Zango / ccbill situation resolved...
 

Ron had posted early today they were getting with their legal team to address this matter. Apparently, zango backed down to ccbill. It seems there is an exclusion list that websites can request to be put on. I don't know of any criteria for making it on the list but I would suspect that the bigger your company, the more resource you have, the more agressive your attornies are, etc... you can prevent zango from targeting your site, taking your traffic and selling to others for pennies on the dollar.

I found this link on Ben Edelman's site: http://www.benedelman.org/spyware/18...xclusions.html which talks about the exclusion list and sites that have been added to it.


More of my thoughts about this: http://www.viraldiscussion.com/post/...exclusion-list

I wish CCBill would still taken legal action against them.

Me too, but props to them for taking action here and protecting their company and clients. I can't blame them for not sueing, you are looking at a 100K fight at least. This was a fix for them that was resolved in a the matter of a couple hours for free. Not many people can turn that down. I don't blame them.

Didn't Lars said that he asked to have AFF's url removed and they wouldnt do it LOL... i guess that is not the case since the exclusion list has been around for a couple years. And we all know, including Zango that AFF would have the resources to take them to court and win. Apparently another lie by Legendary Liars.

well that was pretty quick action!

What about Paycom?

great job ccbill, that is definately awesome news to wake up to today :)

Do you have a url with Ron's post will? Curious to see what the full statement was. Thanks.
WG

no offense will but you do not speak for CCbill and anything you have to say here is guesswork.


At best

You are right i don't speak "for" ccbill. But I spoke "to" ccbill and everything i posted here was 100% true. You are welcome to contact them and verify this.

Nice.. WTG CCbill :thumbsup

No public statement by them has been released that I am aware of. the post Ron made this morning was here:

As I posted in the other thread, if this is true, well, good for CCBill. I look forward to something more official from them on this.

If this is true, it would be another indication that someone else was just a Legendary Liar. Apparently getting domains blocked off their list isn't that difficult, now is it?

I fail to see how Ron's post and your post of the issue with ccBill has been resolved? It looks more like a request to followup with legal. Are all the pops disabled?
WG

Interesting.. I see a bunch of topbucks domains on the 2006 exclusion list.. Seems like some companies actually have their shit together and get things done instead of just flapping around in the wind...

I think you are missreading something here. I never said ccbill posted this information. The only think they posted was from Ron, which i quoted above.

I spoke with ccbill this afternoon about this and was told it was resolved. I was also "ok'ed" to post the information. I don't know when they will make a formal post if they will. I just thought everyone would want to know what the status is. I am not one to post about rumors or on behalf of other people. I either get information from the source or I don't repeat it.

Take it as fact. Perhaps the discussion should be how this affects other companies and why they have failed to get their domain name on the exclusion list. Or if exempting people by putting them on a "do not target" list is an admission of guilt that what they are doing is wrong.

Yup, someone from ccBill contacted me as well from this thread and notified me. Thanks for the heads up.
WG

Everyone

I am here to confirm that we have been in contact with Zango's Attorneys today regarding the abuse of CCbill's Trademark. It is our understanding that CCbill has been placed on a "Blacklist" and no other webmaster will ever be able to purchase traffic related to the CCbill.com domain. If anyone can still see our Trademark being violated by Zango please let us know as soon as possible.



Ron Cadwell
CEO
__________
CCbill.com

Is there a way to see the exclusion list?
WG

I was just checking the list that will76 had posted on that benedelman site.. I ASSumed it was a full exclusion list but it appears to be more along the lines of him testing domains and coming up with his own listing independently. One of the things that's interesting is that it appears zango puts domains on the list and then sometimes "drops" them so it would appear they can't be trusted and need to be constantly monitored.

http://www.benedelman.org/spyware/18...xclusions.html

so if Zango has an "exclusion list"... what is their ethical reasoning in defining the difference between those companies that are on the exclusion list versus those that are not?

One would think that in their running of an ethical business it might be a better idea to run an "inclusion list" instead


.

Thanks for posting. Good Job by the way. I would love to have seen you guys go after them but I know this is best for your company since the issue is resolved today and without a lot of cost or headaches.


So what about the other sponsors... why have they failed to do what ccbill did in the matter of a couple hours ?

Kudos to Ron. :)

:1orglaugh :thumbsup

BINGO. if you are doing nothing wrong then you don't need a list.

What determines if you get on the list? $$$$$$ and i am not talking bribes. No doubt the amount of money of your company grosses and how good of a legal fight you could put up against them is likely their only criteria for determining who goes on the list and who doesn't. Going after them like a bulldog and having the financials to back it up. Thats about it pretty much.

Paging Legendary Lars... can you explain why CCBill apparently has much better lawyers than you guys do?

This makes alot of people happy including myself :)

Good to hear :)

so zango is ok abusing other people's trademarks...

interesting. ccbill contacted them, with full legal team i am sure, and zango said oh shit, we dont want to get sued and lose. We will comply and stop abusing your trademark. So zango admits it abuses trademarks. What about all the other trademarks out there? Zango keeps abusing them till people with more money then them threaten them ?

Hmm..

Threaten them with huge class action & we'll include a list of thousands of urls demanding they be added to the exclusion list otherwise a group of thousands of webmasters will file a class action lawsuit :evil-laug

:thumbsup

They have great lawers. So great they can spend months circle jerking on adbuys and faxing useless forms.

Very crack team there.

Actually, I have already consider this line of thinking:

Say a company, let's call it "Adult People Place" (APP) runs a program, and offers really good payouts on every signup. But they also pay all sorts of toolbar, popup, and ever other type of system to pop windows over their signup pages, entrance pages, etc, making it much harder for their affiliates to make money.

As a result, APP still makes the sale, but pays only the per click rate for the traffic. It's a huge savings, because they are only popping on their join page, so they are only paying for people who might be signing up (about 1 in 500 or so...) so instead of having to pay an affiliate $250 per signup, they pay 50 cents a click and convert that 1 in 10, net cost $5.00, or a savings of $245 per member.

Now, at some point, a company like APP might be engaged in a sort of disloyal competition with their own affiliates. Even if they don't do it themselves, knowingly allows "bros" to do the same and take the payment would still be an issue.

In many ways, if a program like APP actually existed, they could find themselves facing a large class action suit from all of their affiliates who see poorer and poorer sales. That would lead to discovery on their entire affiliate software system, and you never know when you might find a milk feature of something in there.

I would say that if a program like APP actually existed, they would be taking a really big risk.

But since there is no APP, we are all safe for another day.

Good choice by ccbill, but I would have liked to have seen it in court and this was the best opportunity to close down this business model altogether. I'm going to contact my atty and get on the exclusion list, but I have an atty and the means to pay him. A lot of companies using third party billers don't. This was the right time and right company to take a stand.

I'm about to get off my high horse and start buying this traffic if nothing is ever going to be done to put an end to it. Gotta stay competitive.

Fucking idiot.

You know I like you but lately you have been very negative. What does attacking Will do for you ? Your better then name calling.

:1orglaugh I can't stop laughing out loud. So me reporting that ccbill backed zango down and zango is no longer poping up over ccbill.com = i am a fucking idiot.

thanks for your contribution. we couldn't exist without your words of wisdom.

Thank you captain Obvious. Ya didnt report shit, you are a fucking idiot.

This just in...
You are no voice of the industry, but merely a noob trying to be someone.

Tony404, this little fuck face deserves some grief, he is one of my best stalkers:) I need to throw some shit on em so he keeps talking about me.

AlienQ invented being a cock gobbler

RonC or anyone at ccbill, can you explain the process or give the contact info at Zango to protect an actual trademark.

Oh ok, when i posted about it, it wasn't news. Not that i care to be the first to post about it or not. I just think you are calling me captin obvious for something that even people in this thread didn't know had happened yet.

Stalker, don't flatter yourself, I think i have replied to you about 5 times in the last year.

Now can you leave your ignorance out of this thread, go start a new one if you like, don't get this thread off track.

Yes this would be good to know. Who is to be contacted at Zango?

don't you have an '83 chevette to trick out?

This is great News, especially since we are in the process of implementing ccbill!

is that what the cool kids are driving these days ?:winkwink:

Or those could be Zango "advertisers" getting their sites on the list, then droped when they stop buying traffic !

If that's the case, then the "Exclusion List Additions between March 13, 2006 and August 6, 2006" and later, would sure give a good indication of what programs are buying zango traffic :2 cents:

Anyone know how Epoch did with it? I haven't seen anything pop over wnu since, but would like to know for sure.

Still getting credit card apps over ccbill join pages, not targeting ccbill, but the terms they are using on THEIR SECURE PAGE. That would make me feel comfortable seeing that third party software is reading everything on a secure connection..

I do hope there is some follow-through on this though. This was definitely fraud and they(Quickbuck, their 'affiliate', and zango) shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

Thanks for posting that Will. I am personally still waiting to see what happens. Did ZANGO REALLY put them on a list, or did they add them to a pretty page that means nothing.

Companies like Zango often need a bigger push, like a summons to court to get them truly motivated.

Could it be that the programs terminated the webmasters in question and now they don't have popups only because no one is currently buying said traffic?