Attorney General Madigan Files Suit Against local affiliate marketer
- Thread starter pocketrockets
- Start date
Well, for the sites that were listed, point 128 in the suit specifically mentions sending a DMCA notice to a couple of the domains. Whether or not DMCA notices were sent out to all of the URLs in question still remains to be confirmed, but there's a pretty good chance a lot of the infringing bodies received them
not true. there's 2 different suits filed, the one by oprah/oz has been filed in Federal court in NY.
The second suit was filed by the IL AG and only concerns Amirouche and Norton LLC, Netalab, and Crush LLC
Not sure I agree but I don't think anyone truly knows the full scope of this suit at this point. I may be wrong.
I have read both docs but in reality, the simple truth is that 500 domains is just the tip of the iceberg. It's obvious to me that they're not going after everyone. If they were, you could add a few 0's to that number.
Azoogle saying bye bye to money or something.
Dear Publishers,
For several years now, the Azoogle Network (AZN) has prided itself on being an industry leader in online marketing compliance, often taking a far more conservative approach than most in our overall marketing standards and investing millions of dollars into compliance tools and resources, both human and technical. The events of the last 48 hours, highlighted below, underscore the reasons why we have taken this approach and been so steadfast in how we advise you, our valued affiliates, each and every day.
The Illinois State Attorney General’s Office, Oprah Winfrey, and Dr. Oz have filed a number of suits in the past day which may affect your business. The lawsuits send a clear message that using deceptive ad content, e.g., fake celebrity endorsements, not disclosing the price and re-bill terms, using fake blogs, etc., will not be tolerated. Please read the following for more information:
The Illinois State AG has filed actions against three parties for deceptive advertising practices in the marketing of acai berry products and other dietary supplements. Please keep in mind that the regulators are choosing to directly pursue affiliate marketers for their marketing practices. The full text of the press release can be found here: http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/pressroom/2009_08/20090819.html.
Dr. Oz and Oprah Winfrey have also filed a lawsuit in New York for copyright and trademark infringement against approximately 50 companies, including advertisers, suppliers, ad networks, and affiliates. To put it bluntly, they are very unhappy of their celebrity status being used to market dietary supplements and cosmetics, without their permission. They have specifically listed hundreds of affiliate sites they want discontinued immediately, because the URLs use their name or the sites claim endorsements from Oprah/Dr. Oz. The full story can be found here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32483484/ns/entertainment-celebrities/
Finally, keep our guidelines in mind when you are creating your ad content. An advertisement or affiliate:
Must not use falsified consumer testimonials or postings.
If any testimonials/photos/first person accounts/etc. are used, appropriate documentation must be submitted to AZN. Talk to your network manager for more information.
Must not use photos of celebrities or falsified endorsements.
Must not use altered pictures and represent that those pictures are of actual consumers.
Must not use fake blogs or fake news sites to promote content.
Must not use of the word “FREE” on anything that is not completely free. ‘Free’, ‘Try it Free’, ‘Free Sample’, etc. are not acceptable.
Must not have a “comments” section without a “reply” or “post” option.
We hope that this information has been helpful to you. Should you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to your Affiliate Manager, or me, directly.
Mitch Richler
Senior Vice President of Distribution
Dear Publishers,
For several years now, the Azoogle Network (AZN) has prided itself on being an industry leader in online marketing compliance, often taking a far more conservative approach than most in our overall marketing standards and investing millions of dollars into compliance tools and resources, both human and technical. The events of the last 48 hours, highlighted below, underscore the reasons why we have taken this approach and been so steadfast in how we advise you, our valued affiliates, each and every day.
The Illinois State Attorney General’s Office, Oprah Winfrey, and Dr. Oz have filed a number of suits in the past day which may affect your business. The lawsuits send a clear message that using deceptive ad content, e.g., fake celebrity endorsements, not disclosing the price and re-bill terms, using fake blogs, etc., will not be tolerated. Please read the following for more information:
The Illinois State AG has filed actions against three parties for deceptive advertising practices in the marketing of acai berry products and other dietary supplements. Please keep in mind that the regulators are choosing to directly pursue affiliate marketers for their marketing practices. The full text of the press release can be found here: http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/pressroom/2009_08/20090819.html.
Dr. Oz and Oprah Winfrey have also filed a lawsuit in New York for copyright and trademark infringement against approximately 50 companies, including advertisers, suppliers, ad networks, and affiliates. To put it bluntly, they are very unhappy of their celebrity status being used to market dietary supplements and cosmetics, without their permission. They have specifically listed hundreds of affiliate sites they want discontinued immediately, because the URLs use their name or the sites claim endorsements from Oprah/Dr. Oz. The full story can be found here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32483484/ns/entertainment-celebrities/
Finally, keep our guidelines in mind when you are creating your ad content. An advertisement or affiliate:
Must not use falsified consumer testimonials or postings.
If any testimonials/photos/first person accounts/etc. are used, appropriate documentation must be submitted to AZN. Talk to your network manager for more information.
Must not use photos of celebrities or falsified endorsements.
Must not use altered pictures and represent that those pictures are of actual consumers.
Must not use fake blogs or fake news sites to promote content.
Must not use of the word “FREE” on anything that is not completely free. ‘Free’, ‘Try it Free’, ‘Free Sample’, etc. are not acceptable.
Must not have a “comments” section without a “reply” or “post” option.
We hope that this information has been helpful to you. Should you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to your Affiliate Manager, or me, directly.
Mitch Richler
Senior Vice President of Distribution
Those rules make perfect sense to me, there are more ways to promote websites than just review sites, flogs, or farticles. I hope one good thing to come out of this is that affiliates who do nothing but jack landing pages die off.
It does not. And your reasoning as to why it does has nothing to do with what Azoogle supposedly is trying to achieve. But carry on.
Those guidelines seem like common sense to me. Fake celeb endorsements, before/after pictures, testimonials, and false representation is something that the FTC has repeatedly been able to win in court. I'd rather have the networks making making the rules instead of waiting for the FTC to start handing out lawsuits and injunctions. They already raided the offices of Vantex so they're obviously on the trail.
No one can be shocked by this. This has trademark infringement written all over it on day 1. Maybe only IL affiliates are affected now, but don't think she won't try to push this nationwide.
Sure. Now just tell me what the layout/design of the landing page and comments have to do with any of that. I can do any of those things using any design. And using a blog-type of page will not automatically get you sued by the FTC and AG.
Here's a gem, sorry if it's a repost:
Oprah Winfrey Sues Resveratrol Seller - BusinessWeek
These companies aren't going to even think twice -- it's all the affiliate's fault. Odd they had no beef with the deceptive and false advertising for the past 12-18 months, only now do they have an issue.
Oprah Winfrey Sues Resveratrol Seller - BusinessWeek
These companies aren't going to even think twice -- it's all the affiliate's fault. Odd they had no beef with the deceptive and false advertising for the past 12-18 months, only now do they have an issue.
Where exactly are you seeing any of that? Or are you going off of business week's shitty sub titles?
This is so crazy it made me post.. I got with an asset protection guy last year.. You would have be an idiot to not see something like this coming. The flogs/farticles got out of hand. The creative folks out there are still making this work. Once you start seeing hiphop flogs with LL cool J on the banners, then its really time to stop. They're giving whatever they get to charity? Hah!
Anyway, PM me if you want my CPA's contact (AIM me if you know it.), dude is like a mad scientist with asset protection.
Anyway, PM me if you want my CPA's contact (AIM me if you know it.), dude is like a mad scientist with asset protection.
Huh? Read the 53 page lawsuit.
Dr. Oz (Zo Co) and Oprah Winfrey (Harpo) filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of the State of New York. The companies/individuals in the lawsuit are located all over the US (they list the addresses of all defendants) -- if they were doing and transacting business within the State of New York and this Judicial District, marketing, selling and/or offering for sale the infringing products via its interactive websites and its affiliate marketers.
Note the "OECD" tacked on the end there.
You can read that as "everybody except Iran and North Korea".
I'm sure they mentioned the layouts within the context of flogs and farticles that don't follow their other guidelines (endorsements, photos, testimonials etc), I doubt they care about your HTML and CSS. What they do care about is when you make it seem as if real people are leaving positive feedback ("I just made $1,000 from google with this kit") which would be false advertising and misrepresentation. It's probably not something the FTC would take you down for, but it is another sticking point they can pile on if you do other stuff or something they can try and blame the advertiser/network for allowing.
They didn't. They are two separate statements. And your interpretation doesn't even make any sense. It's like saying you aren't allowed to be nude in public and you also are not allowed to be nude in public and have white socks on.
Azoogle doesn't always follow logic. They did the same thing when they didn't allow blogs for Acai but allowed them for Rezv.