Huge Problem with Warrior here on the Forum

133 replies
As some might now i have my WSOs running here for over a year already, starting with "Affiliate Hijacker" (now: "Affiliate Site Quick") and recently "Affiliate Power Script".

( In a nutshell, my product(s) work "similar" to methods using frames or iframes, where a site can display a "frame" of a 3rd party site B....eg. a vendor site where customer would click from within Site A where it is not obvious that the "frame-site" is indeed located on 3rd party site )

The problem is that the person, a lawyer and respected member of our forum, keeps posting in my WSO thread(s) that my product condones "copyright theft" and so forth, "stealing web sites" and how the customers would get into trouble using my product and would get sued and banned.

I am not a lawyer but i did some research in regards to the "frame issue" (since this is somewhat related) and it looks that the legal situation is ANYTHING but obvious. There were some cases in the past where someone "framed" another site - and in the lawsuits i saw listed were arguments given speaking FOR both sites - and those lawsuits ended in settlements without a clear "outcome" whose defense is actually "right" since both sides had points speaking for them.

But this is not the point.

I am selling my WSOs for one year+ and if i would have heard about people running into trouble using my software i would have pulled it long ago. This is not the case.

The person in question made negative comments on my first WSO thread rendering the WSO thread basically useless.

Yesterday i was forced to make a new WSO thread just to come back today and see the first comment in the new WSO is by the very same person, literally saying "Warriors, watch out!" and discouraging people buying my WSO right in my thread!

The person also did never contact me via PM in regards to this, but instead states his opinion right in my thread warning people to buy my WSO!

There are several "technical" details how my WSOs work, which (i think) have to be understood to make a statement about how "legal" the use of my software is - and (again), from my non-legal background point of view there are many aspects fuzzy and anything but OBVIOUS when it comes to the legal situation.

On this background i see it as uncalled for that this person is posting his comments into my WSO thread, right after my initial posting.

This also since the person in my old WSO thread said he is going to stop commenting in regards to my WSO, also said he is not willing to give "legal advice" since he sees me as something like a "web site copyright thief" - just to jump right into my new WSO thread from yesterday and (low and behold!) giving his "legal advice" to warriors!

I enjoy being on the warrior forum - also, forum/WSO marketing is one of the bases of my income. I am proud of my products and what and how they work (LOTS of work put in, believe me...), i am proud when i sell them and people like them and tell me how great they are and how they use them...but now i have a problem with this person because it is seriously destroying a corner stone of my business.

I am sure that's also what he wants. Advice needed...badly...

Georg.
#forum #huge #problem #warrior
  • Profile picture of the author Andrew E.
    First - Check out the Warrior Support Desk - Sticky'd at the page.

    Secondly, I'm no lawyer, but your description of the events on hand lead me to believe that the warrior who is causing you issues has no real understanding of how basic html works.

    This person probably thinks that the frame you use is actually a method for copying site files/images/etc.., which if it did, copyright would be in effect.

    But it does not; a frame is just a substitute for another browser, it just points to other resources.

    If this is a serious problem, I'd take it up with the admin.
    Signature
    LinkCamo FREE Affiliate Link Cloaker
    The Best FREE Affiliate Link Cloaker!
    Click Tracking & Click Graphs + Different Link Types (PHP Redirect, Meta & Double Meta Refresh, Iframe & Frames) All in 1 Package!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311629].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Will Edwards
    Simple solution - what I would do is to write to the owner of the site you are using in the iframe and ask permission. If granted, keep the email as proof of the legailty of your approach and produce it if challenged.

    And good luck.

    Will
    Signature
    Whether you are a Reader, an Author or a Website Owner, we have something for you!

    Books that Inspire
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311640].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jeremy Kelsall
      I think the rules of the WSO forum state that another member is not allowed to sabotage your offer or persist in questioning if they have not bought and used the product....

      I would open a ticket with the support desk and make them aware of the situation.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311646].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Norma Holt
        Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall View Post

        I think the rules of the WSO forum state that another member is not allowed to sabotage your offer or persist in questioning if they have not bought and used the product....

        I would open a ticket with the support desk and make them aware of the situation.
        This is exactly what I would do as well. Has he/she bought and used your software? Are they an expert in the field, which they obviously are not? I would also denounce the post immediately after it is placed and inform your people of the vindictive nature of the poster. Do you know who is doing it because maybe you can put some negatives in his/her threads.

        God bless,

        Norma
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316443].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
          Norma,

          You obviously didn't read the entire thread here. The "problem" poster is someone who is an actual lawyer, and who has extensive experience with dealing with legal issues regarding online commerce. Not to mention the fact that the "problem" poster has an unquestioned years long reputation here.

          As a long time poster you should know that certain people have been here long enough and have given enough to this community that they are allowed some slack when they are clearly looking out for the best interest of the community.

          There was nothing vindictive about his post. He was clearly stating "buyer beware" as the product was clearly running afoul of some very serious laws.


          Originally Posted by Norma Holt View Post

          This is exactly what I would do as well. Has he/she bought and used your software? Are they an expert in the field, which they obviously are not? I would also denounce the post immediately after it is placed and inform your people of the vindictive nature of the poster. Do you know who is doing it because maybe you can put some negatives in his/her threads.

          God bless,

          Norma
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316465].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
      Originally Posted by Will Edwards View Post

      Simple solution - what I would do is to write to the owner of the site you are using in the iframe and ask permission. If granted, keep the email as proof of the legailty of your approach and produce it if challenged.

      And good luck.

      Will
      Well, its not about me using the iframe (iframe method is VERY related to the subject tho) but that my product produces something comparable as a result, its an aff. marketing tool.

      Cheers,

      G.
      Signature
      *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
      -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
      *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
      Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311691].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    hello, i wrote "admin" a PM, is there a special "support" email/person?

    Georg.

    Add: never mind, see it
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311677].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jared Alberghini
    Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

    hello, i wrote "admin" a PM, is there a special "support" email/person?

    Warrior Forum Helpdesk


    - Jared
    Signature

    P.S.

    Join The Future: Telekinetic Marketing

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311680].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JOhnny Depth
    Pardon me but what is a WSO?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311928].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MarcusXavier
      Originally Posted by JOhnny Depth View Post

      Pardon me but what is a WSO?
      are you serious or joking?

      in case your serious it's a Warrior Special Offer.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[311933].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    A WSO is (usually and mostly) a special offer where marketers have special deals on their products, offering them at a far lower price than what their products usually go for "outside" of warrior forum.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312016].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Floyd Fisher
      Forgive me for thread crapping, but I'd like to shed some light on this situation if I may (yes, I investigated situation myself).

      The person who posted in your thread about the potential problems is a very respected warrior (I won't mention their name here) and you would be very well advised to take their criticism into account, and perhaps put the following disclaimer into your sales pitch:

      "This product does things that may be construed as copyright violations by others. Always get permission to do this from the owners of said affiliate program to prevent any potential legal trouble."

      I hope this helps.

      -Floyd
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312092].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author David_Thompson
        Originally Posted by Floyd Fisher View Post

        Forgive me for thread crapping, but I'd like to shed some light on this situation if I may (yes, I investigated situation myself).

        The person who posted in your thread about the potential problems is a very respected warrior (I won't mention their name here) and you would be very well advised to take their criticism into account, and perhaps put the following disclaimer into your sales pitch:

        "This product does things that may be construed as copyright violations by others. Always get permission to do this from the owners of said affiliate program to prevent any potential legal trouble."

        I hope this helps.

        -Floyd
        Floyd, this is all well and good but the well respected warrior could or should have at least PM the WSO owner about the issue....

        As you well pointed out above in bold all it takes is a few lines to sort this issue out. I really don't see the need to follow George around posting and rendering his WSO useless or create more work for George...

        And as George pointed out he has done his homework too...

        --David
        Signature
        JV partnership wanted, Lets grow your list for free. Nothing to do with giveaways. PM Now
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312120].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    Hello Floyd,

    i appreciate your comment. On my main sales page(s) i have a disclaimer, wait i can paste this in:

    Disclaimer of Liability: Affiliate Site Quick: Landing Page Generator - Affiliate Marketing, the creator and all subsidiaries or representatives or affiliates of Affiliate Site Quick: Landing Page Generator - Affiliate Marketing do not claim a guarantee of any protection against copyright infringement through the use of Affiliate Site Quick. It is assumed that the affiliate will take sole responsibility for their own actions and will make their own judgment call towards the use of any copyrighted material. It is up to the affiliate to determine whether or not they should contact the vendor before showing any variation of the vendor's sales page or web site on the affiliate's site.

    I did not see it as necessary to paste my disclaimer in the WSO thread, for now.

    Yes, respected Warrior all right. Does not give him the right to crap in my thread.

    The person in question was using wording making it sound like i am a "scammer-like" person who sells "illegal methods" "just to make a few bucks" by "stealing other web sites" and so forth.

    The fact that he is "respected" does not make it better, especially since his intention is and was not to give advice (he could have PMed me for example) but instead without going any personal route just destroying my WSOs with his comments.

    I will post my disclaimer in my WSOs, but i highly doubt that this will stop the person looking out for my WSOs in the future.

    This is especially interesting since i had Affiliate Hijacker/Affiliate Site Quick (related programs) here as WSO running for almost exactly ONE year - yes i had some comments, i had also people PMing me giving me well meant advice (about the disclaimer, for example) in a civilized way.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312122].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author David_Thompson
      George did you give him a time out...the yellow or red button under his name?

      he might just need that the well respected warrior...

      --David
      Signature
      JV partnership wanted, Lets grow your list for free. Nothing to do with giveaways. PM Now
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312130].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author koolphoto
        Though, I haven't read your WSO or the offending post, I am basing this comment on your post here.

        I tend agree with the lawyer/commenter. I personally would like to be aware of the method you are employing in your wso because I would not be interested in it.

        I have not researched the legalities of this method. For me I don't feel it is ethical and would be uncomfortable employing this method.

        First off, I was taught that affiliate sites are pre-sell sites which this is not. And, then it just seems like more duplicate content that everyone warns against.

        You are stealing their bandwith and content, but some might not mind because they are also making money off it. So, I am not sure this is that much a factor.

        So, yes, I would like to see a disclaimer.

        Just my opinion.
        Signature

        My name is Ken Katz and I am a Web Designer and Photographer. My motto: "If you really want to do something, you'll find a way. If you don't, you'll find an excuse." -Jim Rohn

        Celebrity Portrait Photgapher - My Photography Portfolio.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312162].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    koolphoto,

    maybe me and you and even the lawyer can also just come up with those existing lawsuits in the past - where somone filed "copyright complaints"..but in court it just turned out that BOTH sites had a point, so they settled on a background of a rather unclear legal situation. (This is how i read it)

    I could pull off that article off wikipedia or wherever i found it, look for "internet law" framing, iframes or similar.

    Kool, certainly we all have the right to have our opinions and ethics,m you have those, i have those.
    But i usually refrain from going into other people's WSO threads and tell them bluntly what i think, even if i see a product where i think its a rip-off, scam or WHATEVER opinion i have.

    In regards to duplicated content,

    there is a very nice story in one of my threads where the vendor's site of one clickbank product was surpassed in search engine rank by a "mirror" site made with Ah or ASQ.

    Now, this is another story which to read made me VERY angry today since the vendor in question seriously stated that he thought he deserved 100% of the commissions and the affiliate (who surpassed him in SERPs on google) was "stealing" his commissions. <------ Mind you, an affiliate who probably put a lot of money into SEO and Pay Per Click Marketing to get his site "up".
    This is the most ridiculous thing i ever heard.

    I do understand the anger of the vendor, but its beyond me how someone offering his product on Clickbank to affiliates basically "snaps" once he sees that someone else might be doing better SEO/Promotion and then thinks he "deserves" 100% of the money which the AFFILIATE made w/ his own efforts.

    As to dupes again: Irrelevant if you do PPC. My main programs have certain "features"...but this is not a "i promote my products" thread so i leave the details
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312172].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author polimedia
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312192].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author koolphoto
      georgr,

      I am sorry, I am not trying to pick an argument. I am just giving an opinion as to why I might or might not buy a wso.

      You will not win me over with your argument. I too might do just as your "bad poster" has done and give my opinion if I don't think a sales page is fair. I will especially do this if I have bought a wso because I have paid for something I don't think is very good.

      I am not saying don't post the wso or sell it. I think everyone needs to make decisions for themselves. But, I prefer being able to make an informed decision. A disclaimer would help me because it appears from what you posted that the copy doesn't go into details.

      For me are the reasons, as I already stated in my previous post, would be what I base my decision on whether I purchase or not purchase your wso.
      Signature

      My name is Ken Katz and I am a Web Designer and Photographer. My motto: "If you really want to do something, you'll find a way. If you don't, you'll find an excuse." -Jim Rohn

      Celebrity Portrait Photgapher - My Photography Portfolio.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312262].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kazakhan
    The problem is that the person, a lawyer and respected member of our forum, keeps posting in my WSO thread(s) that my product condones "copyright theft" and so forth, "stealing web sites" and how the customers would get into trouble using my product and would get sued and banned.
    I'm suprised that a lawyer would use terms such as "copyright theft" and "stealing web sites". The correct term of course is "copyright infringement" and unless the web site owner has been deprived of his or her site then it certainly hasn't been stolen.
    Framing other sites is a potential lawsuit but i doubt it'd have anything to do with copyright infringement and stolen web sites.
    Edit: I've looked at the WSO now and i don't think it would take too long for a user to be facing complaints if not legal action. And as you're using a script rather than a straight frame an infringement claim would probably stand too. I'm not a lawyer, i've had a keen interest in IP issues over the last ten years or so.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312341].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author polimedia
      Banned
      [DELETED]
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312382].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author kazakhan
        Originally Posted by polimedia View Post

        ...interference with a protected computer would be a much better avenue to prosecute that sort of thing than a copyright infringement claim, and arguably better even than anything to do with trademarks.
        It'd be harder to achieve but i wouldn't want to be on the recieving end of that charge
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312404].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        The problem is that the person, a lawyer and respected member of our forum
        Yes, he is an attorney and you should go through the help desk if you have a problem with his assessment of the WSO.

        The question isn't whether non-lawyers here agree or disagree - because they don't know.

        The questions you should be asking (of someone qualified to answer) is whether there are adjustments that would avoid the risk...or what you should do to inform customers of potential risk.


        kay
        Signature
        Every child needs a pet because every family needs an optimist

        Saving one dog will not save the world....but will forever change the world for one dog.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312434].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author write-stuff
    As everyone knows, intellectual property issues can be very amorphous, especially where the internet is concerned. iFraming someone else's site does use their bandwidth and I can certainly see how this could create difficulties for you if done without their permission. If it was me, that is certainly the direction in which I'd go (getting their permission). - Russ
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312480].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mmurtha
    Hey Georg

    Personally, I agree with Floyd Fisher and Kay KIng,

    They both bring up very valuable points that you should consider.

    And just for the record, I think you should have contacted the person who you are posting about directly and the Admin, and not post here in the main discussion area.

    If it were me having this problem, I'd leave it as is, and take it in stride. S/He got you, and now you got him/her, so you both are even.

    The funny part about the game of tag is that no one really wins! It's an endless game that kids play when they have little to nothing else to do.

    Leave it in the hands of the Admin now, and go about your business marketing and selling. Oh, if you keep it real gentlemenly like you will look the better for it.

    If all else falls, get a good lawyer to make sure you are correct.


    Mary
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312490].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
    I just have a quick question to ask.

    You say you are not a lawyer and have not talked to one concerning the legality of your product but have instead relied on your own personal research.

    You have an actual lawyer, who is well versed in online commerce and has been active here in helping warriors stay on the proper side of the law for years, who flat out tells you that your product is breaking some laws.

    The question here is... instead of complaining about it, why haven't you taken his advice to heart and at the very least contacted a lawyer on your own to make 100% certain that your product doesn't break any laws?

    The lawyer here isn't on a vendetta trying to kill your business, his interest is to protect "every" member of this forum. It would be in your best interest to not rely on your own small amount of research, because no matter how much you read online you have no idea of the dealings inside of a courtroom and you are not qualified to make legal decisions.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312666].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kazakhan
      Originally Posted by Johnny Slater View Post

      You have an actual lawyer, who is well versed in online commerce and has been active here in helping warriors stay on the proper side of the law for years, who flat out tells you that your product is breaking some laws.

      The question here is... instead of complaining about it, why haven't you taken his advice to heart and at the very least contacted a lawyer on your own to make 100% certain that your product doesn't break any laws?
      I wouldn't listen to anyone claiming to be a lawyer that cannot even get the terminology correct
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314535].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Tom B
        Banned
        Originally Posted by kazakhan View Post

        I wouldn't listen to anyone claiming to be a lawyer that cannot even get the terminology correct
        Or a person with no name.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314540].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kazakhan
          Originally Posted by Thomas Belknap View Post

          Or a person with no name.
          What is more important to you, facts or names? Why am i supposed to believe Thomas is your real name? Do you have some evidence that Kazakhan is not my name?
          Would you hire a lawyer on a matter of Intellectual Property when they use terms like "copyright theft"?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314589].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Tom B
            Banned
            Originally Posted by kazakhan View Post

            What is more important to you, facts or names? Why am i supposed to believe Thomas is your real name? Do you have some evidence that Kazakhan is not my name?
            Would you hire a lawyer on a matter of Intellectual Property when they use terms like "copyright theft"?

            Sorry Mr Kazakhan Kazakhan. Interesting first and last name.

            I nor anyone else in this thread hired a lawyer. I do think that Brian has more pull since he has been here on the forum a lot longer and people have done business with him. In fact, many people ask him to post on threads just like this for his opinion.


            When did you get your law degree Mr. Kazakhan Kazakhan?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314599].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author kazakhan
              Originally Posted by Thomas Belknap View Post

              When did you get your law degree Mr. Kazakhan Kazakhan?
              Where are the answers to my questions
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314652].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author globalpro
    Correct me if I am wrong, but before we get into the legal aspects, I thought forum rules dictated a PM first, then a support desk ticket if someone has a problem with another Warrior.

    Is this correct or not?

    If it is, then rules are rules and need to be followed.

    Thanks,

    John
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312711].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jimcal
    Buyer Beware for any WSO. Most of us aren't legal experts so if you use a WSO you are responsible for the consequences. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Most times cease and desist is enough. Still he should have sent a PM before taking public.
    Thanks,
    Jim
    Signature

    Index Annuity Guide
    www.indexannuityguide.net

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312730].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ChristianM
    As far as I can tell, based on your wso copy (note: I don't have the product so some of these may be wrong assumptions but I can only go on what I see), you are not using a technique remotely similar to iframes/frames - you are actually copying a site, in its entirety, possibly modifying it slightly and then posting it on your own webspace.

    This is not the same as a frame or iframe, with a frame or iframe the owner of the original site has complete control over the look and appearance of the site, has the ability to "break-out" of frames if they so choose and to change any legal wording etc which may appear.

    If you then copy their site and shove it up somewhere else you deny them these abilities which, despite what you may think, could cause them problems in the future.

    I'm not a lawyer and therefore wont comment on that side of things but as far as I can tell this is only similar to framing in a very simplistic way and actually has very different implications.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312767].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
      As far as I can tell, based on your wso copy (note: I don't have the product so some of these may be wrong assumptions but I can only go on what I see), you are not using a technique remotely similar to iframes/frames - you are actually copying a site, in its entirety, possibly modifying it slightly and then posting it on your own webspace.
      no i dont.

      Indeed not one bit of the other site is "copied" in ANY way. The site is built in the browser, in real time. If target site is down, so is the site on the other URL. It is very, very related to iframing and certain redirect techniques.

      As for the script (the latest WSO) there is not even a site "existing" but solely a link..the site only starts to "exist" by clicking the link, but also only in the user's browser.

      I am willing to bring this to a CONSTRUCTIVE end, as i stated on other places i already started putting disclaimers on my sites - stating it is in the users responsibility and that it is also advised to ask for vendor's permission if there's doubt. What else can i do? Should i "warn" my customers not to buy, regardless of the fact that hundreds already use them and i did NOT hear of any troubles of any of my customers for over a year of sales now?
      Signature
      *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
      -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
      *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
      Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312822].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tim Russ
    George,

    There's a simple solution to your problem. Instead of waiting to be contacted by this person via PM why not contact them instead? Since he's respected and legally qualified, HIRE him to tell you what you need to do to adjust your product.

    Once your product is corrected use his testimony as a method to promote the adjusted product. You'll win his respect, the respect of current customers when you send them a free update, and the respect of potential customers when they see your openness.
    Signature

    “Whether you believe you can do a thing or not, you're right” -Henry Ford

    Need direct help from a real person? PM me or Contact me. I'll help if I can. http://www.timruss.com/members/contact-me/

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312817].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      George,

      I am not a lawyer, etc.

      First, Mike makes an excellent point. Now that a real lawyer has apprised you of a potential legal issue, your liability in case you're wrong may have just increased. Talk to counsel.

      That said, this whole area gets real murky, real fast. For instance, if you made no changes and the merchant hasn't filed a copyright, you'd probably be safe, as there are no damages to prove. To the contrary, you are improving the merchant's business.

      Note the "probably." That's an important word in this instance.

      If you're hosting the content, the iframes suits may be completely irrelevant. I wouldn't base any opinion on them at all, without talking to an attorney who is competent in both IP law and the technical issues related to online commerce.

      If the merchant has filed a copyright and you're hosting the letter, changed or not, you could be held liable for statutory penalties, regardless of the lack of real damages. Those start in the 6-figure range.

      Having been warned of such potential, you could be looking at higher penalties based on intent.

      If you made changes that take an acceptable presentation and add or remove anything that could be deemed deceptive (a trickier issue than you probably think), you could face action by the FTC or individual consumers.

      This stuff can get very involved, which is one reason IP lawyers are so expensive. Add to that the room for interpretation by judges, and it's a gamble with unknown odds.

      At an absolute minimum, you need to put something in the WSO to the effect of: "The methods taught in this product may be subject to regulation and legal concerns that can vary based on jurisdiction. The buyer is responsible for adhering to the relevant laws in the areas in which they do business."

      Casual wording, as a basis for something more serious. Again, not legal advice.

      Why in the WSO, if it's already in the sales copy? Because the FTC knows that customers don't read every word of a sales communication. If someone buys based on the assumption that the WSO contains everything relevant, and something relevant isn't there, that's your headache.

      Disclaimers must be clear and conspicuous. For instance, you'll see a lot of sites with disclaimers at the bottom of the page, in pale lettering, often smaller than the rest of the copy. They think that covers them. It does not.

      But don't believe me. Ask a lawyer.

      Even professionals have challenges with this area. It's definitely not someplace an inexperienced person wants to play casually.

      Note: In my experience, this is especially true of people with a technically-oriented perspective. Those folks tend to operate on the basis of assumptions that are not supported by law.


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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312933].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author polimedia
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312835].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Floyd Fisher
      Originally Posted by polimedia View Post

      I have not read his wso, or his code, or bought his script.

      I am however aware that many websites, among them better known being the way back machine, make copies of other websites, which then they display to the public.

      Google itself makes cached copies of some websites, which are then displayed to the public.

      It would seem that such copying of websites is standard fare, if not outright standard business practice.

      Provided he respects the robots.txt specifications, I don't readily see how there could be a problem that merits legal attention - and an important point here is, that in the online community, the vast vast majority balk at monthly server costs in the 100 to 1000 dollars range.

      Recomending people online that they discuss their concerns with a lawyer as a matter of course is ridiculous. They can not afford one, and even if they could, the majority of transactions need to happen without lawyer support - or else society as a whole will just stop. To apply a different standard to the internet just because it's new, or just because every two bit guy in a garage calls himself a company seems a bad call. The internet will just stop.

      So how about we follow proper venue, which is, not interfere with ongoing WSOs, as per the rules, discussing private problems privately, and giving legal advice that is specifically asked for, like in general that profession is intended to function ? No good ?
      Check out 'fair use' and see what that says.

      And if you were here about a year ago, there was a ton of drama over copyrights, so I understand why Brian posted the way he did. He was merely acting to protect other members, right or wrong.

      Let it go already.

      (Big Mike already let the cat out of the bag, so why keep his name a secret)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312987].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bishop81
    I have one question about this, or maybe it's a request for clarification. I'm a programmer, so I have an idea or what your application (script, whatever you want to call it) does.

    How on earth is it any different, in the end, from using the Domain Masking features at GoDaddy, or whatever registrar you're using? That's exactly what they do there. They host the target site in an iframe, allowing you to keep your Title, Meta Keywords, Meta Description, and URL showing throughout the process.

    Yes, I know there may be slight differences in the way they function, and I'm not trying to dissuade people from purchasing your product. I'm simply asking those who think that it's so bad, how is it any different? Are you going to go to GoDaddy and start demanding that they not allow you to do that because it's copyright infringement?
    Signature

    I'm tired of my signature... Deleted.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312847].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
    There is a huge difference in sites like Google and the Way Back Machine chaching a site and this persons script which can actually change anything thats on the site.

    I read the WSO text, and it clearly states that you can change parts of the web sites text on the fly. Basically, it's stripping the html from the page and using a script to dynamically recreate it on your own site while allowing you to make any changes you want.

    This would make a good copyright violation case as you are in effect using someone else's content without their permission, making changes to it without permission, and giving visitors the impression that the content that they see is your own.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312863].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author affenpinscher
      If I'm ever arrested, I plan to call someone who's actually licensed to practice law rather than rely on someone who's watched Boston Legal, read John Grisham, etc. and believes he understands criminal law as well as any lawyer.

      You probably could pay $100-$200 for an hour with a lawyer who specializes in intellectual property and find out if this WSO is on shaky ground. That the WSO creator refuses to talk to a lawyer and won't even consider the opinion of one when it's offered for free speaks volumes.

      Caveat emptor.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312882].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
        Originally Posted by affenpinscher View Post

        If I'm ever arrested, I plan to call someone who's actually licensed to practice law rather than rely on someone who's watched Boston Legal, read John Grisham, etc. and believes he understands criminal law as well as any lawyer.

        You probably could pay $100-$200 for an hour with a lawyer who specializes in intellectual property and find out if this WSO is on shaky ground. That the WSO creator refuses to talk to a lawyer and won't even consider the opinion of one when it's offered for free speaks volumes.

        Caveat emptor.
        i said i "refused to talk with a lawyer"? Who said that?
        And why should i refuse free legal advice?
        Signature
        *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
        -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
        *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
        Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312890].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
      Georg:

      Since I am apparently the huge program, let me take this opportunity to highlight the issue, using an example from your sales page:

      Compare these 2 websites:

      Earth4Energy.com - Create electricity at home - renewable energy. Make a windmill and solar power system

      Earth4Energy.com - Create electricity at home - renewable energy. Make a windmill and solar power system

      The first link is a merchant selling a product with an explicitly clear statement at the bottom of their website - "Copyright" and "Do not copy."

      The second link is your website. Ironically, this is an example you provide of how the software works.

      In my view it doesn't matter how your software works and whether you think a "copy" is being made or not. There is a copy.

      Here is a common trick lawyers use to make sure we don't have our common sense being clouded by the law - ask any person on the street, or your wife, or your mother, to review the two links and ask if they think a copy is being made.

      Frankly, that is what judges do in this situation. You submit both web page (or actually blow up the web pages to poster-board size - or larger) for the court to review. If you have to start explaining your position, you're in trouble.

      This is dead-bang simple in your situation.

      I know you're trying to make some money here, and that's fine. But check yourself and do your own common sense analysis.

      Good luck with your software. At this point, you know the risks and your sales and duplicate WSO are now intentionally made, in fact arguably made with an intent to prevent buyers from learning of their risks. I think I'll wish you good luck again.

      And let me add that your programming skills appear to be top-notch. I may even be interested in future, shall we call them - better directed - WSOs.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312939].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author polimedia
        Banned
        [DELETED]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313006].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          polimedia,

          The search term you're looking for is "reasonable man standard" (with quotes). That will get you plenty of pointers.


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

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313014].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Lance K
            GeorgeR., if I were you I'd contact him and see about getting an affiliate commission. Because of this thread, I researched the squabble to get the whole story.

            Then I bought the book in his sig file. Don't you think you outta get a cut?
            Signature
            "You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
            ~ Zig Ziglar
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313028].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
              Originally Posted by Lance K View Post

              GeorgeR., if I were you I'd contact him and see about getting an affiliate commission. Because of this thread, I researched the squabble to get the whole story.

              Then I bought the book in his sig file. Don't you think you outta get a cut?
              LOL!

              Georg, send me your PayPal email and I'll send you a commission.

              Brian
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313247].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author polimedia
            Banned
            [DELETED]
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313033].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
              polimedia,

              Damn. My bad. Leave off the quotes.


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

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313040].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Alan Petersen
            Did he buy your WSO? According to the WSO rules:

            UPDATED: Anyone caught trying to purposefully harm another persons WSO will be removed from this forum permanently. If you bought the WSO you have a right to comment on it. However, if you have not bought it you have no right to say anything at all about it. You have no basis on which to even give an opinion one way or the other.

            If you think someone is trying to harm your WSO on purpose just PM admin here in the forum.
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314417].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
              James,
              I am not giving any legal advice here.. But facts are facts and it is not illegal..
              The second part of the sentence contradicts the first.

              The script itself is certainly not illegal. It can be used in ways that potentially constitute civil violations, though. Your opinions on the subject do not change that.

              Which ones fall afoul of the law is a discussion best avoided, because it may come down to something as capricious as which judge hears the case.

              Copyright law is tricky. And if the changes made by the software remove important disclaimers or qualifiers, that could get into even rougher terrain.


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

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314447].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
                Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

                James,The second part of the sentence contradicts the first.

                The script itself is certainly not illegal. It can be used in ways that potentially constitute civil violations, though. Your opinions on the subject do not change that.

                Which ones fall afoul of the law is a discussion best avoided, because it may come down to something as capricious as which judge hears the case.

                Copyright law is tricky. And if the changes made by the software remove important disclaimers or qualifiers, that could get into even rougher terrain.


                Paul
                Hi Paul,
                The product itself is not illegal .. Again many many sites do the same exact thing.. That is not legal advice, it's a fact...

                Can the product be used in a questionable way ? Well as a developer I can tell you now almost all scripts can be used in a questionable way but this is not the developers / sellers responsibility.

                I have a license agreement with all my scripts which ofcourse protect me from what my client decides to do. No developer can control what a client decides to do once he has the script and it is installed on his/her server.. Thus this is why developers make license agreements.

                I do not have a copy of GeorgR script but if he wants some help then he can send me a PM and I will review the script for him if he has a demo installed.

                Bottom line is though anytime you create a script and/or software always provide a legal license agreement along with it...

                James
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314509].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
          Originally Posted by polimedia View Post

          Apparently I learn something every day. I've never heard of the "common man" test applied to this subject in this way ever before.

          For my further education, can you point to a few cases where this device is used as you describe ?

          Thank you for taking the time.
          At first wasn't not sure if you were trying to be clever or have a real interest. But after seeing the responses to Paul, I question if your interests are pure, although maybe you just misread or misinterpreted by comment. So -...

          I obviously wasn't talking about an official legal standard. You may want to re-read my paragraph again. Rather, an informal rule of thumb to make sure someone like Georg isn't lost in the programming, or an attorney lost in trying to distinguish trivial points in an obscure case.

          As we might say, not being able to see the forest for the trees.

          It was taught to me as the "Mary test" as the attorney had a secretary named Mary that he would run issues and arguments by just to make sure they had common sense. That probably does not appear in any case. Other attorneys call it different things.

          Basically, to check oneself to make sure common sense is being applied.

          So save yourself the time researching the common man / reasonable man test.

          Basically, I was just looking for a way to get through to Georg, for him to step back and stop being so defensive, so he could see what I was seeing. Because when you're defensive you can hear / see things through an improper prism. Happens to everyone, including me.

          This is what happens in court, especially when a TRO is being sought and a judge only has a few minutes to evaluate and make a ruling. There is a legal brief, of course, but what is more important is that the judge sees. You take the plaintiff's original work and compare it side-by-side with what the defendant has done. You make sure it is blown-up, and what is identical is highlighted.

          When the entire exhibit is highlighted because the entire page has been copied, the defendant is in a heap of trouble. It looks really, really, bad.

          So when a programmer is saying, well, it really isn't copying like using I-frames, it does this and that, yadda yadda, it can be helpful to get a common sense reference. Ask an uninterested person if it looks like you have copied something. It is a lot better, and cheaper(!), to do that than to have a judge do it.

          If they say yes, duh, the entire web page is word for word, graphic for graphic the same, is this a trick question? Then you might want to re-evaluate whether there is a copyright pitfall, and what can be done about it.

          So if you're really looking to further your education, that's it. Instead of getting caught up in programming technicalities, just ask yourself, if what you created is stuck up on a courtroom wall and a Judge is looking at it, what will they think?

          Sorry if that's a let down and not a juicy law case to cite.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313223].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author grumpyjacksa
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        Georg:

        Since I am apparently the huge program, let me take this opportunity to highlight the issue, using an example from your sales page:
        The bottom line is still.....

        why in public, and not via PM ? or are you exempted from common decency because you are a lawyer ?

        The author could at least have had a chance to pull it, and try and fix it.

        Or is that too much to ask ?
        Signature
        Ex-ghostwriter now writing exclusive PLR ebooks - Limited PLR Club
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313082].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Chris Lockwood
      Originally Posted by Johnny Slater View Post

      This would make a good copyright violation case as you are in effect using someone else's content without their permission, making changes to it without permission, and giving visitors the impression that the content that they see is your own.
      Much like Google does?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[352210].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    Johnny,

    you have a point. I am aware that that "changing" feature could be thorn in some people's eyes...i could certainly remove this again.

    Ironically, for my older "Affiliate Hijacker" we were looking for a way to add content and banners - so we had to think about a way to do this withour actually changing the site content.

    Since we had some vendors saying that they are fine with a "clone" as long as content and design is untouched. That is when we came up with the "overlay" banner feature.

    The "word replacement" function is merely something i toyed around with, i can certainly remove this again.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312888].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
      Ok guys... this is real simple.

      Allen owns this board and he sets the rules. Not you. If you dont like how Allen runs his own forum no one is forcing you to stay. The policy of allowing old time and respected members a little slack comes directly from Allen so if you don't like it your pretty much out of luck.

      You have two options here as well as anywhere else, live by the rules or don't. If you can't live by Allens rules then you will be doing yourself a favor by finding another forum to spend your time on.

      Btw.. here is a quote by George himself saying that his program allowed you to change content.
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      Johnny,
      you have a point. I am aware that that "changing" feature could be thorn in some people's eyes...i could certainly remove this again.
      Ironically, for my older "Affiliate Hijacker" we were looking for a way to add content and banners - so we had to think about a way to do this withour actually changing the site content.
      Since we had some vendors saying that they are fine with a "clone" as long as content and design is untouched. That is when we came up with the "overlay" banner feature.
      The "word replacement" function is merely something i toyed around with, i can certainly remove this again.
      If you are going to try to stir an old pot at least know what your talking about. George already admitted that the ability to change the content was there and has since removed the feature from what I understand.

      This thread was dead and buried and everything was settled so no one is doing any good here by bringing it back up just to cause a stir. By bringing up something that has already been settled you just make yourself look a little foolish.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[351177].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    good reply paul.

    I am halfway wondering if i were better off to market this as "blackhat".
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312948].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sannyman
    Hosting and promoting a 1:1 copy (OK, almost 1:1) of an IM info product site seems to be quite a common practice and if so, the only problems may be related to the SEO - duplicate content. I am a subscriber on one of ADEEL Chowdhry's list and some time ago, I got from him a link towards such a product site "clone", where the minor difference was a misspelled word domain name and some extra lines of HTML containing his ethical bribe. I assume that the copyright owner knew and agreed with such a promotion, so as long as you get the approval from "the source", everything stays perfectly legal.
    Simply inform the buyers of the WSO that such a formal approval is needed for their own protection.

    On the other hand, I saw the advertising for a product that basically was cloaking and stripping the original content, especially the "Affiliates" section. This is a copyright infringement but again, with a formal approval from "the source", you move the problem from the legal part to SEO.

    I do not know how many warriors will be against having their site promoted by affiliates even in such a manner and actually I would like to hear your opinions.

    Thank you!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312961].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DonDavis
    Why would anybody that isn't a lawyer offer any advice on this subject other than the OP ought to seek legal counsel if he thinks he may have issues to be concerned about?
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312962].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    Mr. Kindsvater,

    you have a point!

    In the WSO i took admittedly only random (currently known products) to use them as examples.

    Of course i did "duplicate" my WSO (after some reasonablee time had passed by) since it is NOT sales-boosting to have warnings by lawyers in a thread - this not with the main intention to "decept" the customer.

    I had and have NO problem to add whatever disclaimer and warnings to my site(s) and WSOs. The clearer the issue for the customer and for me as seller - the better.

    It is kind of ironic that you say you would not have jumped in the thread if i would've market as "blackhat"....how's that? Even if i re-market this as blackhat tool i am certain i would require disclaimers and warnings. since this would not "exempt" me.
    I see people selling cookie stuffers and what not here..just as a side note.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312971].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Don,
      Why would anybody that isn't a lawyer offer any advice on this subject other than the OP ought to seek legal counsel if he thinks he may have issues to be concerned about?
      To give the poster some information on which to ask questions of their attorney. That's the only sensible use of such advice, other than the occasional decision that, "These people seem to know what they're talking about, and it's just not worth the hassle to risk it."

      Keep in mind that there is a difference between "not a lawyer" and "not understanding the issues." The law degree is simply a standard that presumes a certain minimum level of competence in the ways of the legal system.

      Put another way, I probably know more about IP law than 90% of attorneys in the US. I know much, much less about it than 100% of lawyers who specialize in the field.


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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313004].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      you say you would not have jumped in the thread if i would've market as "blackhat"....how's that? Even if i re-market this as blackhat tool i am certain i would require disclaimers and warnings. since this would not "exempt" me.
      Georg:

      You're right that this would not necessarily "exempt" you from a claim, but my initial concerns were not you - but other Warriors, especially newbies, not understanding the risks involved and going whole hog creating pages from 12,000 merchants (as was being suggested in the sales copy).

      Although others may disagree, once I see someone advertising "blackhat" it is a warning to watch your butt, even if it is not illegal.

      For instance, "blackhat" techniques to scheme Google may not be illegal, it's just that one does not want Google to know about them when it formulates its search listings.

      And, when someone starts talking blackhat it means they know they're on the edge of something and generally have lots of disclaimers.

      I don't comment each time I see something that is apparently a scam or may have legal problems.

      You got 'lucky' due to the overt nature of the software, lack of disclaimers, and the 12,000 merchant promotion pitch.

      Edit:

      Hi Georg:

      Just saw your last post. How can others advertise cookie stuffing software?

      Because while some merchants / affiliate programs may contractually prohibit that technique, others allow it. For example, I have a website where I stuff cookies. I also have written permission from the merchant to do that, and I've used the website as an example to affiliate managers on what to look for.

      That should not be confused with copyright issues and your software.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313026].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 14
    Banned
    Looks like I stumbled upon the bad side of the forum...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[312991].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author scorpio9
      Originally Posted by 14 View Post

      Looks like I stumbled upon the bad side of the forum...
      the bad side? I think it is good to know of these things, none of us want to find ourselves in any legal minefield

      scorpio9
      Signature
      BeaconSites - Websites Designed For Lead Generation & Conversions
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313107].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    i am at a point where i wish i hadn't started this thread.

    the question is now whether i am "fine" with putting various disclaimers and warnings on my WSOs. I would be surprised if NOT, otherwise i would ask myself how it comes that otherwise people can sell scripts for cookie stuffing and similar *without* having a lawyer "advising" in each second post in their WSO threads
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313020].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Floyd Fisher
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      i am at a point where i wish i hadn't started this thread.

      the question is now whether i am "fine" with putting various disclaimers and warnings on my WSOs. I would be surprised if NOT, otherwise i would ask myself how it comes that otherwise people can sell scripts for cookie stuffing and similar *without* having a lawyer "advising" in each second post in their WSO threads
      Don't feel so bad. I've put in my license for co reg master a requirement to abide by spam regulations because I know abuse can and will lead to lots of problems.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313045].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author X
    Georg -

    You can work any marketing situation to your
    advantage. I think Brian is attempting to keep
    some unknowing people out of trouble, which
    does not necessarily mean there is anything
    wrong with what you're doing.

    I'd make it clear that your offer isn't for the
    faint of heart, or whimps and whiners. Because
    it's not and it's going to turn off the wrong people
    and turn on the right people.

    Brian has a valid point and your challenge is
    to take Brian's point and make it your advantage.

    There are plenty of people not only willing
    to walk on the wild side - they crave it.

    If a certain percentage of people don't like you
    or what you're doing, then you're doing something
    right.

    X
    Signature
    The Affiliate Black Book
    The Inside Nasty on How to Kick the Snot Out of a Google Cash affiliate.

    Black Books Blog: No Cow is Too Sacred
    The Death of Crap: Crap Dies Slowly
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313058].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
      X,

      i am aware of that
      Signature
      *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
      -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
      *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
      Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313064].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        polimedia,

        Given that Brian didn't use the phrase "common man, " and you did, it seemed to me that there was some lack in regard to the actual legal term. That can often mean a less than thorough understanding of the principle, although not always.

        The principle itself is the clearest explanation of why that technique would work in a court of law.

        Demanding specific cases gives the impression that you're more interested in showing Brian up than in the actual issue at hand.


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

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313085].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Grumpy,
          why in public, and not via PM? or are you exempted from common decency because you are a lawyer?
          No, it's very likely because he's looking out for the members in an area in which his expertise is likely much greater than that of the Powers That Be. He gains nothing from those efforts, and protects people from inadvertent risks that could be serious.

          Brian has, as far as I know, no history of abusing the group, and a significant history of acting in good faith. Do that long enough and you get cut slack that most people wouldn't.

          Because you've earned it.


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

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313094].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author grumpyjacksa
            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

            Grumpy,No, it's very likely because he's looking out for the members in an area in which his expertise is likely much greater than that of the Powers That Be. He gains nothing from those efforts, and protects people from inadvertent risks that could be serious.

            Brian has, as far as I know, no history of abusing the group, and a significant history of acting in good faith. Do that long enough and you get cut slack that most people wouldn't.

            Because you've earned it.


            Paul
            My concern is that, even if Georg produces a "legitimate product next, his credibility may have taken a knock. All of which may have been prevented by a pm a year ago
            Signature
            Ex-ghostwriter now writing exclusive PLR ebooks - Limited PLR Club
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313119].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
              Grumpy,
              My concern is that, even if Georg produces a "legitimate product next, his credibility may have taken a knock. All of which may have been prevented by a pm a year ago
              Consider: He didn't do anything to correct it when warned publicly the first time. Instead, he came in the main forum, increasing awareness of the problem, and looking for someone to stop the warnings.

              What could possibly make you think he'd have done anything if warned privately?

              That said, I don't think anyone who's reading this will have any problems with him tomorrow, much less next year. He's handling it relatively well, he's not accused of scamming people or anything like that... Folks forget the learning experiences when they don't involve lying or malice.


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

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313153].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Floyd Fisher
              Originally Posted by grumpyjacksa View Post

              My concern is that, even if Georg produces a "legitimate product next, his credibility may have taken a knock. All of which may have been prevented by a pm a year ago
              And why is the OP a crook now?

              It's a legal issue, and it's quite simple to fix. Always get permission before copying anyone else's stuff.

              That doesn't make him a crook, does it?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313221].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                polimedia,
                You're saying that a principle of fiduciary duty mostly intended for assesing the conduct of individuals can be successfully applied to identify copies just cause what, exactly? There's people involved and you readily recognize the importance of people? Would you say any two CDs are copies of each other because a reasonable person looking at the rainbow-y side of them would perceive no difference? Shall we make posters?
                You're either a troll or you're very confused.

                Reasonable people do not try to figure out what's on a CD by looking at the unlabeled side. If the labeled sides of two CDs are exactly the same, including text and graphics, a reasonable person would conclude that they contain the same content and are from the same source.

                One does not defeat the reasonable man standard by arguing unreasonable situations.

                As with all copyright issues, the content is the substance of any case. If the two pages are substantially identical in words and graphics, and promote the same product at the same price, a reasonable person would very likely conclude that they were the same thing from the same source.

                Printed copies are much easier for a judge or jury to examine than images on a computer screen. They're also less susceptible to tinkering once rendered.


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

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313246].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mark Brock
                Originally Posted by Floyd Fisher View Post

                And why is the OP a crook now?

                It's a legal issue, and it's quite simple to fix. Always get permission before copying anyone else's stuff.

                That doesn't make him a crook, does it?
                I agree Floyd.

                I don't have any expertise in what GeorgR is doing and I'm not a lawyer either but as a layman wouldn't this serve everyone's purpose?

                Wouldn't everyone benefit from simply ensuring you get permission and tell others to get permission beforehand?

                Mark
                Signature

                AWOL

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315903].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Gail Sober
    Using a function such as cURL and framing a page are entirely different animals though neither would stand up to the "reasonable man standard".

    cURL does actually grab the other page and make a copy, be it temporary or permanent should you choose to write the page to the server. That is how the words/links are able to be changed before being displayed to the visitors browser.

    There's a lot of yet to be fought battles in the area of legalities in the interweb technologies but I think I would talk to someone (attorney) who understands the technologies you are using as well as copyright laws.

    The technique you are most likely using has been used for years so it shouldn't be hard to research previous legal actions. I know there have been some, particular one advertising company, can't remember their name or if they're still around but you could basically advertise on other peoples websites through their system which used this technology.

    I believe most anonymous surfing websites use similar methods. Many of these also change the page before displaying to the visitor usually by reading the html for banner size width tags and either blocking or replacing those with their own.

    There are many other applications used online doing something similar to this.

    Definitely worth a visit to an attorney though.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313106].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
      Originally Posted by Gail Sober View Post

      Using a function such as cURL and framing a page are entirely different animals though neither would stand up to the "reasonable man standard".
      i actually dont use Curl, i could however.

      Your example with the proxies is VERY interesting indeed...from that point of view, any of those proxies replacing advertisements with their own: Copyright Infringement?
      Signature
      *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
      -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
      *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
      Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[313128].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    How would the situation look if any created site had a disclaimer-bar with reference to the original site, aka "This site is an affiliate site of http://originalvendor.com" <--- referencing to the original site and maybe further explaining notes.
    Key here to make clear that its not intention to "pretend" being the original site in question - because such deception is not the purpose of the script.

    The tool is an affiliate marketing tool, after all.

    See i really want a constructive solution for this "mess", for my customers and me as seller.

    G.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314320].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
    Georg,
    I have been developing websites for over 15 years and I can tell you right now your product is not illegal, it breaks no laws or anything. Am I a lawyer ?? No .. But the one posting on your WSO I will highly doubt is a lawyer either.

    I have built 10,000's of sites and the fact is there are many site that use iframe... Matter fact I have an affiliate shop script that uses iframe for all links going off-site. This is an entire script with admin area and everything.

    If I submit a script to scripts.com they use a iframe for rating a site ... Many auto-surf sites use an iframe, PTR, PTC use iFrame.. And the list goes on and on .. Fact is this is not illegal...

    With that said there are some registered trademarked websites that can cause problems for people if they feel their site is not represented in a manner that they feel it should be.. Can the sue ?? Well they can file until hell freezes over but all they will do is waste alot of money and the courts time...

    I am not giving any legal advice here.. But facts are facts and it is not illegal.. Maybe the user is question should be booted off this forum and then blocked and banned..

    James
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314380].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom B
      Banned
      Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

      Georg,
      I have been developing websites for over 15 years and I can tell you right now your product is not illegal, it breaks no laws or anything. Am I a lawyer ?? No .. But the one posting on your WSO I will highly doubt is a lawyer either.

      I have built 10,000's of sites and the fact us there are many site sthat use iframe... Matter fact I have an affiliate shop script that uses iframe for all links going off-site. This is an entire script with admin area and everything.

      If I submit script to scripts.com they use a iframe for rating a site ... Many auto-surf sites use an iframe, PTR, PTC use iFrame.. And the list goes on and on .. Fact is this is not illegal...

      With that said there are some registered trademarked websites that can cause problems for people if they feel their site is not represented in a manner that they feel it should be.. Can the sue ?? Well they can file until hell freezes over but all they will do is waste alot of money and the courts time...

      I am not giving any legal advice here.. But facts are facts and it is not illegal.. Maybe the user is question should be booted off this forum and then blocked and banned..

      James
      Wow, developing websites for 15 years makes you know what is legal or not regarding copyright infringement. Not only that but you know Brian isn't a lawyer. That must be the 15 years of web development experience talking. lol


      Just because you haven't been sued doesn't make something legal or illegal. It can just be that you are lucky... so far.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314500].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
        Originally Posted by Thomas Belknap View Post

        Wow, developing websites for 15 years makes you know what is legal or not regarding copyright infringement. Not only that but you know Brian isn't a lawyer. That must be the 15 years of web development experience talking. lol


        Just because you haven't been sued doesn't make something legal or illegal. It can just be that you are lucky... so far.
        I don't recall making any legal statement Thomas.. But since you so nicely asked.. I have a vast knowledge of internet laws, my business requires I know many such things when developing high end large scale websites.

        James
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314520].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Tom B
          Banned
          Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

          I don't recall making any legal statement Thomas.. But since you so nicely asked.. I have a vast knowledge of internet laws, my business requires I know many such things when developing high end large scale websites.

          James
          LOL


          You stated it was legal but now say you didn't make any legal statments?

          You better go back to law school then. Thanks for the laugh James.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314528].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
            Originally Posted by Thomas Belknap View Post

            LOL


            You stated it was legal but now say you didn't make any legal statments?

            You better go back to law school then. Thanks for the laugh James.
            I stated a fact, it is not illegal to use iframes or other such similar technologies.. That is not a legal statement, it is a fact ...

            As for your bad attitude, I have never given out a infraction and I do not intend to do so now... But I feel it is needed to finally activate my ignore list with you being the first and only one on that list.

            I see you again have offered nothing to this discussion and I am glad you had a good laugh. As I have told you before, you only make me stronger by doing what you do ..

            James
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314618].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Tom B
              Banned
              Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

              I stated a fact, it is not illegal to use iframes or other such similar technologies.. That is not a legal statement, it is a fact ...

              As for your bad attitude, I have never given out a infraction and I do not intend to do so now... But I feel it is needed to finally activate my ignore list with you being the first and only one on that list.

              I see you again have offered nothing to this discussion and I am glad you had a good laugh. As I have told you before, you only make me stronger by doing what you do ..

              James
              lol


              Do you think it is legal to show someone's website on your site and make it look as if it is yours?


              Just interested in more facts.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314622].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    TRJN,

    "the user" is very respected member here

    But that is not the point. Its also not the point whether my product "breaks a law" (which i think it does NOT)....as well as its not the point to have having endless conversations about my product(s) anytime i offer it on a page or on the forum.

    If a simple disclaimer or display bar on the pages could solve this then it would already help me a lot. It is still on the customer to "use it in a responsible way".

    For me as a seller i want a constructive solution to protect a) my customers from trouble and helping them make a decision whether and how to use my products, what rules to abide (if needed) and how they can use my product(s) the most effective way and what better not to do with them.

    I would RATHER write ONE clear sentence in RED at the beginning of my sales threads like "Ask a Vendor first" <---- instead of having conversations with lawyers in my threads

    The other solution would be to re-package AH and APS and make them the "ultimate blackhat affiliate kit" aka "let 12.000 vendors work for you and use their sites as your own" and make the most blatant and hyped up BH product out there, a product which "makes any lawyer rotate since it is so powerful" <--- you get the idea smash a few scary SKULLS on the sales page left and right and market it like that...

    It is also my impression that Mr. Kindsvater is respected and many appreciate his input, and i am trying to get the positive out of it, also in regards how to continue w/ my marketing respective changing either my marketing/market or product itself.

    Edit: i dont know whether he bought it
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314437].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    a "funny" situation indeed since it was first argued to prove that a site is a "copy" by examining the two sites - and then make a decision that it IS a copy if its found that they're indeed identical.

    However, the fact that it is possible to do things like replacing words makes it even "worse" <--- in other words, how you turn it, people complain

    By the way the intended purpose is and was NOT to do any changes at all, this was made clear by some vendors to me who were otherwise fine with how the product works.

    But here we also run into technical "details" since i got many requests by customers, ranging from implementing tid tracking, adding code, adding meta tags etc...but my product(s) are not site-builders. if i add this little thing, does it constitute a "change" of the site, even if its not obvious? if i add tracking code...if i add google analytics code.....things like that.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314507].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    i have to add something constructive here, the law actually varies depending on Country. In Germany framing a site is actually considered Copyright Theft, i found some entry yesterday with some very recent court ruling from 2007.

    However, it is about the INTENTION since in no way my script(s) purpose is to pretend "being" a "targeted" site in question - its main intention is to create landing pages for selling products as an affiliate, and a disclaimer on a "generated" site making this clear would NOT IN ANY WAY render the script worthless for any of its "main" purposes.

    Yes i am aware that framing happens ALL OVER, just look at your next proxy site and how they work and what they do.

    Thom, as said its not about "make it look like its yours"...this is just a result of how the script works since a landing page per definition needs to be on your URL.

    The question now for users of my script and for me as a seller is whether something like a disclaimer bar ON THE PAGE would change anything on the whole situation - making it VERY clear that the design/site is coming from whatever source to avoid any "confusion" about ownership in advance, also make it clear that deception (eg. about ownership of a site) is NOT the purpose for the site's existence.
    I have to ask this since (again) since "I am not a lawyer" <--
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314693].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom B
      Banned
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      i have to add something constructive here, the law actually varies depending on Country. In Germany framing a site is actually considered Copyright Theft, i found some entry yesterday with some very recent court ruling from 2007.

      However, it is about the INTENTION since in no way my script(s) purpose is to pretend "being" a "targeted" site in question - its main intention is to create landing pages for selling products as an affiliate, and a disclaimer on a "generated" site making this clear would NOT IN ANY WAY render the script worthless for any of its "main" purposes.

      Yes i am aware that framing happens ALL OVER, just look at your next proxy site and how they work and what they do.

      Thom, as said its not about "make it look like its yours"...this is just a result of how the script works since a landing page per definition needs to be on your URL.

      The question now for users of my script and for me as a seller is whether something like a disclaimer bar ON THE PAGE would change anything on the whole situation - making it VERY clear that the design/site is coming from whatever source to avoid any "confusion" about ownership in advance, also make it clear that deception (eg. about ownership of a site) is NOT the purpose for the site's existence.
      I have to ask this since (again) since "I am not a lawyer" <--


      Sorry GeorgR, I wasn't talking about your script. I really don't know what your script does. I wasn't referring to it when I asked James and am sorry if I gave that impression.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[314698].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike McBride
    You're either a troll or you're very confused.
    Paul,

    The vote is already in - TROLL
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315064].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
      Banned
      [DELETED]
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315083].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author David_Thompson
        Originally Posted by BIG Mike View Post

        I'll second that one Mike...
        BigMike, I was wondering about you and the family bro...
        with all the troubles you guys are having over there.

        --David
        Signature
        JV partnership wanted, Lets grow your list for free. Nothing to do with giveaways. PM Now
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315202].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike McBride
    Hey Big Mike, Polly the Troll gave both of us infractions - it's beginning to look a lot like Christmas!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315220].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
      Banned
      [DELETED]
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315221].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike McBride
        Originally Posted by BIG Mike View Post

        I just reversed yours, LOL...
        And I reversed yours!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315235].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
    I have given GeorgR very valuable information by PM and this problem should be resolved...

    I will state this again for those that may question the ethics of technology. Millions of websites use cURL, Snoopy, iFrames, and similar technologies and there is nothing illegal about using these technologies.

    Any legal advice on any matters such as this should be taken up in person with a lawyer that has knowledge of the internet laws. A lawyer must understand not only internet laws but also understand how the technologies behind the internet works.

    For any customer or possible future customer of GeorgR' understand his product is in no way, shape, or form breaking any laws and it is not illegal .. Again this is not legal advice, it is a fact....

    James
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315756].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
      "For any customer or possible future customer of GeorgR' understand his product is in no way, shape, or form breaking any laws and it is not illegal .. Again this is not legal advice, it is a fact...."

      James, tell you what, why don't you buy the product, use it on the 12,000 merchants with your affiliate link - and display your main URL in this thread, along with your real name and address so service of process won't be so difficult.

      Unless and until you do that you're just out for publicity with no care for the harm you cause others.

      Was it you who said I wasn't a lawyer? Darn. Guess I'll just have to close my office. Maybe I can get a tuition refund from the University of California.

      Was it you who said I should be booted from the forum, blocked and banned? Why stop there. I suggest also being tortured, drawn and quartered, then BBQ'd and eaten by zombies.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315865].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Tom B
        Banned
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        "For any customer or possible future customer of GeorgR' understand his product is in no way, shape, or form breaking any laws and it is not illegal .. Again this is not legal advice, it is a fact...."

        James, tell you what, why don't you buy the product, use it on the 12,000 merchants with your affiliate link - and display your main URL in this thread, along with your real name and address so service of process won't be so difficult.

        Unless and until you do that you're just out for publicity with no care for the harm you cause others.

        Was it you who said I wasn't a lawyer? Darn. Guess I'll just have to close my office. Maybe I can get a tuition refund from the University of California.

        Was it you who said I should be booted from the forum, blocked and banned? Why stop there. I suggest also being tortured, drawn and quartered, then BBQ'd and eaten by zombies.


        Brain, in all due respect, James has 12 years of web development experience to back up his "facts". You just went to law school and practiced law. Or did you...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315880].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
          Originally Posted by Thomas Belknap View Post

          Brain, in all due respect, James has 12 years of web development experience to back up his "facts". You just went to law school and practiced law. Or did you...
          Well, truth be told, I did miss a few classes

          But I'm feeling slighted. I have 14+ years of web development experience. My AOL account dates back to 1994. Signed up because AOL had access to this thing called the Internet and CompuServe didn't.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315980].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
            Only back to 94? Then your just a novice... my first AOL account was early 93.


            Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

            Well, truth be told, I did miss a few classes

            But I'm feeling slighted. I have 14+ years of web development experience. My AOL account dates back to 1994. Signed up because AOL had access to this thing called the Internet and CompuServe didn't.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[315996].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          James,
          For any customer or possible future customer of GeorgR' understand his product is in no way, shape, or form breaking any laws and it is not illegal .. Again this is not legal advice, it is a fact....
          Ummm... I don't think anyone is contending that the product itself is illegal.

          Perhaps you aren't clear on the meaning of the word 'copyright.' It means, the right to control who can make and/or display copies of an original work. That covers exact copies, modified copies, and even derivative works.

          The "any tool can be misused" argument, while factually true, doesn't have any merit in this discussion. The problematic use of this tool is coincident with its primary function.

          I could make a strong case that any use of the tool for the purpose for which it was designed, without prior permission of the owner of the material it processes and displays, constitutes copyright infringement. The question of whether you could file suit and win a damage award is a whole other issue, but it's still infringement.


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

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316001].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Killer Joe
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        I suggest also being tortured, drawn and quartered, then BBQ'd and eaten by zombies.
        With all due respect Brian, remarks like that should come with the disclaimer that those zombies will never be able to get the taste of BBQ'd lawyer out of their mouth.

        KJ
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316030].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        "For any customer or possible future customer of GeorgR' understand his product is in no way, shape, or form breaking any laws and it is not illegal .. Again this is not legal advice, it is a fact...."

        James, tell you what, why don't you buy the product, use it on the 12,000 merchants with your affiliate link - and display your main URL in this thread, along with your real name and address so service of process won't be so difficult.

        Unless and until you do that you're just out for publicity with no care for the harm you cause others.

        Was it you who said I wasn't a lawyer? Darn. Guess I'll just have to close my office. Maybe I can get a tuition refund from the University of California.

        Was it you who said I should be booted from the forum, blocked and banned? Why stop there. I suggest also being tortured, drawn and quartered, then BBQ'd and eaten by zombies.
        To start off with I don't have any need of the product .. I already own an affiliate shop script that I coded by hand myself.

        2nd If I did purchase the product then (if allowed) I would modify the code to cover myself legally if I used the product.

        3rd any affiliate product that I would push would only be done under those merchants that have the respect to communicate with their affiliates on a one-on-one basis. A huge mistake many make when it comes to affiliate marketing is the lack of communications.

        4th I feel the continued need to just prolong this thread with more and more theories does not only hurt the OP but it puts doubts in others minds about similar products (in this case scripts). In my eyes it does more harm then good.

        5th Under your argument here.. This means that I can sue Alexa for false representation of my sites by taking screenshots (without permissions - remember copyright belongs to the designer) and then spreading false and misleading traffic stats that are not only a bit incorrect but that are totally incorrect. This may not be the same thing that the OP's product does but it is very similar in nature.

        @Paul - I fully understand what copyrights are.. Again I develop websites for a living and have done so for over 15 years.

        James
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316053].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
          Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

          5th Under your argument here.. This means that I can sue Alexa for false representation of my sites by taking screenshots (without permissions - remember copyright belongs to the designer) and then spreading false and misleading traffic stats that are not only a bit incorrect but that are totally incorrect. This may not be the same thing that the OP's product does but it is very similar in nature.
          James
          Alexa take screen shots of your sites, not copy the entire html code and serve it like it comes from their server. Also, they make no chages to your sites code when they display the screen shot.

          You are talking about two completely different technologies here.

          Also, Alexa's use of your content comes under the fair use bylaws as they are in effect giving a review of your site. Fair use bylaws allow specifically for that.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316069].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
    All joking aside, it doesn't matter how many years experience with web development anyone has here. There are many of us here on the WF who spent years on the old BBS systems before the Internet became publicly available in 1993. Some who have been programmers even longer than that.

    That has no bearing in this situation at all. The issues here have nothing to do with programming or web technologies, or the use of them.

    The issues were with the use of other peoples content. TRJN keeps bringing up that many sites use curl or iframes to pull in other peoples content. That is true. However, the same sites he mentioned do not do it the same way as the OP's program.

    The OP blatently stated on his WSO that you can pull others peoples content and serve it on your domain so that it looks like it's your unique content. That in itself may or many not get you into any trouble, depending on too many factors to list. However, he also blatently states on the WSO that you can change anything you like on the served page. That WILL get you into legal trouble.

    That is no different than taking someones ebook that only has personal use rights and changing all the affiliate links to your own. It's no different than making a hard copy of the sales page and making a few changes to it then putting it in an html page on your own site.

    People can sit here and argue ethics all day. It's not a matter of ethics. It is a matter of law. If you take something without permission and use it as your own then your breaking copyright law.

    It doesn't matter how many legal ways the WSO could be used. All that matters is that the OP was clearly advising his potential customers exactly how to break copyright laws and in effect steal other peoples content and use it as they like. Under international copyright laws that is illegal in almost every country in the world.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316024].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Martin Luxton
      Originally Posted by Johnny Slater View Post


      The issues were with the use of other peoples content. TRJN keeps bringing up that many sites use curl or iframes to pull in other peoples content. That is true. However, the same sites he mentioned do not do it the same way as the OP's program.

      The OP blatently stated on his WSO that you can pull others peoples content and serve it on your domain so that it looks like it's your unique content. That in itself may or many not get you into any trouble, depending on too many factors to list. However, he also blatently states on the WSO that you can change anything you like on the served page. That WILL get you into legal trouble. (My bold lettering)

      That is no different than taking someones ebook that only has personal use rights and changing all the affiliate links to your own. It's no different than making a hard copy of the sales page and making a few changes to it then putting it in an html page on your own site.
      The techical issues are a bit beyond me but can I get what Johnny is saying this straight?

      Basically, the script lets you show a web page as your own and you are encouraged to treat it as PLR content.

      If this is the case, why do you need a script? Just copy and paste the content from the original site, take a screen shot of the graphics and save them as jpegs and ftp the whole lot to your own site.

      Doing it this way would also help you to split test different headlines, because sometimes the copy on the original site needs redoing.

      Then, if your headlines outpull the original you can share this with the site owner and he'll be so happy he'll ask you to copy all his sites.

      Martin
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316313].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
        Martin, the script lets you use some special code to have anyones sales page displayed dynamically on your site. This way the visitor doesn't have to leave your domain and you can use one domain to show thousands of sales pages for different products.

        It's not as simple as just pulling one page and displaying it as your own. It's set up as an affilate scheme so that the script pulls the original sales page and displays it with your affiliate links added through hidden means.

        The idea itself isn't that bad, it's more the way it was done, and the fact that the OP made direct comments in his WSO that in effect advised potential customers to break IP and copyright laws.

        Originally Posted by Martin Luxton View Post

        The techical issues are a bit beyond me but can I get what Johnny is saying this straight?

        Basically, the script lets you show a web page as your own and you are encouraged to treat it as PLR content.

        If this is the case, why do you need a script? Just copy and paste the content from the original site, take a screen shot of the graphics and save them as jpegs and ftp the whole lot to your own site.

        Doing it this way would also help you to split test different headlines, because sometimes the copy on the original site needs redoing.

        Then, if your headlines outpull the original you can share this with the site owner and he'll be so happy he'll ask you to copy all his sites.

        Martin
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316394].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author globalpro
    This comment here, I don't think is correct:

    Can the product be used in a questionable way ? Well as a developer I can tell you now almost all scripts can be used in a questionable way but this is not the developers / sellers responsibility.
    As a developer, as with any professional, there is a certain amount of liability attached to what you do. In this sue happy world we live in, people will go for 'the more, the merrier' approach when naming defendants to a lawsuit.

    Is there a legal disclaimer that you use, that your clients have to sign.

    Just curious.

    Thanks,

    John
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316026].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
      Originally Posted by globalpro View Post

      This comment here, I don't think is correct:



      As a developer, as with any professional, there is a certain amount of liability attached to what you do. In this sue happy world we live in, people will go for 'the more, the merrier' approach when naming defendants to a lawsuit.

      Is there a legal disclaimer that you use, that your clients have to sign.

      Just curious.

      Thanks,

      John
      John,
      I have a full legal binding license agreement.. I have all the legal disclaimers and protection in place.

      Yes many developers will agree with my statement, almost any program out there can be used for questionable means.

      With that said I do not make statements that are misleading, untruthful, or anything similar on any product. I state what a product is and what it does... I do not use any type of hype to push aproduct.. I am not saying the OP did this either.

      Now some have questioned the way the OP has marketed his product and if this is the only issue that Brian and others see then there is a simple solution to this problem.

      1. Pull the product from selling it.

      2. Notify all current customers that the product is under review for upgrades.

      3. Hire a developer (I am not sure if GeorgR is one) to review your product and make suggestions on improvements and/or corrections.

      4. Recode the product the be in more under standard compliance if it is infact in question.

      5. Make any or all suggested changes by the developer.

      6. Include all license agreements, legal diclaimers, and protection for the seller and developer of the product.

      7. Create all brand new marketing materials for said product including sales copy.

      8. Relaunch new upgraded product with all of the above

      9. Contact current customers and offer a huge discount on upgrade and also state the old version is not longer supported.

      10. Problem solved.

      If required contact with said merchants are to be done then all of this can be coded within the system to make things more automative.

      James
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316165].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
    Can the product be used in a questionable way ? Well as a developer I can tell you now almost all scripts can be used in a questionable way but this is not the developers / sellers responsibility.
    Tell that to McDonalds who got sued because their coffee was "hot" and someone got burned. The sued McDonalds and won the case.

    That is exactly the reason for disclaimers. It is your responsibility to warn the customer of any potential damage. As a software developer, unless you have a disclaimer you open yourself up to damage claims any time anyone installs or uses your software.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316058].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      James,
      I fully understand what copyrights are.. Again I develop websites for a living and have done so for over 15 years.
      The latter is not evidence of the former.

      If your words are sufficiently unclear, the reader doesn't know whether you understand the issue or not. Merely that what you're saying, taken as said, is Very Bad Advice.

      Johnny,
      Tell that to McDonalds who got sued because their coffee was "hot" and someone got burned. The sued McDonalds and won the case.
      Ah. Stella.

      Were you aware that there were over 700 reported incidents of McD's coffee burning people badly enough to require treatment the year that Stella had her accident with it? The stuff is served at a temperature that will scald human flesh. As in, blister and burn. (Some McD's restaurants break the rules and turn it down a bit, which I think is smart.)

      I had an interesting discussion with some friends about that case. They all went down McD's line about how coffee is "supposed" to be served that way, and that you should know it's hot and take precautions (she did), don't open it while in a moving vehicle (she didn't), etc.

      Not a one of these people, including the lawyer and the columnist who were part of the conversation, had a clue. I told them they were making the case against McDonald's. The lawyer asked why.

      Consider: They bought that coffee at a drive-thru window. McD's knows that anyone buying at those windows is very likely to use the product in the car.

      The product was sold in a condition that made it unsafe for its intended purpose. McDonald's knew that injury was likely to result from this.

      A clear case of willful negligence.

      Stella was right, and so was the jury. Of course, so was the judge who reduced the award.


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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316138].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316222].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
      Originally Posted by BIG Mike View Post

      So you knowingly and intentionally deceive your customers about the real issue?



      To the best of your knowledge, you mean. And yet, the first item I quoted, contradicts what you're stating here.
      BigMike,
      No I stated on point 2 to contact the customers... You should never deceive your customers about anything and I would never suggest any to do so ...

      As I said be truthful, upfront, honest, and use no hype...

      Please understand the outline I gave was as an example and was in breif detail.

      James
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316235].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
        Banned
        [DELETED]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316253].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
          Originally Posted by BIG Mike View Post

          No James, you said to " Notify all current customers that the product is under review for upgrades.", which is clearly not true. The product is being pulled due to a potential legal issue involving intellectual property law.

          I think the point you're missing with your previous comments regarding your experience is that it comes down to what a judge somewhere along the line will think of it. Not what you or I or anyone else here does.

          That's why I pointed out the contradiction in your statements. While I can appreciate that it was most likely unintentional, nevertheless, it opens the door to potential problems with perception of what was intended.
          BigMike,
          Ok ..lol Understood .. Did not mean that to sound as a contradiction. What I meant was is a full email should be given to the customer explaining everything and the product itself is being reviewed for possible upgrades or re-creation all together.

          As I said I was brief in my list..

          James
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316271].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316287].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
      Originally Posted by BIG Mike View Post

      With the legal concern Brian brought up, hiring a developer is not the solution, nor is "Recoding the product to be in more standard compliance".

      If I were the developer and someone brought this to me to be re-developed to sort out any potential legal issues, my secretary would be on the phone scheduling a design meeting with our lawyers and client (and myself) in a heartbeat.

      Like you, I've got more years of experience at this than I care to admit - and while I might acknowledge having some expertise in various legal issues involving the WWW, I still consult regularly with our lawyers on specific issues that invariably come up.

      It's called Risk Management - and the purpose of it is to minimize or eliminate potential liability. And you'll have to trust me on this - Risk Management doesn't rely on the advice or opinions of developers, coders, designers or whomever.
      Agreed 100% ... I also have a lawyer that I can consult when needed which is something that most developers should have.

      By the way Mike .. Where is the link for your social bot ??

      James
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316302].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author polimedia
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316446].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      polimedia,

      You persist in comparing different situations. Dealing dope is not the primary purpose of Craigslist. It's not even allowed. On the other side, displaying copies of someone else's work is the primary purpose of the software in question.

      If you don't see the significance of that in terms of potential liability, you are not as well-versed in legal principle as you seem to imagine.

      That aside, yeah. The majority of the problems could be fixed by proper warnings about the legal considerations, and ways to use it without exposing oneself to lawsuits.


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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316484].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Okay. ON the subject of disclaimers, something very funny just happened.

        I'm on a discussion list that involves a lot of systems administrators and spamfighters. There's an offtopic list for discussing everything else. (Technical types are amazingly well-read people, as a rule, so the discussions can be very interesting.)

        We got into a long discussion about mens rea and issues surrounding the distinction between someone who kills because they're insane and someone who kills because of drug-related circumstances. The latter involved people who took drugs knowingly, people who were drugged without their knowledge, and people who stopped taking drugs for mental conditions and killed someone when off their meds.

        Lots of opinions, as you might expect. One gentleman, named Mike Atkinson, expressed his own thoughts on the subject and gave what was, for me, the funniest line of the year:

        "Please note that I am not a lawyer and that nobody
        should go off and kill someone based on my advice."



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

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316519].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Johnny,
          That wouldn't solve the issue in this case. In this case the product was designed specifically in a way that the only way to use it would break IP laws.
          That's not quite accurate. It CAN be used in legitimate ways. Assuming a policy that allows hosting the sales page remotely, or with permission from the merchant, there's no legal issue at all.


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

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316523].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
            Paul,

            Yes your the situation you describe it would be legal. But the purpose of the product was to do it without permission. It was designed to be "black hat" and run unknown to the vendor.

            I'm not talking about specific situations but broad implications. It can be "made" to work within the confines of the law but it wasn't designed specifically for that. It was designed specifically to in effect steal other peoples sales pages without their knowledge or consent.

            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

            Johnny,That's not quite accurate. It CAN be used in legitimate ways. Assuming a policy that allows hosting the sales page remotely, or with permission from the merchant, there's no legal issue at all.


            Paul
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316543].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
            Johnny,

            I wouldn't call it stealing, as they are promoting the merchant's product, for which the merchant will get paid. Well, assuming the promotion is successful, anyway.

            Not like he's pirating the product or anything criminal.


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

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316561].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
              No, he isn't pirating the product, just the sales copy. The copy that is protected under copyright and IP laws and can't be used without permission without breaking the law.

              Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

              Johnny,

              I wouldn't call it stealing, as they are promoting the merchant's product, for which the merchant will get paid. Well, assuming the promotion is successful, anyway.

              Not like he's pirating the product or anything criminal.


              Paul
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316589].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author nebraska
                Originally Posted by Johnny Slater View Post

                No, he isn't pirating the product, just the sales copy. The copy that is protected under copyright and IP laws and can't be used without permission without breaking the law.
                This product's intended use is to display an affiliate page on your own server space. An affiliate page that you have the right to promote. The person offering access to their sales material to anyone with a Clickbank account, for instance, is granting you permission to sell their product via whatever they make available there.

                The intended use of this product is not to grab their copy and then offer your own product using their sales material. In the end it's a means to use the original sales page as your own landing page and get around Google's no affiliate pages in Adwords. A darn smart idea and probably going to have me driving a nicer car later next year...
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[349096].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
                  You have the right to promote, not host on your own site and make it look like its your page. And by no means not to change anything of the authors original work and put your own in it's place.

                  Originally Posted by nebraska View Post

                  This product's intended use is to display an affiliate page on your own server space. An affiliate page that you have the right to promote. The person offering access to their sales material to anyone with a Clickbank account, for instance, is granting you permission to sell their product via whatever they make available there.

                  The intended use of this product is not to grab their copy and then offer your own product using their sales material. In the end it's a means to use the original sales page as your own landing page and get around Google's no affiliate pages in Adwords. A darn smart idea and probably going to have me driving a nicer car later next year...
                  Signature

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[349504].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
      That wouldn't solve the issue in this case. In this case the product was designed specifically in a way that the only way to use it would break IP laws. It's not just about the verbage used in the WSO. It's also about the intent that the software was created for.

      Originally Posted by polimedia View Post

      I still think the points are tenuous at best.

      The fact that the OPs software can be used to break some law or other hasn't, traditionally, impressed many people. Craiglist can be used to deal dope, Myspace can be used to proposition 9 year olds, the vcr can be used to copy every film you see, on and on. Actually, even guns can be used to kill and maim people. All of these are far more than mere potentials.

      The fact that the OP uses verbiage that seems to encourage his customers to break laws isn't particularly bright.

      But could we agree that were he to leave his software intact, and change his pitch from "here's how you can use this to steal, cause havoc and piss people off" to a more common, "here is how this works, please do not break any laws" would pretty much put the entire issue at rest ?
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316493].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author polimedia
        Banned
        [DELETED]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316607].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          polimedia,
          The discussion about what a tool is intended for, and primary purpose, and all that, aren't, as both you and myers seem to imagine, nearly as heavy hitters as to either do much for your theory, or otherwise to paint someone of a different oppinion "not as versed as they imagine".
          Really?

          Show this discussion to a lawyer who knows anything at all about product liability and see if they agree with you.

          This thread does illustrate why you should not take legal advice from forum posters. Not even lawyers who post in forums.

          There's a ton of bad advice in the discussion, and even the good advice is only general. Legal questions are not often clearly cut and dried. There can be so many interacting concerns that only someone who's trained in the law and its principles, and who gets full detail on which to form an opinion, can hope to get it right in a specific instance.

          The best you can hope for from a discussion like this is to become aware of things that you can research or discuss with more qualified professionals.


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

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316655].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
    My last comment on the issue...

    Stealing something worth one cent is the same as stealing something worth a million dollars. The penalties are different for the two, but they are both stealing.

    The value doesn't matter here. All that matters is that a product was created with the intent of going behind someone's back and using their copyright protected content. The fact that the script steals the content, with intent of commercial gain, is a clear violation of copyright and IP laws.

    If you get permission in writing from EVERY vendor whose site you use this script with then your free and clear. However, that is not what was intended when this product was created and the copy used to sell this product clearly stated that its intended use was to use other peoples work and display it as your own. Nothing at all was said about permission or any other legal implications.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[316598].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    All that matters is that a product was created with the intent of going behind someone's back and using their copyright protected content. The fact that the script steals the content, with intent of commercial gain, is a clear violation of copyright and IP laws.

    If you get permission in writing from EVERY vendor whose site you use this script with then your free and clear. However, that is not what was intended when this product was created and the copy used to sell this product clearly stated that its intended use was to use other peoples work and display it as your own. Nothing at all was said about permission or any other legal implications.
    Johnny,

    you brought up many good point in this thread, and i especially liked how you were able to describe what my script does in two simple sentences, further above.
    (I myself always have trouble with wording, this is also the reason i got huge amounts of replies/emails still asking me WHAT the script exactly does since i obviously confused people even more with my "descriptions" )

    My script was created with the intent to create a landing page and it is intended to be an affiliate tool. Deception or similar is not the purpose of the script, and i THINK we can debate whether the term "steal" is appropriate, even if i see your point.

    A site which displays thumbnails of another site or product shots, from a certain point of view would then ALSO "steal", assuming that owner has not been asked. In one case i "display" a site in full, in the other case i could display the whole site as a thumbnail image, or i take an image like a cover of the 3rd party product and display it for "commercial gain".

    Eg. just a few days ago i signed up at a service which creates ads w/ thumbnails..displaying product shots of various CB products.

    Re: Commercial gain: It is certainly driven by "commercial intent" when i sign up as an affiliate and promote product X or product Y, using my money for SEO, promotion and PPC.
    This "commercial gain" happens on the background of the vendor's termn which the vendor chose when he put his product in the affiliate program.

    If he puts it on clickbank and says: "Every affiliate gets 75%" - i think its a little far fetched to use the term "commercial gain" in a rather negative sense, implying that the affiliate would do something which is against those terms. Because it is, per definition, NOT.

    The disclaimer and advice "to ask a vendor for permission first" i have on my older sites and related products already for over a year...however i did not have it in those recent WSOs. So...yes, blame myself.

    I admit that not w/ every WSO i collect legal advice in advance and make sure that all aspects are covered in every sense, and it might certainly the case that my wording in the WSO was rather focused on, well, what my script can do, instead of giving lengthy "warnings" or adding disclaimers which are (not even kidding) longer than the WSO text itself!

    From what i get from this whole discussion now is that i need to re-market a la "for demonstration purposes" only...however i really want to distance myself from any assumption my product itself would be "against any laws" since the product itself certainly is NOT - not even what it DOES, given the right curcumstances, eg. assuming vendor permissions are given and so forth.

    A little sad that we covered many aspects here in the thread, and people were fighting even, but i still did not get answer eg. to my question whether it would change the sitaution if every generated site had a disclaimer indicating the original site or similar. (Some TECHNICAL solution which would enable me to continue marketing without all those "problems", or maybe some solution like the site only appearing in a "banner", assuming the KEY ISSUE here is the "Display of another site on another URL"..and confusion about ownership of the displayed site. Mabye there are solutions, now from a coder's point of view and how the script would work and display the results.)

    it would very well be possible to make the site appear looking like a popup, and take measures so this confusion is not caused in the first place - eg. by keeping the original URL displayed, "physically" separating the displayed content from the other site within another window AND clearly state origin of content and that this content is NOT (c) by owner of the site who runs the script.

    G.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[318031].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Phnx
    See, where I'm confused is if you had to submit copies of the website to a Judge, there is only ONE. The ORIGINAL. From what I can tell, George isn't hosting a 'copy', it really is like an IFRAME in that he is bringing the original to the browser of the viewer only for the time they are viewing it.

    It only exists temporarily, there is no physical copy, and it disappears when the browser is closed. If a judge will deem that to be a copy, then he must also get pissy about cached pages on Google or Way Back Machine which ARE physical copies.

    I think people are failing to realise what this script is and that's why they are are getting so upset. George can show any Judge that he does not have a copy on his server and never has had one.

    I don't have his product, but it is quite clearly just a glorified iframe job with a few more bells and whistles.
    Signature
    In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane. ~ Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)

    Easy Weight Loss
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[349314].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
      It is NOT like an iframe. An iframe only allows you to show the other page within a frame. That is not what this software does.

      This software uses something like curl to strip the html code and put it into an array which you can then edit any way you wish. The fact that it can be edited is what makes it a major issue.

      No one has the right to take another persons work and to pass it off as their own or to change it without permission. Period.

      Originally Posted by Phnx View Post

      See, where I'm confused is if you had to submit copies of the website to a Judge, there is only ONE. The ORIGINAL. From what I can tell, George isn't hosting a 'copy', it really is like an IFRAME in that he is bringing the original to the browser of the viewer only for the time they are viewing it.

      It only exists temporarily, there is no physical copy, and it disappears when the browser is closed. If a judge will deem that to be a copy, then he must also get pissy about cached pages on Google or Way Back Machine which ARE physical copies.

      I think people are failing to realise what this script is and that's why they are are getting so upset. George can show any Judge that he does not have a copy on his server and never has had one.

      I don't have his product, but it is quite clearly just a glorified iframe job with a few more bells and whistles.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[349505].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Phnx
        Originally Posted by Johnny Slater View Post

        An iframe only allows you to show the other page within a frame. That is not what this software does.
        Well no, because there is no frame, but the principle is the same. It's like an iframe in that sense, but framed sans 'frame'. He is hosting nothing, he has a "virtual page", that is what he is 'editing' and it only remains edited while the browser is opened. Even the editing is 'virtual', close the browser and *poof* it's gone. Whether it's ethical is another matter, but it's not in essence much different from obscuring the text will a popup or banner to hammer home the message on the sales page - after all he is trying to get more sales for the vendor.

        "You have the right to promote, not host on your own site and make it look like its your page".

        Don't disagree, but again, he is hosting NOTHING. Unless there is a physical copy, then there is NO copy. Yeah, it's true that Joe Schmoe who understands jack will assume there must be a physical duplicate, but you can't convict people because of the ignorance of others. Though they might try I suppose.

        "No one has the right to take another persons work and to pass it off as their own or to change it without permission. Period."

        No they don't, but he is not 'taking' anything, or changing anything. You'd have to locate it to show that, and it doesn't exist. IFRAME principle without a frame. You could use a javascript code to edit this page, or any other, but it only exists in YOUR browser, nothing of the original has changed and you are not storing an edited copy on your server. Only the traffic George sends to his site to learn about the product he's pimping, will temporarily see the virtual page in their browser.

        Actually now I think about it..... it's not a million miles away in principle from one of the cool widgets I have on my site.....when you click a link for a site it overlays that site in a window within my site, and I suppose it could look as if it's part of my site to non-techy people. These widgets are pretty common now. www.increasewebsitetrafficfast.com is an MFA site, click any of the links (not the tags or videos) and you'll see what I mean.

        Would not Joe Public who often doesn't know one end of a mouse from another perhaps assume that I've pinched the 'original' sites and am hosting the pages on my server? Sure I can't 'edit' them like Georges widget does, but that is a difference of degree not kind. But how can I have 'taken' it when it remains where it always was? It certainly ain't on my server, so where has it been 'taken'? Much more sophisticated than the old iframes, but the principle is the same. I'm happy because it keeps surfers on my site, surfers should be happy because they aren't opening yet more windows. Vendor should be happy because I'm pimping his site for him. In Georges case when he's 'editing', he is editing a 'virtual' page.

        Honestly I think it's all a lot of fuss over nothing.
        Signature
        In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane. ~ Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)

        Easy Weight Loss
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[349730].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
    You need to go back and read the thread. Know what your talking about before making comments.

    The script was designed for a specific purpose. To pull content from other sites and display it on your own. There is an added ability to change anything you wish before it is displayed.

    I'm not sure why you guys are commenting on this thread when this has already been handled, but if you are going to comment then please have your facts straight.

    The script uses a feature like curl to scrape the html then allows you to make any changes you want before you display the content. The OP actually stated this as one of the selling points on the WSO page. (I believe that has since been removed but I haven't looked to check.)

    Regardless of if it is changed or not, if you use someone else's content without their consent, regardless of the purpose, then you are breaking copyright and IP law. There is no amount of justification that can bypass that one statement.

    Unless you have prior concent from the original creator then you have no right to use it in any shape, form, or fashion.

    It does not matter if it is an actual page or is site or if it is dynamic. The fact that it is being displayed is against the law without consent.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[349824].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Phnx
      Originally Posted by Johnny Slater View Post

      You need to go back and read the thread. Know what your talking about before making comments.

      The script was designed for a specific purpose. To pull content from other sites and display it on your own. There is an added ability to change anything you wish before it is displayed.

      I'm not sure why you guys are commenting on this thread when this has already been handled, but if you are going to comment then please have your facts straight.

      The script uses a feature like curl to scrape the html then allows you to make any changes you want before you display the content. The OP actually stated this as one of the selling points on the WSO page. (I believe that has since been removed but I haven't looked to check.)

      Regardless of if it is changed or not, if you use someone else's content without their consent, regardless of the purpose, then you are breaking copyright and IP law. There is no amount of justification that can bypass that one statement.

      Unless you have prior concent from the original creator then you have no right to use it in any shape, form, or fashion.

      It does not matter if it is an actual page or is site or if it is dynamic. The fact that it is being displayed is against the law without consent.
      Johnny, George has stated over and over that the script does not do any such thing, and that he hosts nothing of the original file. He has also said he is not the best at explaining things. In fact there is a fella on the flipping thread who flips sites and says he is using Georges script. When questioned on it, he said he is merely "selling an index.php". That is all his 'sites' consist of, and he says it doesn't violate any T&C. Look for JimFurrs post on this thread

      I'd wager that the code on that index page does nothing more than what mine does when it displays a site within a window, except it omits the window and just displays it 'as is'. I'd also wager that there is some kind of javascript that allows the page to be edited as it's created (and his program must automatically insert text that's been done beforehand in order to 'change' it as the page is created). The Vendor doesn't own that code, and HIS code is not being stolen, so where is the violation? If the Vendor insists that his page must only be viewed on his server/url then and only then could he have a legitimate grievance. Otherwise you'll have to ban the whole concept of 'iframe' and that is unlikely to happen.

      Does our outraged Vendor know that anyone can go to say..DomainTools and if his site isn't listed then can grab it all to display. Would he give his permission for that, knowing his competitors may be studying his SE and keyword rankings? Then they keep a cache, and take it upon themselves to update it periodically, or when someone wants a fresh look. Does his robots text insist that only certain spiders can display his site? What about Alexa who ignore the robots.txt and will display his site regardless. Maybe if he insists that people can only view his site on his url he needs to password protect it - but that would be silly and self defeating.

      George tells his buyers to contact the Vendor, explain the program and get permission. The few who say no, well they just move on to another affiliate program to promote.

      Could George get in trouble? Oh yeah. If he or his buyers get lazy about asking permission (after all most apparantly are fine with it and don't explicitly state upfront they forbid it, so might think why waste time asking), somewhere down the line he'll come across a Vendor who can't grasp that he isn't having his site pinched, and he'll attempt to sue. There'll be lawyers and police who agree with him. Never underestimate the ignorance and stupidity of the States IT departments.

      Anyone remember the case of that school teacher who was unfortunate enough to click an innocuous looking link when demonstrating something to her students and the next minute she was innundated with porn pop ups that wouldn't quit till they pulled the plug. She got convicted with exposing minors to porn as the police and lawyers insisted those sites had to be deliberately clicked on to show up in the 'history'.

      After the tech bloggers had finished laughing at the billybobs in the States IT department and the hillbilly Sheriff, they realised this poor woman was facing 40+ years because of their ignorance. Many IT experts offered to help pro bono and got her a new hearing. The bloggers were planning to mobilise to educate these retards, but the case is over after she got browbeaten into pleading guilty to a misdemeanor and surrendering her teaching license. Doesn't get more outrageous than that, but one must never be surprised at the stupidity of self proclaimed "experts". Officialdom is full of them. http://www.reason.com/news/show/130527.html

      And yes, I've read this thread from the beginning - with increasing incredulity - and either George is lying about his script or people are making an assumption that it does something he has denied it does. If his script does scrape the content in order to change it, then he has been untruthful because he must then be hosting that html code - even if temporarily - in order to change it. That would be a copyright violation. When he previously advertised his script he compared it to the iframe principle and made great play that he was taking nothing away from the original site, which would NOT be a violation.
      Signature
      In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane. ~ Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)

      Easy Weight Loss
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[350834].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeff Usher
    The person who posted in your thread about the potential problems is a very respected warrior
    Going back to basics, a person has no right to comment on a WSO unless they themselves have purchased it. That's one of Allens golden rules.

    if you have not bought it you have no right to say anything at all about it. You have no basis on which to even give an opinion one way or the other.
    Just because the person is "well known" and "respected" does not give them rights to go in and trash a WSO regardless of the issue they have with it.

    Reminds me Animal Farm & George Orwell, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" ......

    The issue should be raised with the MODS and if they deem the product to be illegal or immoral then the appropriate action should be taken.

    Jeff
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[349870].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Raydal
      Originally Posted by Jeff Usher View Post


      Just because the person is "well known" and "respected" does not give them rights to go in and trash a WSO regardless of the issue they have with it.

      Reminds me Animal Farm & George Orwell, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" ......

      The issue should be raised with the MODS and if they deem the product to be illegal or immoral then the appropriate action should be taken.

      Jeff
      I've seen this same "rule" followed on the Warrior Board more times than I wish to admit. So many
      people can 'break the rules' because they "well known" and "respected". Whatever
      his intentions, the rule says do not rain on a person's WSO, so another course should
      have been taken rather than 'following the poster around'.

      Justification cannot be made for "caring about Warriors and wanting to protect people"

      The very same reason why my phone is tapped in order to protect me from terrorist!!
      My privacy has to be sacrificed in order to protect my privacy.

      "Lord, please save us from the saviors, Amen"

      -Ray L.,
      Signature
      The most powerful and concentrated copywriting training online today bar none! Autoresponder Writing Email SECRETS
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[350985].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Wayne
    I know from reading various forums, that some Clickbank vendors will get very angry when they see affiliates copying their sites, which is basically what this script does even though it does it in a dynamic fashion. Some vendors will even complain to your webhost and try to get your site shut down, though most would ask you to remove the copy first. It is still a copy, even though dynamic, search engines can see the page and rank the page in their search engine. When vendors see a copy of their site popping up on the search engines, they may not be happy.
    Also, this is very different from using a php redirect or frames, as the search engines see the content as being on your site.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[350627].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Wayne
    GeorgR, you said your product 'Affiliate Site Quick' was approved by Clickbank for their marketplace, however I can't find it by searching for it. Could you let me know where it is listed in the marketplace?
    I do know that there was a product similar to this a few years back, don't remember the name of the product anymore, but Clickbank removed it from the marketplace after being alerted to how it worked. Sorry I can't give you more details, my memory isn't what it used to be as I get older.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[350721].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author bsmith
      Just start describing the software as "a proxy for a single site" and make the statement true (at least "arguably true" -- and it may be actually true already for all I know). Then everybody can debate the legality of proxies for the next 3 pages of this thread.

      Maybe even calling it "a caching proxy for a single site -- just like Google caches websites" so all lawyers and lawyer-wannabe's can debate Google's practice of caching websites for their personal gain.

      I like the caching proxy angle the best as they are VERY common and every one of them actually make and STORE copies of websites for financial gain that doesn't benefit the website owner.

      If you don't like that angle for your own software, I think I'll edit PHProxy to work as a "single site caching proxy" and go make a WSO, LOL!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[350831].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
      Originally Posted by Wayne View Post

      GeorgR, you said your product 'Affiliate Site Quick' was approved by Clickbank for their marketplace, however I can't find it by searching for it. Could you let me know where it is listed in the marketplace?
      I do know that there was a product similar to this a few years back, don't remember the name of the product anymore, but Clickbank removed it from the marketplace after being alerted to how it worked. Sorry I can't give you more details, my memory isn't what it used to be as I get older.
      lol its really hard to find...i searched for "affiliate site quick" in the "Marketing and Ads/Promotion" section and it came up #53.

      yes..and PLEASE let this thread DIEEEEEEE

      issues are so far resolved. The End. Get along, nothing to see. Mods you have permission to delete this thread.
      Signature
      *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
      -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
      *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
      Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[351780].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author kazakhan
        Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

        yes..and PLEASE let this thread DIEEEEEEE

        issues are so far resolved. The End. Get along, nothing to see. Mods you have permission to delete this thread.
        Indeed, the horse is dead :p
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[352023].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnny Slater
    Chris, Google does NOT make changes to your content.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[352218].message }}

Trending Topics