Is it illegal to do business with a company that installs malware? Unless banks stop doing businesses with those, I don't see why epass should. They're not here to make a moral or ethical choices. That's my opinion on it.

I personally hate malware and spyware but I do think it'd be a bad sign if epass started to screen who they allow to use their services and who not, until proven guilty/illegal.

Not sure what the status of videoscash is, but if it's not 'officially illegal', I don't see why epass should stop doing business with them. I would hate to work with a bank that would shut down my account according to their moral standards and ethics.

1. In legal terms, much happening on and via the internet is new. "The Law" will take decades to catch up to many issues.
2. Worse, there is no "THE" Law: every country has its own laws. Even such broadly agreed concepts as copyright protection are still treated differently, with some countries virtual havens for abusers. So what chance is there that the various forms (and future forms) of scumware will be handled consistently within the lifetime of anyone here now?

Realistically we cannot make this stuff go away, the very best we can do is force it to the sidelines. The very worst we can do - as many are doing now - is treat it as just another way of doing business. That's because legitimate competition is tough, it requires effort and imagination. Writing checks to people who will deliver hijacked or near-zero cost traffic requires neither.

But legitimate competition is also healthy, it not only rewards those who are successful, the dynamic of competition and the provision of more marketable products and services generate growth. You can bet every cent you have, that the vast majority of those who utilize scumware, will not be providing customers with something they will enjoy and consider value for money. So we lose two ways: individually when our traffic is hijacked and collectively as potential long-term customers are burned.

What exactly is "walking the walk"? I cannot - for example - begin a case against someone for violating AFF's trademark: only they can do that. There are thousands of webmasters who are not practically nor financially in a position to use even the limited protection the law provides.

Meanwhile, Traffic Gigolos is the latest sponsor to be mentioned in a thread like this. But they could have been anyone and tomorrow there will be more and different targets. Every single one of us, big and small and including those who have resorted to non-competitive ways of getting traffic, is vulnerable to someone willing to write out a check without caring about how their traffic will be delivered. It doesn't make any practical difference whether they pay someone like Zango directly, or an affiliate using scumware, or who has a site based on stolen content, or whatever.

1. Some of the biggest sponsors in this business are using and/or turning a blind eye to scumware and other non-competitive practises.
2. Other big sponsors, along with major traffic sources, are sending traffic to the primary offenders.
3. All of us here are supporting a board which generates income by accepting advertising from offenders.
4. Offenders are welcome at trade functions and actively participate in them.

That's the reality and as such, online porn might as well put up an invite to anyone who wants to screw someone else. That is what is truly pathetic, because we have no control over the extent to which legitimate competition is bypassed. We have no control over who is targeted. The whole ludicrous scenario is rationalized - if at all - entirely on past and current earnings, without a thought for the future, beyond - presumably - the testosterone-fueled fantasy that if the beneficiaries of today's scams become victims of tomorrow's, they will be able to handle it.

Without any "walk", all that remains is talk. You cannot really imagine that scams will cease to be front and center of this industry, if those who object just quietly drop their links to certain sponsors and traffic sources and no longer visit boards which accept dubious advertisers? There cannot be anything those involved in doing business this way would like more, than to be able to present a friendly face which no-one ever questions, while at the same time undermining the industry and everyone in it. And there is the small snag that if no-one talks about this issue, we would have no way to know who are the villains and the victims (you really want to send traffic to sponsors it may never reach?).

With zero entry costs, this industry is always going to have an army of people just passing through. Young as it is, right now we also have lots of successful people who wouldn't make a cent if they had to start over. Between them, plenty of support, direct and indirect, is guranteed for things which will earn $5 today even if they cost $10 tomorrow. But that is more reason, not less, for those who do plan to be around for the long term, to keep chipping away.

"officially illegal". If we wait for the courts, you will get the decision about at the same speed we got the COPA decision (1998 law, 2007 ruling). Meanwhile, they will install how many millions of rootkits and run how many zombie machines?

It would take less than a few minutes to show that the VC product isn't good - it preinstalls many things BEFORE it asks for permission, so even if you say no, the machine has still been rooted. Ugly shit. Install it, I dare you.

Cut off the method for moving money, and thier business gets harder.

For once, we agree.