GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Zango / ccbill situation resolved... (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=775037)

will76 10-08-2007 05:37 PM

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

FreeHugeMovies 10-08-2007 05:39 PM

I wish CCBill would still taken legal action against them.

will76 10-08-2007 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeHugeMovies (Post 13208042)
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.

Sosa 10-08-2007 05:46 PM

well that was pretty quick action!

aico 10-08-2007 05:48 PM

What about Paycom?

mikeyddddd 10-08-2007 05:49 PM

Zango can still go choke on moldy green cock cheese

http://www.eazytraffic.com/gfy/image...ikey-zango.gif



jscott 10-08-2007 05:52 PM

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

WiredGuy 10-08-2007 05:57 PM

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

12clicks 10-08-2007 05:57 PM

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


At best

will76 10-08-2007 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 13208101)
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.

Taass 10-08-2007 06:30 PM

Nice.. WTG CCbill :thumbsup

will76 10-08-2007 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy (Post 13208099)
Do you have a url with Ron's post will? Curious to see what the full statement was. Thanks.
WG

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonC (Post 13205394)
Jace

We are in the process of taking action with our lawyers today about this. Can you explain in more detail how Isearch is involved in this and not Zango?

Ron C
CEO
_____________
CCbill.com


RawAlex 10-08-2007 06:37 PM

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?

WiredGuy 10-08-2007 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76 (Post 13208197)
No public statement by them has been released that I am aware of. the post Ron made this morning was here:

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

Tempest 10-08-2007 07:07 PM

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...

will76 10-08-2007 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy (Post 13208206)
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

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.

WiredGuy 10-08-2007 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76 (Post 13208271)
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

RonC 10-08-2007 07:25 PM

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

WiredGuy 10-08-2007 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 13208247)
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...

Is there a way to see the exclusion list?
WG

Tempest 10-08-2007 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy (Post 13208288)
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

d-null 10-08-2007 07:37 PM

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


.

will76 10-08-2007 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonC (Post 13208279)
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



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 ?

tony286 10-08-2007 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonC (Post 13208279)
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

Kudos to Ron. :)

D 10-08-2007 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeyddddd (Post 13208074)
Zango can still go choke on moldy green cock cheese

http://www.eazytraffic.com/gfy/image...ikey-zango.gif



:1orglaugh :thumbsup

will76 10-08-2007 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetjet (Post 13208306)
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


.



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.

RawAlex 10-08-2007 07:44 PM

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

TampaToker 10-08-2007 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonC (Post 13208279)
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


This makes alot of people happy including myself :)

Quickdraw 10-08-2007 08:19 PM

Good to hear :)

will76 10-08-2007 08:19 PM

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 ?

spacedog 10-08-2007 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76 (Post 13208335)
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.

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

ProjectNaked 10-08-2007 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog (Post 13208455)
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

BradM 10-08-2007 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex (Post 13208336)
Paging Legendary Lars... can you explain why CCBill apparently has much better lawyers than you guys do?

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

Very crack team there.

RawAlex 10-08-2007 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog (Post 13208455)
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

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.

dig420 10-08-2007 09:29 PM

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.

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE 10-08-2007 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76 (Post 13208035)
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


Fucking idiot.

tony286 10-08-2007 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlienQ (Post 13208774)
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.

will76 10-08-2007 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlienQ (Post 13208774)
Fucking idiot.



: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.

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE 10-08-2007 10:20 PM

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.

xclusive 10-08-2007 10:26 PM

AlienQ invented being a cock gobbler

After Shock Media 10-08-2007 10:27 PM

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


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc