27 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
27 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

WSO Rule Update

by Caleb Spilchen
23 replies
I just noticed that Allen has updated one of the WSO Rules.


1. All WSOs Must Comply With Forum Rules, US Laws, and the Laws of Your Location. Keep in mind the forum cannot possibly review and evaluate WSOs. Legal compliance is strictly your responsibility. Do not ask me or a moderator if what you are offering is legal.

The forum does not tolerate false claims. Treat your membership like gold as violating forum rules can result in a loss of WSO posting privileges.

Your War Room membership gives you an opportunity to submit WSOs, but the forum solely decides what is allowed. From time to time the forum may not allow certain advertisements, products, or services, and this could affect the ability of existing offers to be bumped or even continued.


Pretty good refresher for all of us. -- And these are rules that I think are really important

Hope that helps~

Caleb
#rule #update #wso
  • Profile picture of the author theemperor
    Darn it, I was going to sell a profitable "horticulture" WSO, but this has nipped me in the bud :p
    Signature
    Learn to code faster, and remove the roadblocks. Get stuff done and shipped! PM me and I can help you with programming tutoring, specialising in Web and the following languages: Javascript ~ HTML ~ CSS ~ React ~ JQuery ~ Typescript ~ NodeJS ~ C#.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567300].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author J Bold
    Uh yeah, you think?
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567305].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Caleb Spilchen
    For those wondering, I believe it was this part added:

    US Laws, and the Laws of Your Location. Keep in mind the forum cannot possibly review and evaluate WSOs. Legal compliance is strictly your responsibility. Do not ask me or a moderator if what you are offering is legal.

    The forum does not tolerate false claims. Treat your membership like gold as violating forum rules can result in a loss of WSO posting privileges.


    Signature

    Canadian Expat Living in Medellin, Colombia

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567309].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WillR
    I know they are probably doing their best to cover themselves however they are the ones that have the last say as to whether or not a WSO is approved and published on their website. For that reason I don't think a simple rule like that will be enough if push comes to shove. I think they may need to be a little tougher with the claims people are making in their WSO's and make people get rid of ludicrous claims BEFORE the WSO is approved.

    Who was getting in to trouble and sued when copyrighted material was being uploaded to Youtube? Was it the people who uploaded the content? Not, it was Youtube because they were the ones publishing the content.

    Just a thought...
    Signature

    .


    .

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567323].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
      Originally Posted by WillR View Post

      I know they are probably doing their best to cover themselves however they are the ones that have the last say as to whether or not a WSO is approved and published on their website. For that reason I don't think a simple rule like that will be enough if push comes to shove. I think they may need to be a little tougher with the claims people are making in their WSO's and make people get rid of ludicrous claims BEFORE the WSO is approved.

      Who was getting in to trouble and sued when copyrighted material was being uploaded to Youtube? Was it the people who uploaded the content? Not, it was Youtube because they were the ones publishing the content.

      Just a thought...
      I think that legal disclaimer was added just to give them added protection in case anything goes awry. They obviously can't have lawyers poring over every WSO to determine its legality in the US and also the country of residence for the seller, so this helps to indemnify them against any and all damages that might possibly occur if any kind of legal infringement occurs.
      Signature
      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567555].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author WillR
        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

        I think that legal disclaimer was added just to give them added protection in case anything goes awry. They obviously can't have lawyers poring over every WSO to determine its legality in the US and also the country of residence for the seller, so this helps to indemnify them against any and all damages that might possibly occur if any kind of legal infringement occurs.
        That was my point though. I don't think adding a little line like that will make any difference at all on a legal stand point. As I said in my example, Youtube also didn't have the time to go through and make sure every piece of content being uploaded was not copyright material but who gets sued at the end of the day? The website who is publishing that material, not the person uploading it. Same situation in the big Napster lawsuit.

        And especially when there is an approval process in place and profit being made from the posting of WSO's it would probably put even more responsibility on the owners of the website themselves.

        This is why I've always said the owners should ban any income claims from being made in WSO's whatsoever. If they do something like that then it puts everyone on a level playing field once again so it doesn't really matter. A WSO should only be able to state exactly what the product does not any specific financial results that **MIGHT** be obtained through using that WSO.

        I think the whole WSO forum is a great initiative and has really helped a lot of IMers get their first product in to the market, I would just hate to see anything happen to it because of some careless claims being made by a small minority of people.
        Signature

        .


        .

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567603].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Will,

          Some large differences. First, as I understand it, YouTube was repeatedly asked to remove copyrighted materials, and failed to do so. Second, it's a fairly simple process to look at a video labeled "Jerry Seinfeld - Episode 58" and know it's copyrighted.

          It is not possible - or legally smart - for a seller of advertising to claim to know whether all the assertions made about a product are true.

          I'll leave the rest of the argument to the legal beagles to explain.


          Paul
          Signature
          .
          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567715].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            There may be another reason to add an update. With the War Room Upgrade and higher WSO fees, there will be some who think they have a right to sell whatever they want....because they are paying for the ad. That same old "my rights" argument:p

            Clearly, the offers also need to conform to forum rules no matter who pays for the WSO.

            Will - if there's a problem with ownership of a product or with claims made, the WF is responsive to a complaint and does investigate. I've seen many bad WSO's locked or removed rather quickly when that happens.

            kay
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
            ***
            Dear April: I don't want any trouble from you.
            January was long, February was iffy, March was a freaking dumpster fire.
            So sit down, be quiet, and don't touch anything.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567796].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author daddykool
            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

            Will,

            Some large differences. First, as I understand it, YouTube was repeatedly asked to remove copyrighted materials, and failed to do so. Second, it's a fairly simple process to look at a video labeled "Jerry Seinfeld - Episode 58" and know it's copyrighted.

            It is not possible - or legally smart - for a seller of advertising to claim to know whether all the assertions made about a product are true.

            I'll leave the rest of the argument to the legal beagles to explain.


            Paul
            Good info Paul

            Might be a good idea to put the rule change in a little code notice, say just below the WF wide banner ad and the actual home page forum, THAT will be legally smart and also make doughnuts think twice before posting

            "I have made 1 Trillion doillars in 2 minutes, just by looking at the Sun!"

            type claims to fame with earnings
            Signature
            LAUNCHING VERY SOON > PRE-REGISTER NOW FOR A WSO THAT EVERY WARRIOR NEW & OLD CAN MAKE $$$ FROM! LIMITED PRE-LAUNCH SPACES - PM or email: JVSuperstars@gmx.com TO RESERVE A PLACE & LOCK IN A SUPER LOW LIFETIME PRICE! *** NEVER TO BE REPEATED PRICE ONLY AVAILABLE ON THE WARRIOR FORUM & OUR VERIFIED JV AFFILIATE PROVIDERS! ***
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567870].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author WillR
              Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

              It is not possible - or legally smart - for a seller of advertising to claim to know whether all the assertions made about a product are true.
              Agreed.

              Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

              Will - if there's a problem with ownership of a product or with claims made, the WF is responsive to a complaint and does investigate. I've seen many bad WSO's locked or removed rather quickly when that happens.
              I totally agree and we've seen it in action over the last few weeks when there were one or two WSO's with some edited screenshots. The WSO's were taken down quick smart until things were fixed up.

              I'm not saying the guys here are not doing a good job. I would hate to try and police a forum like this and the likes of Allen and Paul do a great job at keeping things under control in such a busy environment.

              All I was saying was with the way the FTC is heading these days with claims of earnings, etc, it may be a wise move to just scrap any income claims and screenshots altogether - they are not really needed, are they?
              Signature

              .


              .

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567891].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Diane S
                Originally Posted by WillR View Post

                All I was saying was with the way the FTC is heading these days with claims of earnings, etc, it may be a wise move to just scrap any income claims and screenshots altogether - they are not really needed, are they?
                But where will it end? If the income claims are removed, then there will be WSOs claiming things like "100,000 daily traffic volume for any keyword - with the push of a button!" or "Your website to the top of Google results in less than 24 hours - for ten minutes a day!" And there will be more fake screen shots...

                Just where do you draw the line?
                Signature
                KimW still needs our help DONATE DIRECTLY
                My First Kindle Book: Ten Days in the Land of Smile
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567973].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Michael Meaney
          Originally Posted by WillR View Post

          This is why I've always said the owners should ban any income claims from being made in WSO's whatsoever.
          I agree 100% with you about income claims Will.

          It looks like a get rich quick forum.
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567836].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author bhuff85
            Originally Posted by Mick Meaney View Post

            I agree 100% with you about income claims Will.
            I second that. I remember when I first joined in '08, I saw some WSO's with income claims, but nothing as crazy as I've seen recently. In fact, with so many income claims in titles, I have a tough time deciphering what is what.

            The sad thing is, people buy into this stuff. My whole thought process on this has been if someone really made $106,893 in 4 days using ONE system they can replicate over and over to consistently churn out thousands of dollars, why are they selling it all for $7?

            Anyway, I agree - income claims are wildly crazy in the WSO section these days.
            Signature
            Want to speed up your writing and save time?
            This book will show you how:
            --> Write Fast: 21 Powerful Ways to Cut Your Writing Time in Half! <--
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567963].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Fernando Veloso
    Caleb, thanks for the headsup. I don't plan on sell any WSO but good to know things are harder for some guys selling stuff in here.

    Truth is, Allen is just doing smart business.

    As we always expect from him.
    Signature
    People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567350].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Zabrina
    Good update, no complaints from me. I wonder if they were getting a lot of PM's from people asking what's legal.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567513].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author daddykool
    Good update and well found Caleb! It is better for everyone to comply now with the new laws on IM and the like and even better to get shot of the s*it on WF at the same time :-)
    Signature
    LAUNCHING VERY SOON > PRE-REGISTER NOW FOR A WSO THAT EVERY WARRIOR NEW & OLD CAN MAKE $$$ FROM! LIMITED PRE-LAUNCH SPACES - PM or email: JVSuperstars@gmx.com TO RESERVE A PLACE & LOCK IN A SUPER LOW LIFETIME PRICE! *** NEVER TO BE REPEATED PRICE ONLY AVAILABLE ON THE WARRIOR FORUM & OUR VERIFIED JV AFFILIATE PROVIDERS! ***
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567545].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author globalpro
    It sounds to me like Allen is not only attempting to cover himself and the forum, but also to allow greater latitude to remove violators.

    The forum does not tolerate false claims. Treat your membership like gold as violating forum rules can result in a loss of WSO posting privileges.
    'The forum' sounds like the members here also. Paul Myers has already said that any questionable 'claims' can be directed to the mods and they will take a look.

    Still a good thing.

    Thanks,

    John
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567588].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Karan Goel
    I actually like this update.

    At least the forum will be saved from the legalities.

    Karan
    Signature
    Penalty Safe, Long Term, 100% Whitehat Backlinks
    Love your site? Then check out SafeSpokes!
    ~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_
    karan996@irchiver.com karan997@irchiver.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567594].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Caleb Spilchen
    However, Income claims are a way of forming a reputation. If you earned $1k with someone and your showing them how you did it, sometimes its best to prove to them that your actually doing it. Imagine a random person posts a WSO That can earn you "$1K", now nobody is going to believe this person because nobody has ever heard of them... So, there kind of stuck.

    However, there is no excuse for fake income proof, and I believe that it should cause removal of a WSO as the forum mods have done in the past.

    Caleb
    Signature

    Canadian Expat Living in Medellin, Colombia

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568266].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author royljestr
    Yeah it's too bad people aren't just honest. For example there is a certain person selling a WSO about building great Facebook fanpages but his own personal one only has a little over 150 fans. There is NO way he is making the income that he claims!
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568301].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tina Golden
      Originally Posted by royljestr View Post

      Yeah it's too bad people aren't just honest. For example there is a certain person selling a WSO about building great Facebook fanpages but his own personal one only has a little over 150 fans. There is NO way he is making the income that he claims!
      He could have multiple fanpages so you have no way to verify claims one way or another when you see only one.
      Signature
      Discover how to have fabulous, engaging content with
      Fast & Easy Content Creation
      ***Especially if you don't have enough time, money, or just plain HATE writing***
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569948].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Caleb Spilchen
    Noticed this too


    New People Here: The WSO forum is full of great deals and the vast majority of the people are 100% honest. People have also made and continue to make small and large fortunes posting their deals in here. Even though most Warriors are honest and offer real value, it pays to use common sense here just as it does anywhere else on the Internet.

    If you have a question about a WSO ask the seller before you buy. The seller's forum history, profile, and what they have posted is available for members to research and evaluate.

    After making a purchase please post your review. Since the forum does not review, recommend, or confirm the content of WSOs, and disclaims all responsibility for whether they live up to their promises, your truthful evaluation is important for all members considering a purchase.

    Please keep your reviews objective and remember there is a full spectrum of experience by our worldwide membership.
    Signature

    Canadian Expat Living in Medellin, Colombia

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568357].message }}

Trending Topics