COPEAC GETS NAILED BY THE FTC - Page 2 - WickedFire - Affiliate Marketing Forum

Jon · 04-15-2011, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tencentpiece

AKA, EWA still can't run enough traffic for the FTC to even be remotely interested in them.

Don't worry, I am sure you'll get your first lawsuit soon enough.

rofl pwned.

jabbering99 · 04-15-2011, 04:33 PM

Copeac will be fine it's all apart of the game, homies.

Hyphen · 04-15-2011, 05:05 PM

Just got an email about a new AM at Copeac 30 minutes ago.

makethatgreen · 04-15-2011, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyphen

Just got an email about a new AM at Copeac 30 minutes ago.

Same thing here, but this was in the works before all this news. I was told I'd be getting a new AM at adtech.

invisible777 · 04-15-2011, 05:41 PM

paidContent - Mobile

The landing pages named in here get little to no traffic

Mr. Websites · 04-15-2011, 06:32 PM

Does this mean they won't compete with their affiliates anymore?

lulz.

tjewsky · 04-15-2011, 09:23 PM

I don't feel bad for Copeac or others in the same boat....gigs been up for quite sometime, those who continue will meet the same fate. The bigger they are the harder they fall.

King. · 04-16-2011, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by invisible777

^ you consider "connotation" and "misconstrued" big words?

loll.

loll yourself jackass. I was talking about barclay&retard and his awkward use of words. Obviously he's trying too hard to sound sophisticated and he's coming off as a bad indian parody of shakespeare.

iPwnNoobs · 04-16-2011, 03:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King.

loll yourself jackass. I was talking about barclay&retard and his awkward use of words. Obviously he's trying too hard to sound sophisticated and he's coming off as a bad indian parody of shakespeare.

wait who the fuck are you again? oh thats right nobody. talk shit like you're somebody when you've actually provided some value or (tits) to the community.

bigbrian · 04-16-2011, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barman

So where's the organization that goes after Wall Street for massive, financial system collapsing fraud that wiped out a huge amounts of wealth and ruined the dollar?

oh wait...

^^ No kidding man!

Brian

mgtarheels · 04-17-2011, 08:44 PM

Bloggers are right to be upset; the Guides violate the First Amendment. The Guides treat blogger endorsements as advertisements and attempt to regulate them as such. Unlike other speech, advertising is considered commercial speech and thus receives reduced First Amendment protection... Consumers should be wary of government policies that favor one form of media over another. Government discrimination among media forms based on “editorial independence” is unprecedented. The Court has already ruled that the government may not legally prescribe editorial standards for newspaper; to do so would violate the First Amendment by interfering with newspapers' "exercise of editorial control and judgment." Yet the principle underlying the Guides is that the FTC may distinguish between blogs and newspapers based on its perceptions of "editorial responsibility." Even if bloggers are, on average, less "editorially responsible" than print media, allowing the government to favor certain media forms would allow it to manipulate the "marketplace of ideas" just as direct interference with editorial content would.

papajohn56 · 04-17-2011, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

Bloggers are right to be upset; the Guides violate the First Amendment. The Guides treat blogger endorsements as advertisements and attempt to regulate them as such. Unlike other speech, advertising is considered commercial speech and thus receives reduced First Amendment protection... Consumers should be wary of government policies that favor one form of media over another. Government discrimination among media forms based on “editorial independence” is unprecedented. The Court has already ruled that the government may not legally prescribe editorial standards for newspaper; to do so would violate the First Amendment by interfering with newspapers' "exercise of editorial control and judgment." Yet the principle underlying the Guides is that the FTC may distinguish between blogs and newspapers based on its perceptions of "editorial responsibility." Even if bloggers are, on average, less "editorially responsible" than print media, allowing the government to favor certain media forms would allow it to manipulate the "marketplace of ideas" just as direct interference with editorial content would.

Someone with a lot of time and money is going to counter-sue the FTC one day for violations of freedom of speech, and it's going to be a very, very nasty knock down drag out legal battle. I hope it happens sooner rather than later. A 1996 Supreme Court Case ruled that Commercial speech and Individual speech are of equal value, and Clarence Thomas echoed this.

Precedent is already there.

mgtarheels · 04-17-2011, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papajohn56

Someone with a lot of time and money is going to counter-sue the FTC one day for violations of freedom of speech, and it's going to be a very, very nasty knock down drag out legal battle. I hope it happens sooner rather than later. A 1996 Supreme Court Case ruled that Commercial speech and Individual speech are of equal value, and Clarence Thomas echoed this.

Precedent is already there.

It'll be more than interesting. Harvard Law Review is drilling the FTC with all the current goings-on. Would love to see their legal department stand up for this.

Firelead · 04-18-2011, 06:02 PM

I'm just curious why they aren't suing The Onion too?

/troll

Hyphen · 04-19-2011, 03:53 PM

Doesn't really read into much but:

Quote:

Notice To All Copeac Publishers,

Copeac is working hand in hand with all advertisers in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the FTC to ensure all creative, copy, accurately depicts truthful results experienced by real individuals. We are in the process of testing new creative material that will comply with the FTC guidelines as well as yield the results our publishers have come to expect on all campaigns. This includes but is not exclusive to all pages that mention or present themselves as news affiliates. This policy will impact all sectors.

We are prepared to work side by side with the FTC and our advertisers to ensure approved marketing practices are being used at all times. A new standard will be set at Copeac as well as the industry as a whole regarding what can and cannot be used when promoting a campaign. Copeac intends on leading the way throughout this transition. Like were doing with the FTC and our respective advertisers, we will work hand in hand with all publishers to ensure they have all the information and materials needed to be compliant.

We thank you in advance for being proactive and working with us through this transition.
The Copeac Team

ClickPimpsta · 04-19-2011, 11:51 PM

The ftc is going after marketers that are promoting acai offers through fake news sites.

The FTC complaints allege that typical fake news sites have titles such as “News 6 News Alerts,” “Health News Health Alerts,” or “Health 5 Beat Health News.” The sites often include the names and logos of major media outlets – such as ABC, Fox News, CBS, CNN, USA Today, and Consumer Reports – and falsely represent that the reports on the sites have been seen on these networks. An investigative-sounding headline on one such site proclaims “Acai Berry Diet Exposed: Miracle Diet or Scam?” The sub-headline reads, “As part of a new series: ‘Diet Trends: A look at America’s Top Diets’ we examine consumer tips for dieting during a recession.” The article that follows purports to document a reporter’s first-hand experience with acai berry supplements – typically claiming to have lost 25 pounds in four weeks.

penguinbc · 04-20-2011, 02:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClickPimpsta

The ftc is going after marketers that are promoting acai offers through fake news sites.

The FTC complaints allege that typical fake news sites have titles such as “News 6 News Alerts,” “Health News Health Alerts,” or “Health 5 Beat Health News.” The sites often include the names and logos of major media outlets – such as ABC, Fox News, CBS, CNN, USA Today, and Consumer Reports – and falsely represent that the reports on the sites have been seen on these networks. An investigative-sounding headline on one such site proclaims “Acai Berry Diet Exposed: Miracle Diet or Scam?” The sub-headline reads, “As part of a new series: ‘Diet Trends: A look at America’s Top Diets’ we examine consumer tips for dieting during a recession.” The article that follows purports to document a reporter’s first-hand experience with acai berry supplements – typically claiming to have lost 25 pounds in four weeks.

Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1

JuiceFigNewton · 04-20-2011, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dwight Schrute

Dear Faggots Who Can't Read Between The Lines:

The FTC is reading every single post here. If you'd like to turn them onto more cases to file, keep writing like a bunch of fucking goons, and point them into the direction to sniff into.

That is all.

Dear Homophobe who can't filter his closeted tendencies on the intertube:

NAMBLA is reading every single post here. If you'd like to turn them on with little boys to nail, keep writing like a bunch of fledgling pubes, and point them into the right cracks to sniff into. (more unnecessary comma ,,,,,,,)

JuiceFigNewton · 04-20-2011, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papajohn56

Someone with a lot of time and money is going to counter-sue the FTC one day for violations of freedom of speech, and it's going to be a very, very nasty knock down drag out legal battle. I hope it happens sooner rather than later. A 1996 Supreme Court Case ruled that Commercial speech and Individual speech are of equal value, and Clarence Thomas echoed this.

Precedent is already there.

yea well fraud trumps freedom of speech. PT Barnum wold have been a bigger pub than Copeac.

papajohn56 · 04-20-2011, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuiceFigNewton

yea well fraud trumps freedom of speech. PT Barnum wold have been a bigger pub than Copeac.

False advertising isn't the same as fraud.

pileofcrap · 04-21-2011, 12:21 AM

Seeing as how I made a little money with them 2 years ago pushing gay dating.. I think I can say I'm safe.

justo_tx · 04-21-2011, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pileofcrap

Seeing as how I made a little money with them 2 years ago pushing gay dating.. I think I can say I'm safe.

Better get checked for the aids.

mpbiz · 04-21-2011, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King.

loll yourself jackass. I was talking about barclay&retard and his awkward use of words. Obviously he's trying too hard to sound sophisticated and he's coming off as a bad indian parody of shakespeare.

don't be a douche.

JuiceFigNewton · 04-25-2011, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papajohn56

False advertising isn't the same as fraud.

False advertising using fraudulent tactics is by definition Fraud.

tacoX · 04-25-2011, 02:32 PM

They got the bird curse.

DeluxJonathon · 04-25-2011, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnjassa

Why them and not some of the networks?

Copeac should be ok. This is all part of business.

Because Copeac ran tons of berry campaigns, and they are one of the larger networks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattaw

A question here, is why acai, why not biz opp, penny auction, teeth, wrinkle or any of the other major niches. The FTC seems quite focused on diet first. I wonder if this is just the beginning and they`re going niche by niche or is this just a nice warning, of hey clean your shit up, before they start to fuck everyone else royally....

My thoughts exactly, the FTC seems to stay dormant for awhile. However, when they start they do not stop.

papajohn56 · 04-26-2011, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeluxJonathon

Because Copeac ran tons of berry campaigns, and they are one of the larger networks.

My thoughts exactly, the FTC seems to stay dormant for awhile. However, when they start they do not stop.

They don't stay dormant, they spend a lot of time researching things they feel extremely confident they have a chance of winning on. If you notice, all of these cases say either "since at least early 2010" or "since at least 2009". They've been watching for a while.

It's also not because Copeac had these offers as a network, Copeac ran their own campaigns as well.

Scheme · 04-26-2011, 12:53 AM

From my understanding FTC only acts based on complaints issued by consumers and depending on how many, and on what company they base lawsuits. Some are you are looking way to into this, FTC will just fine them if they even win and Copeac will continue running shitty offers once again.

If you where smart you could of seen this miles away due to misleading articles and all the bullshit offers for those gay berrys.

papajohn56 · 04-26-2011, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scheme

From my understanding FTC only acts based on complaints issued by consumers and depending on how many, and on what company they base lawsuits. Some are you are looking way to into this, FTC will just fine them if they even win and Copeac will continue running shitty offers once again.

If you where smart you could of seen this miles away due to misleading articles and all the bullshit offers for those gay berrys.

Partially true. The FTC bases its cases on complaints largely yes, but for this campaign of lawsuits they went after the affiliates. Most people would complain about the billing and the product itself, which those pages have largely been compliant.

Sonny Forelli · 04-26-2011, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papajohn56

Partially true. The FTC bases its cases on complaints largely yes, but for this campaign of lawsuits they went after the affiliates. Most people would complain about the billing and the product itself, which those pages have largely been compliant.

They already did that, am I really the only person who remembers late '09?

Nothing changed and now they try this approach. Cannot honestly be a surprise to anyone especially as they already highlighted their problem areas that they cite in many of these cases.

papajohn56 · 04-26-2011, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sonny Forelli

They already did that, am I really the only person who remembers late '09?

Nothing changed and now they try this approach. Cannot honestly be a surprise to anyone especially as they already highlighted their problem areas that they cite in many of these cases.

Yeah but advertisers did end up changing their pages to comply. The word "free" wasn't on the pages, they didn't sell CC info to other rebillers anymore, etc.

04-15-2011, 04:33 PM	#52 (permalink)
jabbering99 Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 27 iTrader: 0 / 0%	Copeac will be fine it's all apart of the game, homies. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

04-15-2011, 05:05 PM	#53 (permalink)
Hyphen Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 413 iTrader: 3 / 100%	Just got an email about a new AM at Copeac 30 minutes ago. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

04-15-2011, 05:41 PM	#55 (permalink)
invisible777 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,322 iTrader: 2 / 100%	paidContent - Mobile The landing pages named in here get little to no traffic Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

04-15-2011, 06:32 PM	#56 (permalink)
Mr. Websites Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Toronto Posts: 1,024 iTrader: 0 / 0%	Does this mean they won't compete with their affiliates anymore? lulz. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

04-15-2011, 09:23 PM	#57 (permalink)
tjewsky Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 789 iTrader: 0 / 0%	I don't feel bad for Copeac or others in the same boat....gigs been up for quite sometime, those who continue will meet the same fate. The bigger they are the harder they fall. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

04-17-2011, 08:44 PM	#61 (permalink)
mgtarheels Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 969 iTrader: 39 / 100%	Bloggers are right to be upset; the Guides violate the First Amendment. The Guides treat blogger endorsements as advertisements and attempt to regulate them as such. Unlike other speech, advertising is considered commercial speech and thus receives reduced First Amendment protection... Consumers should be wary of government policies that favor one form of media over another. Government discrimination among media forms based on “editorial independence” is unprecedented. The Court has already ruled that the government may not legally prescribe editorial standards for newspaper; to do so would violate the First Amendment by interfering with newspapers' "exercise of editorial control and judgment." Yet the principle underlying the Guides is that the FTC may distinguish between blogs and newspapers based on its perceptions of "editorial responsibility." Even if bloggers are, on average, less "editorially responsible" than print media, allowing the government to favor certain media forms would allow it to manipulate the "marketplace of ideas" just as direct interference with editorial content would. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

04-18-2011, 06:02 PM	#64 (permalink)
Firelead Affiliate Network Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: PA Posts: 584 iTrader: 2 / 100%	I'm just curious why they aren't suing The Onion too? /troll Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Firelead Affiliate Network Follow me on Twitter

04-19-2011, 11:51 PM	#66 (permalink)
ClickPimpsta Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 1 iTrader: 0 / 0%	The ftc is going after marketers that are promoting acai offers through fake news sites. The FTC complaints allege that typical fake news sites have titles such as “News 6 News Alerts,” “Health News Health Alerts,” or “Health 5 Beat Health News.” The sites often include the names and logos of major media outlets – such as ABC, Fox News, CBS, CNN, USA Today, and Consumer Reports – and falsely represent that the reports on the sites have been seen on these networks. An investigative-sounding headline on one such site proclaims “Acai Berry Diet Exposed: Miracle Diet or Scam?” The sub-headline reads, “As part of a new series: ‘Diet Trends: A look at America’s Top Diets’ we examine consumer tips for dieting during a recession.” The article that follows purports to document a reporter’s first-hand experience with acai berry supplements – typically claiming to have lost 25 pounds in four weeks. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

04-25-2011, 02:32 PM	#75 (permalink)
tacoX is RYAN EAGLE Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 1,697 iTrader: 0 / 0%	They got the bird curse. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Weekly Pay, 3200 Offers, and Affiliate Guides with EWA Network

04-26-2011, 12:53 AM	#78 (permalink)
Scheme Money makes me cum Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Posts: 971 iTrader: 6 / 88%	From my understanding FTC only acts based on complaints issued by consumers and depending on how many, and on what company they base lawsuits. Some are you are looking way to into this, FTC will just fine them if they even win and Copeac will continue running shitty offers once again. If you where smart you could of seen this miles away due to misleading articles and all the bullshit offers for those gay berrys. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ http://profitkingsmedia.com/sig5.jpg

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How I Lost $4,600 through COPEAC	Robert827	Affiliate Marketing	167	08-20-2010 02:48 AM
Azoogle whoring Jonathan Volk = LMAO	Truffles	Affiliate Marketing	54	03-02-2010 06:56 AM
COPEAC: why no postback?	ilsoph	Affiliate Marketing	3	09-29-2007 07:26 PM
Have you had this problem with Copeac?	riddarhusetgal	Affiliate Marketing	4	05-17-2007 09:01 AM
I recommend Copeac	Jon	Affiliate Marketing	43	11-29-2006 06:35 PM