Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 87
  1. #1
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    Okay This is based on Norton and the Fair content trade act within Cj's products and links

    1. millions of people have Norton Ad Blocker to block cj ads and cookies, I think in this case Tracking is effected. This needs to be fixed now. not later. Christmas is coming up soon and you cj will lose money because affiliates will not get any sales. there is millions of Affiliates and theres millions of Customers who have Norton ad blocker installed. That's a large amount of people with Norton Installed. What norton is doing is Interfering with: FTC site content Fair Trade Act 2002.

    FTC site content Fair Trade Act 2002:
    Article 10

    No monopolistic enterprises shall:

    directly or indirectly prevent any other enterprises from competing by unfair means;
    improperly set, maintain or change the price for goods or the remuneration for services;
    make a trading counterpart give preferential treatment without justification; or
    otherwise abuse its market power.

    They are altering links and using there market power to install on millions of computers. This needs to be delt with now they are infringing on our business growth.

    Am I not right Hello Cj has millions of Affiliates correct? and millions of there customers are using Norton. What do others think On norton. what is Cj doing about this? Todd can we have a answer? Because based on my traffic I believe either cj tracking is or thousands of customers have norton ad blocking enabled.

  2. #2
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,423
    How is norton a monopoly again? Why don't you ***** at norton more or any of the other networks, instead of CJ?

    CJ's tracking in this case, is not affected. To blame this on CJ alone is silly. To say they must start a lawsuit they will lose, is silly. Yes, this sucks, but I don't get this post and this kind of nonsensical CJ bashing is getting old. Go yell at linkshare, they are blocked as well - hell isn't even sharesale blocked? Go yell at Brian.

    Chet
    ps. I really don't mean for anyone to go yell at brian, but feel free to yell at linkshare.

  3. #3
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    Chez Noir, I'm not bashing CJ, I just believe that cj needs to get do something about norton, also Linkshare and shareasale do to.

    If you look at improperly set, maintain or change the price for goods or the remuneration for services I have to say this is what I'm talking about. Lets keep on Topic here and Focus on Norton. I'm not bashing anyone.

    Doesn't Norton interfere with alterting or changing links, doesn't that define it as

    improperly set, maintain or change the price for goods or the remuneration for services.

    Sure they may not be a monopoly. But it's still Infriging on "improperly set, maintain or change the price for goods or the remuneration for services" Isn't it. ?

    So don't mess with me. LOL

  4. #4
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    quote:
    hell isn't even sharesale blocked?


    No! As I understand it SAS is the only major (And, if they aren't major they will be soon) network that does not have their tracking blocked by Norton!

    Don't listen to those who would have you think SAS merchants don't sell, either. My May SAS check alone will pay all my bills! The others simply buy quality of life stuff.
    Comments are opinion unless otherwise noted. Remember, pillage first. Then burn. Half of all people in the world have IQs under 100. You best learn to trust ol' SSanf!

  5. #5
    ABW Ambassador Radegast's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,978
    quote:
    Originally posted by jasonco12:
    No monopolistic enterprises shall:

    directly or indirectly prevent any other enterprises from competing by unfair means;



    If that's a literal quote from the FTC we are in trouble.

    It says monopolies shall not prevent other enterprises from using unfair means to compete.

    Does no-one care about the English language anymore? I thought the whole litigious aparatus revolved around these subtleties...???

  6. #6
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,423
    Jason, you posted in the CJ forum with the title, oops, you changed the title - but the new one doesn't make any more sense. "CJ is infringing on the Fair Trade Act of 2002?" huh?

    You also include the quote:
    quote:
    I hate Complaining about cj's interface and tracking but it needs to be noticed


    Sounds like bashing/complaining to me.

    And what does this mean in regard to CJ?
    quote:
    If you look at improperly set, maintain or change the price for goods or the remuneration for services I have to say this is what I'm talking about.


    This whole thing gets a big, Huh? Please explain it to me how this deals with CJ. Just don't quote the law some more, in your own words.

    There are legit grievances against some companies, but when you throw in these nonsensical attacks, it only weakens everyone else.

    Ask yourself, what is the purpose of this thread? Who is the audience, what do you want to change? If you just want to vent, fine, vent. But I really don't understand your point here past venting, venting against CJ.

    Chet

  7. #7
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    Though cj has product links, With Norton ad blocker isn't the product links altered and that means that it has been changed. Even parasites are infringing on the Site content Fair Trade Act 2002? Am I not right.

    And Isn't Norton defined as a monopoly. They are installed on millions on computers, they own anti virus, ad blocking, security they should be defined as a monopoly since they get installed on millions of computer in which in this care infringes on others peoples businesses. I'm getting the Definition of monopoly right now. Lets continue this thread!

    Chez Noir- It's based on Cj's content, Cj owns the products though there System that's how it's related to cj. I'll make it clearer.

  8. #8
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,423
    SSanf, that wasn't meant as a bash on Brian and SAS. But if a third party wants to block a site or banner with the users consent, there isn't much the blocked company can do, it isn't their fault. They can request for Norton to change their behavior, or clarify their criteria, but since the norton blocker arbitrarily blocks so much stuff, I can't see them caring what anyone thinks.

    Chet

  9. #9
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    dictionary.reference.com

    The definition of monopolistic

    Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: “Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals” (Milton Friedman).
    Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.

    A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
    A commodity or service so controlled.

    Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth.
    Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly.

    Right here:

    A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
    A commodity or service so controlled.
    It's installed on millions of Computers correct? it should be exclusive control on peoples computers.

  10. #10
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,423
    jasonco, I don't think you understand the word monopoly and how it applies here. Norton is not the only player in that market, while yes, it does have control over their customers computers in a sense, it does not have control over the firewall/banner blocker market. For it to be a monopoly, it would have to be the only player, or the far and away dominate player with no alternatives.

    True monopolies are few and far between. Popular does not equal monopoly.

    Just to clarify, according to your definition, every piece of software - that was the only one of that type - on your pc would be a monopoly. Which unless all you had was the game monopoly installed, would not be true.

    Chet

  11. #11
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    Chez Noir, Okay maybe your right on the Manopoly issue but I think it does effect people and something to think about. I mean it's related to basically more then the Ad blockers,parasites,Some adware. i do believe though that if it changes goods or changes services should be illegal. what do others think? It alters cj's creative links and products. something to think about? Basically this should be moved to the parasite forum?

  12. #12
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    Jason and other people seem to think that CJ can do something to make Norton mind and stop blocking CJ links. He is basically demanding that CJ do that.

    He wants to use CJ advertisers and is mad that, in his opinion, CJ just isn't doing what they can to insure that Norton stops blocking CJ links.

    That is why it is in the CJ thread.
    Comments are opinion unless otherwise noted. Remember, pillage first. Then burn. Half of all people in the world have IQs under 100. You best learn to trust ol' SSanf!

  13. #13
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,423
    Has norton ever done a drive-by install? Does it make money by intercepting our pages and cashing in on them? Why would you move this to the parasite forum, what is parasitic about their ad blocker?

    Affiliate marketers are not on the top of the food chain, the whole world is not going to bend because we ask it to, so we can make a buck. People chose to install this crap on their PCs. It is neither a trojan nor a parasite. To call it one, would be a disservice to all the work done against parasites, all the people who have investigated and worked on the issue.

    Does it suck? Yes. Do I wish there was a way to circumnavigate it? I only know of one. Give visitors a reason to want to see your site and content and explain to them why they might not be able to if they are running Nortons.

    Chet

  14. #14
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    SSanf- You are correct. There has been no official notice from cj whatsoever that there working on the Norton issue. I mean millions of people have norton installed, that alot of loss revenue if you think about it.

  15. #15
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    Chez Noir, Drive By installs aren't the only parasites that Exist, Norton is changing links that too me is also defined as parasiteware.
    changing, intercepting or redirecting an affiliate link is also a parasite

    The definition is:

    is technology (including, but not restricted to, browser helpers, browser plug-ins, toolbars and pop ups/sliders) that knowingly or unknowingly undermines or removes another affiliate's ability to compete by changing, intercepting or redirecting an affiliate link
    Am I not right the definition is right there Chez Noir!

  16. #16
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,423
    And by your own definition, they are not parasitic. They are not competing against you, they are not another affiliate.

    Chet

  17. #17
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    My opinion is that if CJ could have done something about this they would have by now. Norton isn't about to bend over to kiss CJ's butt. It is just a burden that anyone using CJ merchants will have to put up with.

    You don't like having broken images and broken links on your site, use programs that Norton doesn't interfere with. If you think that Norton users are too few to matter or that you can get people to turn off Norton, go ahead and use CJ. It is your choice.
    Comments are opinion unless otherwise noted. Remember, pillage first. Then burn. Half of all people in the world have IQs under 100. You best learn to trust ol' SSanf!

  18. #18
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    And by your own definition, they are not parasitic. They are not competing against you, they are not another affiliate.

    Chez Noir: changing, intercepting or redirecting an affiliate link, And they are competing with me. You see they sell there software so they make money by changing other links. I agree SSanf I'm not focusing on cj that much anymore. Anyway Chez Noir we all have different opinions and I believe Norton is a parasite because they change links. Period!

  19. #19
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,423
    SSanf, bingo. We aren't on the top of the food chain, they will not change just for us.

    jasonco, you can say that fairies and unicorns are stealing your comissions. That will not make it true. Your definition voids them of being parasitic, so you ignore your own definition?

    That was my point for posting in this thread, these kinds of attacks, with no thought behind them, with no purpose and no even goal do one thing - they add another boy crying wolf against one of the networks. And that hurts all of us who are not crying wolf.

    Chet

  20. #20
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    Chet, hey add another boy crying wolf against one of the networks, I'm not crying wolf I"m just saying that Norton to me in a parasite. I'm making good $ and didn't post this without any thought. people need to understand that Norton does change links and is considered a parasite because they do change links.

    I agree They will not change for us. I brought this up so others may be aware of it. i wasn't attacking cj at all. I was just letting others know that this is a big deal and we could be out of a business if something doesn't get fixed soon or we switch to ways where we can bypass Norton's operation. I have other ways of making money then cj. Anyway Norton does interfere with changing links and that too me should be considered in the Site content Fair Trade Act 2002, since it alters or changes links of products and services.

  21. #21
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    461
    Although I stand by the post I just deleted. I deleted it for reasons that came to mind after I posted it. I just don't have the time defending my position from the type of questions or comments I see coming from it, not to mention possible repercussions from a clause in the policy that might be there. I know most companies have the type of clause in its policy or agreement I am thinking of.

    Besides, based on history, I see it doing no good anyway, with this thread getting lost with the rest of similar threads of complaining, and nothing being done to force change.

  22. #22
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    Jasonco,
    I understand your concerns about Norton. I have the same concerns. Excluding a few side web design jobs that I take on a very limited basis, my affiliate sites make up 100% of my income and I make more most months than the month before. I have made a living exclusively on the web since 1997.
    I'll stick my neck out and say that anyone making a good living in affiliate marketing puts out no less than 50 new pages a day and is up late nights tweaking, touching and wondering how to make their pages better and drive more traffic to them.
    With any due respect, over the last 23 months since you joined ABW, you have made an average of 200.65 posts per month.
    I'll bet that if you redirected your energy spent complaining about CJ (which all posts that I've seen from you do) toward putting more pages out, SEO and other marketing techniques, your income would grow too.
    There are always going to be parasites, security programs, hackers, etc. but those who endure will be the ones who find a way to work around these things and move forward.
    Just my two bits.
    Scott


  23. #23
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,133
    CJ has nothing to loose and everything to gain by pursuing ligitagation against Symantec. Further, with Valueclick behind the wheel they have even more resources to throw into addressing this issue and Valueclick itself should be researching the ins and out of possible ways to stop this.

    To ignore it and do nothing would be nothing short of putting blinders on. I have yet to understand why any intelligent affiliate would suggest they should do nothing...Boggling to say the least, if not border line ignorant.

  24. #24
    ABW Veteran jc101's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,597
    scohaz Thanks for the information. I actually have tooken quite a bit of time making pages this month and I'm actually Making more as we speak. Anyway that's my 2 cents.

  25. #25
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,663
    quote:
    Doesn't Norton interfere with alterting or changing links, doesn't that define it as improperly set, maintain or change the price for goods or the remuneration for services.


    This has nothing to do with monopolies and the phrase you keep citing has nothing to do with the problem Norton is causing. Last I checked, Norton doesn't set, maintain or change any prices. It blocks ads, short and simple. To suggest it changes prices is quite a stretch of imagination.

    Check with a lawyer for applicable statutes.

    Wayne

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Looking for Fair Trade Goods Affiliate Programs
    By solaris955 in forum Newbie Affiliate FAQs & Helpful Articles
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: January 7th, 2007, 11:27 AM
  2. Trade links with solid content site
    By Sid in forum Midnight Cafe'
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2004, 10:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •