affiliate programs will be caught out with a shave or milking device, and they will end up on the end of a class action suit. I could also see where that sort of thing could actually lead to interstate fraud charges.

I think for something like shaving it would find it's way in both criminal and civil court.

This allowing Zango thing is just a gross negligence.

Shaving would actually be a criminal act

[yahoo-xxx-girls.com]

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Did somebody say milk?

Yea... That does look a bit funny...

.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by kenny

I think for something like shaving it would find it's way in both criminal and civil court.

This allowing Zango thing is just a gross negligence.

Shaving would actually be a criminal act

Potentially yes, but criminal is harder to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) compared to civil where it just has to be shown to a certain level. OJ was not guity in criminal court, and he got his ass handed to him in civil.

I am really serious when I say that this industry is about this close to the start of a major war.

[zalka]

bumpity bump

[will76]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Potentially yes, but criminal is harder to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) compared to civil where it just has to be shown to a certain level. OJ was not guity in criminal court, and he got his ass handed to him in civil.

I am really serious when I say that this industry is about this close to the start of a major war.

bump for the war. i can 't wait for it to happen and for once there is a line drawn you are either on this side or that side.

[will76]

Originally Posted by Probono

Thanks Will I am now a party to the cj.com class action. If anything actually occurs I will post it.

nice, let us know how it works out for you.

[96ukssob]

Originally Posted by will76

I had posted this in another thread but don't think many people noticed it.


http://www.cjclassaction.com/

CJ.com is being sued becaused they allowed their affiliates to use "adware" one of the companies being Zango. From my understanding, it looks like CJ affiliates were using companies like Zango to target other CJ affiliates. CJ still profited so they were basically turning a blind eye and allowing it to happen.

If you don't want to read the whole thing, at least read this part:

http://www.cjclassaction.com/Carrier...aint_Final.pdf

skip down to the part " B. Adware and Affiliate Commission theft".

It explains how "adware" works and the process in which affiliates have their traffic stolen. Sounds very familar to what AFF was doing, but imo AFF's affiliates would have had a much better case. AFF, the company ADMITTED they were doing this, and taking money from their affiliates. So there wouldn't be an issue of neglagence, where they had to prove they weren't letting rouge affiliates get away with it, when in fact it was themselves doing it. Anyway, its an interesting read and something that all sponsors who allow zango traffic, or who participate in buying zango traffic themselves should take notice. Yes, I hope you get fucked.

Would be nice to see this start a pattarn and catch up to some companies.

I think what a lot of people dont understand with this kind of stuff, is its NOT just individual affiliates thare are using adware, like zango, but many ad agencies as well.

Ive talked to a few in the past about doing some cross business sales (SEM with ads), as well one of my sales guys used to work for 2 ad agencies here in LA and told me that both would buy traffic for customers using adware and the customer would have no idea.

So, if you contact XYZ Ad Agency and ask to buy $10,000 worth of ads to your site, chances are a portion of that will come from adware.

[kenny]

Originally Posted by will76

seems pretty plausable to me. In CJ's case it looks like they were letting certain affiliates steal from other affiliates, which naturally anything like that would violate their TOS. Using AFF as an example where the sponsor themselves were stealing traffic and sales from their own affiliates, i would think it would be a slam dunk especially with all of Lars' admission here. Lucky for Lars I never did send them a substantial amount of traffic, or I would be leading the cause on that one.

There is a statute of limitations for suing over such things.

When did they last use Zango? Can it be proven?

What would be the statute of limitations for this cause of action?

My guess is 1-3 years for something like this.

[will76]

Originally Posted by kenny

There is a statute of limitations for suing over such things.

When did they last use Zango? Can it be proven?

What would be the statute of limitations for this cause of action?

My guess is 1-3 years for something like this.

I think it varies from location to location although AFF only annouced that they stopped about 6 months ago and recently I have noticed that that appear to be back at it again.

You wouldn't have any statue of limitations problems with them.

[kenny]

Originally Posted by will76

I think it varies from location to location although AFF only annouced that they stopped about 6 months ago and recently I have noticed that that appear to be back at it again.

You wouldn't have any statue of limitations problems with them.

I don't promote them.

I was just curious if there would be a window of opportunity after this case is decided.

If this case goes in favor of Plaintiffs then any sponsor using or recently using these tactics should have alot to worry about.

[Babaganoosh]

Originally Posted by chupacabra

however much AFF deserves a good fucking, i must admit i'd love to see CJ go down in flames over this sort of thing... mostly due to their early roots of content theft and how much they must have made off my content back then. i really could care less that they "went legit" once money was coming in... once a thief, always a thief..

You do know that this thread isn't about Consumption Junction, right?

[will76]

Originally Posted by Babaganoosh

You do know that this thread isn't about Consumption Junction, right?

actually it is, but it could be a good tip for other affiliates from other companies as an idea what they can do too.

[Ayla_SquareTurtle]

Originally Posted by will76

actually it is, but it could be a good tip for other affiliates from other companies as an idea what they can do too.

Huh? I thought this was about Commission Junction, not Consumption Junction (consumptionjunction.com)??

[will76]

Originally Posted by Ayla_SquareTurtle

Huh? I thought this was about Commission Junction, not Consumption Junction (consumptionjunction.com)??

i read that fast and thought he was implying that i started this thread to rip on AFF.

commission junction, cj.com

[MarcWomack]

Originally Posted by Babaganoosh

You do know that this thread isn't about Consumption Junction, right?

Heh, thanks for the clarification. Yeah, ConsumptionJunction.com, SickSiteNetwork.com, and CJTraffic.com have jack-shit to do with this.

ChokeOnaCockra thanks for using this to a) associate us with something shady and b) to take a stab at our history.

For the record, we don't / never have steal content. Our fans submit stuff and it goes up. If it's watermarked and we can tell where it came from (as in obviously not something the fan created) we take it down. Anytime someone contacts us about some piece of content that's there that wasn't watermarked so we couldn't tell whose it was we offer to either A) take it down or B) turn it into one of our Video Sponsorship ad spots we sell for FREE.

When you allow user submissions people are going to post stuff they don't own. It's the nature of the beast. I defy YOU to find any other company that allows user submissions that has a better policy than us. Find someone that not only quickly removes but gladly turns it into an ad spot for free that they normally charge a lot of money for. I dare ya!

[will76]

bump.....

[will76]

bump this one a few more times