Boycott Thieving LookSmart . . .

[Rockrz]

These guys are theives. We all should boycott them ASAP.
(they are about to go broke anyway)

For more info, go to: http://scumware.com/hall1.html

[Blue]

Welcome to the forums, Rockrz! :hi:

[ihelpyou]

Welcome to the forums Rockrz! :hi:

It is very troubling.

[Rockrz]

Lets get together a class action lawsuit for CASH money!!!

I think we should break the financial backs of the TopText
software people & all the advertisers that are using this
technology.

Lets get some money in Federal court for this copyright
infringement.

Is there a movement for legal action yet? If so, where do
I sign up at? I want some of their money . . . .

[Blue]

Rockrz,

If you haven't already, read this (http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/t415/s.html) looooooooooooong thread (you should probably set aside a day or two :rolleyes: ).

**************

Doug, as a proponent of LookSmart, or at least a proponent of [i]submitting to[\i] LookSmart, how do you feel about this?

Oh, and welcome back :cheers: .

[lots0cash]

Rockrz,
If you can find a copyright Attorney that says we have a chance against ezula, toptext, gator or any other page theif, PLEASE let me know. I have been talking to Attorneys about this since July of this year and the consensus is we don’t stand a chance in any US court, unless the copyright laws are changed.

I did speak to one Attorney that said he would be willing to start the action for $50,000.00 cash upfront, but he assured me that we would lose, because of the current laws.
:mad:

[MakeMeTop]

>Lets get together a class action lawsuit for CASH money!!!

Why :confused:

I can't see what L$ are doing apart from getting more traffic for L$ customers? I may not like the method - but my clients benefit. What am I going to say? Let's remove your listing from MSN - from a point of principle?

If I did that, I would go broke quickly! Far better for the large SEO customers of L$ to say - "don't like getting tarred with this brush.."

Saying boycott them is foolish. Are you going to get surfers to boycott MSN? If you think so - dream on.. :)

[ihelpyou]

Yes Barry. Very good points. What concerns me is the very fact that those same visitors our clients are getting from MSN are being stolen right back by Looksmart. If that visitor has Ezulu installed on their computer they are given links from Ezulu and Looksmart right on their own web pages that are ranked on MSN!!

MSN and Looksmart give our clients the traffic, BUT, they then proceed to steal our page content and visitors by putting their links on OUR pages that wisk our visitors away to another web site!

[MakeMeTop]

>If that visitor has Ezulu..

I agree entirely, Doug. The argument is with Ezulu and I firmly support any way we can get rid of these people. Unfortunately, it is the surfer who has been 'infected' with Ezulu - and nothing to do with L$. If the user surfs MSN and has Ezulu we still can get burned with or without the L$ relationship. We should make our feelings known to L$ to get them to withdraw from the relationship. Attacking them directly will do nothing (IMHO).

[ihelpyou]

I am not sure I understand this:
and nothing to do with L$
Looksmart is who we submit our clients to in order to get them on the first page of results on MSN. Looksmart recently partnered with Ezula to get into the scumware links. This has a bunch to do with Looksmart and Ezula both.

Looksmart is stealing our visitors by partnering with Ezula. If our visitor comes from MSN and has the scumware installed, Looksmart via Ezula can steal them right back.

I do have a call into looksmart for a call back. I truly want to know the "why" about this partnership.

[Rockrz]

yeah, but no matter how you slice it, these people are all guilty of stealing and should be dealt with in a court of law.

They are taking something that does not belong to them.
And that is wrong.

In the world of business, this will cost them money if/when someone takes them to court.

If we make it expensive for them to keep this up, they'll eventually quit because it's isn't cost effective -and they'll also quit when a court of law commands them to stop & desist.

If musicians can bring suit against someone stealing their intellectual property, so can webmasters.

It's just a matter of time.
I may consult with a few lawyers here in town, and see what can be done.

Who knows, I might become famous & rich.
(open to bids for my memoirs . . . minimum bid: $1 million)

[MsSearch]

:hi: Rockrz and welcome to the forums

While the fact that Looksmart has partnered with this scum angers me, I have not seen any drop in traffic.

[ihelpyou]

I don't know what you mean by that MS? Your traffic will be the same from MSN or Looksmart. What happens is when that visitor you get from MSN comes to your site, and also has the scumware loaded on their computer, Looksmart will put links on your pages that lead your visitor to another web site. They steal your traffic you earned from them to begin with. You do not know when this happens and will never know.

[MsSearch]

oops..my bad, should have reread my post (i am in pre-vacation mode) ... I meant that our sales haven't dropped/decreased...

[ihelpyou]

Okay. I finally talked to a "Sandy" in the Looksmart business development office. She is on the second level and knew all about the Ezula thing. She was very friendly and truly listened to what I had to say.

LS is familiar with all the bad publicity they are receiving right now and is in a test mode with this software. She said they would be weighing all the pros and cons of this.

I truly, truly hope that Looksmart makes the right decision and ceases their relationship with the scumware. If not, it will be straight downhill for them. That I do know as a fact.

[MsSearch]

Did you reqeust that 'Sandy' read some of the threads going on here that mentions people's opinions of scumware?

[lots0cash]

Doug I hope you invited L$ here!!

As a contributor to zeal (I refuse to call myself a “zealot” - don’t like the word) I am very unhappy with this L$-ezula connection. I have stopped donating my time (which I think is somewhat valuable) to zeal as my small form of protest to this unholy coupling.

If L$ continues this marriage made in hell with those scumbags, I do not think in good conscience I could continue to donate my time to zeal.

Just my opinion

[ihelpyou]

Oh yes. I pointed them to these forums. They already knew about scumware.com.

[buckworks.com]

Folks here who are concerned about scumware might be interested in what's happening in the forums at abestweb.com (http://www.abestweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi)

A number of affiliates are undertaking a letter-writing campaign directed at merchants who have been implicated in the use of scumware programs, in particular one called "SaveNow" from WhenU. In some cases the merchants' involvement is unwitting, because it's an affiliate who is using predatory advertising methods, and as soon as the merchant realizes what's going on they are dropping the affiliate. The WhenU software spawns popup windows based on one's page content - even the merchants! - in effect positioning themselves to grab a commission which rightfully belongs to the affiliate who did the work to deliver an interested customer to the merchant.

Parasitic link placement should be scorned and spurned just as much as spam email is, no matter what the legalities are. This is not an issue where we can depend on the law to support what is RIGHT, because it will take ages for legislation to catch up with what's happening now, let alone what might come along next month. We need to express our outrage directly to merchants and their agents and let them know that if they want to maintain the reputation of being ethical and honest, they will avoid this form of promotion, period.

I'll stop now, but I could go on, and on, and on ...

Elisabeth Archambault

[buckworks.com]

I just wrote to LookSmart. If anyone wants to copy/adapt this for their own use, please do so.

===========

Hello,

I was prepared to pay for a listing in LookSmart's directory, but I've had second thoughts since I learned that LookSmart is in active partnership with Ezula/TopText.

I consider TopText's methods of parasitic link placement to be THEFT, plain and simple, and I am extremely disappointed to learn that LookSmart effectively condones their methods through their partnership with TopText.

I will not be spending any money with LookSmart until I learn that you have stopped working with companies which engage in parasitical link placement (often called "scumware").

I prefer to invest my promotional resources to work with companies that show higher ethical standards than this.

Elisabeth Archambault

Site Owner

BuckWorks Online Shopping Directory
====================

I must confess that my little boycott is made easier by the fact that the business case for listing my site with LookSmart was just borderline! -- EJA

[ihelpyou]

That is a very good letter. It's essentially what I told them over the phone when they said they were testing. They best only be testing, that's all I have to say. It would be hard to believe they would not listen to the very web sites who have got them to where they are anyway. They are robbing Peter to pay Paul, which has never worked in the past and never will in the future.

Their demise is a fact if they continue on this path.

[bigblock]

Their demise is a fact if they continue on this path.

agreed. Especially considering that this is certainly not Looksmart's first foray into the dark side of the force.

Their paid listing program, for sites that want to submit more than 5 URLs, is pay-per-click (very high priced pay-per-click as well), and is incorporated into their standard listing results, with no mention of paid advertising.

Additionally, I highly suspect that they are artificially boosting these PPC links (makes sense, don't it?) to increase their PPC revenue. No hard proof, though.

Anyone with their hands that deep in micro$oft's pockets is highly suspect to begin with.

Looksmart is grasping at straws, and will try every evil trick it can on the way to its eventual doom.

[ihelpyou]

I do hold out hope as the Gal I talked to at Looksmart said they were "testing" things to see if they want to continue with Ezula. Maybe they will stop?

[MsSearch]

Hopefully they will stop...there is nothing (that i can find) on Looksmart's site that mentions any sort of partnership with Ezula. Seems they are trying to keep things quiet on their end...which'll make it easier if they do back out of this scummy deal.

[MakeMeTop]

>I highly suspect that they are artificially boosting these PPC links .....

They certainly are in the UK!!!

Try this search http://synd-uk.looksmart.co.uk/synd-yah/SearchResults.jsp?key=search%20engine%20optimisation

Since when did Thomas the Tank Engine start SEO :confused:

Or this one: http://www.looksmart.co.uk/SearchResults.jsp?key=uk+eye+surgery&lan=uk&cp=2&skip=20&se=0&sir=78781&cs=4

When did Comet's dishwashers start performing eye surgery at home!

If you hover over all the results which come up before the proper ones - you will see they have a LookSmart tracking code for PPC.


Any search you do will match words from PPC vendors who will come up before standard listings!

Unfortunately this may increase their click throughs - but makes their results something of a joke :(

I have spoken to LS UK about this last week - but it hasn't been fixed yet - so maybe they need a few more complaints!

[Advisor]

Gawd...I knew the day would come when I'd finally have to start competing for SEO jobs with Thomas the Tank Engine. Guess it's time to hang up my SEO hat...who could compete with Thomas after all??? :shy:

J

[MakeMeTop]

Now I feel bad. I've just been called by LookSmart who have their engineers working to correct the problem and asked me to give them a couple of examples of how it is messing up - I did :)

[ihelpyou]

I will say one thing about Looksmart, they do seem to be concerned with customer support. They also seem to be concerned with their image. Knowing this, it is hard to explain why they have chose to partner with Ezula, even if for a short time, and knowing how the webmaster community feels about this, and has felt for along time. :confused:

[Advisor]

Originally posted by MakeMeTop
Now I feel bad. I've just been called by LookSmart who have their engineers working to correct the problem and asked me to give them a couple of examples of how it is messing up - I did :) You mean you're going to put an end to Thomas' reign as the King of SEO in LookSmart UK listings? I'll bet old Thomas won't like that. He's gonna be huffing and puffing some steam outta his lil ole stack like you wouldn't believe! Toot Toot!

J

All hail the great SEO God Thomas the Tank Engine!

[Advisor]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
I will say one thing about Looksmart, they do seem to be concerned with customer support. They also seem to be concerned with their image. Knowing this, it is hard to explain why they have chose to partner with Ezula, even if for a short time, and knowing how the webmaster community feels about this, and has felt for along time. :confused: Are you boycotting them yet, Dougie? This must be hard on you. I know how much you like(d) them.

J

[ihelpyou]

If they continue to be with scumware..... oh yes, I will boycott and just find other ways for sites to get spidered. I have not as of yet (submitted one today), and am waiting patiently for them to make a good decision.

[Advisor]

How long ya gonna give 'em? Seems like they've been doing this ezula thing for many months now and have made their decision. If they don't see any negative impact (i.e., people like you boycotting them) why would they stop doing it. As a parent, I know that threats of punishment don't have the same (or any) impact as actual punishment!

Just 2 cents.

J

[ihelpyou]

Well, since I just talked to their business development office only 2 weeks ago, I need to give them some time. They told me then that they are "testing" and are very aware of the negative publicity they are getting.

[Alan Perkins]

What are they "testing"?

[ihelpyou]

I took it they are weighing the pros and cons. The negatives and positives of being associated with Ezula. It probably comes down to the almight dollar and if they get more in return than the negative publicity dishes out.

It's hard for me to understand what kind of decision they are making as WE are the very people who have gotten them to where they are. They would wish to ruin that? Who knows.

[Alan Perkins]

What cons - in almighty dollar terms - are they seeing?

IMO you would be doing them a favour to boycott them now - it would allow them to evaluate the true extent of your feelings, which is what they are trying to "test", surely.

[Advisor]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
I took it they are weighing the pros and cons. The negatives and positives of being associated with Ezula. It probably comes down to the almight dollar and if they get more in return than the negative publicity dishes out.

It's hard for me to understand what kind of decision they are making as WE are the very people who have gotten them to where they are. They would wish to ruin that? Who knows. That's what I'm saying. If everyone waits to see what happens and no one actually boycotts looksmart, then they figure everything has blown over and things are cool as is. Why should they stop using ezula just because a few "crazies" say they'll boycott looksmart (but really don't). I'll bet they're not seeing any negative effects to their partnership and that's why they haven't done anything to stop it. In fact, they're probably making lots of money out of it.

The fact of the matter is as SEO's we need looksmart right now, whether we like it or not. We know it, they know it. Until they're not important to be listed in, we have no choice but to use them, whether or not they are scum.

J

[ihelpyou]

Oh yes, I realize this. The negative PR they are getting and will continue to get has to have an affect on the bottom line anyway. I plan on calling them again in about one month or so.

Believe me, I was NOT a happy camper when talking the first time. I gave them quite a piece of my mind and was outright mad. Maybe I am not one of their best customers but spending the kind of money I have spent with them over the past year and even since they started the "pay" for inclusion, I think they did listen to me.

Let's see. How many thousands over the last year? Quite a few. (insert grin here)

[lots0cash]

Unfortunately, I think Doug & Jill are correct It probably comes down to the almight dollar

There are several companies out there that teamed up with ezula on the Q.T.

Download.com – if it were not for this company promoting ezula(kazaa), and not telling the user what this crap really is before they downloaded it, there would not be tens of millions of users with Spyware crap-dodo installed on their computers. Of course download.com denies they made any money from ezula, ya right, who paid for all that bandwidth!!

Commission Junction – Here is a real winner, This Company recruits affiliates for business then cj uses ezula to steal the commission from the affiliate. I guess that’s why they call themselves commission junction, your commission hits a junction and goes in their pocket, not yours. (From what I understand - I don’t know this for a fact, cj has shut down their affiliate forum; I guess too many affiliates were complaining about ezula stealing their commissions.)

Now L$ enters this stellar group of outstanding Internet business, what can I say, not much that can be printed here. I will make one prediction though, if L$ makes any money at all from ezula, they will stay with them till there is no more L$, no matter what webmasters, SEO’s or the crazies say.

[buckworks.com]

Regarding Commission Junction's forums = yes, they were closed, and while some of their concerns were legitimate the way they handled the closing was simply tacky. It's not accurate to say that discussions of scumware were part of the reason though. That topic simply hadn't come up by then.

A number of folks who used to frequent CJ's forums have found each other in the forums at http://www.abestweb.com/ if anyone's interested. There are some hot and heavy discussions about "parasiteware" and its implications for affiliate marketers. The biggest focus of these discussions is WhenU, although there's lots of other scumware to talk about too.

Don't get me started ...

[lots0cash]

It's not accurate to say that discussions of scumware were part of the reason though. That topic simply hadn't come up by then. Not correct Buckworks. I was banned from the cj forums in August of last year for talking about this in there forums. The reason you never saw the posts was because they were being deleted as soon as they popped up and the posters were being banned. I know this for a fact…

P.S. I saw a 65% reduction in my commision from cj right after they hooked up with ezula.

[buckworks.com]

Hmmm ... that's something I didn't know. I was away in July/August and I certainly didn't come across the topic in the archives when I was catching up after my holiday.

CJ's approach to the whole scumware issue is dismaying. They seem to be endorsing parasitic link placement as an acceptable way to do business on the internet.

I've been actively looking for other affiliate networks and individual merchants with affiliate programs so that CJ will become a smaller piece of my pie. I know there are other affiliates doing the same. What CJ might gain in one pocket they will lose in another. Unethical behaviour never wins in the long run.

[Advisor]

Unethical behaviour never wins in the long run. And that's the key to everything in life!

J

[Blue]

LOL

...no matter what webmasters, SEO’s or the crazies say.

Finally! Some proof that us webmasters and SEO's are not crazy!

:rolleyes:

LOL