Black Hat vs Fraud: What's the Difference?

keinehabe said:

well ... fraud's definition out of the dictionary definition involve let's say an correlation with penal law's ... BH activities and techniques aren't covered by law's restrictions .... Idea it's easy to understand peoples before spoke about using an vcc for example to fill an cpa offert ... dude's WOKE UP ... it's not a fkin fraud ! the vcc IF is legal bought from any bank or provider that shiet isn't illegal ! .... if my fkin bank allow me to create virtually how manny virtual card number's I wanna I can use them like I wish and you and none don't need to care about it ... will be a fraud when I`ll stole your card and will fill same cpa offert then yes that's a fraud ... but ... the limits are highly disputable ...

Things what you have to understand it's difference between what it's allowed by law's and what it's forbidden IT's make the difference between fraud and non-fraud activities . ALL other will be maybe worst case immoral activities ... what the advertiser will lose money because an lead will be filled with a vcc ? so what who the heck care about those multimillion bastards if they are losing money I don't give a damn .

Spam for example it's illegal ! if you don't know the definition on spam go to google and check about CANSPAM act ... read and try to understand it . ALL other type of electronic communications witch aren't covered by canspam act aren't spam so aren't illegal and STILL worldwide are sent daily millions of emails '' unwanted '' or other electronic forms of commercial communications .

So ... where it's the difference between illegal and illegal stuffs ? where it's the cross line between BH and fraud ? ... one single answer it's here '' right '' . Where the penal law's will stop to cover different activities . And NO using vcc's AREN'T ILLEGAL are perfectly legal exactly like condoms for example .

Click to expand...

What??? I can't understand you...

But I think you're trying to say filling in offers with VCCs aren't illegal... I got news for you, IT IS. Because you are sending in leads that networks state clearly in the agreement that they don't want. They're basically paying you for something you didn't do. It has nothing to do with VCCs being illegal or not. How you're using them to steal money from a network is fraud.

I think that the definition of BH doesn't have anything to do with ethics, but you have to supply your own ethics. I'm happy that some people are disgusted at the same things as me. Some of the "tactics" that some people use are really nothing more than stealing.

Slicing an offer to cut out cost and rebill info? Stealing. Plus, you'll get booted out of the network. People treat "fraud" as some great intangible idea, but "stealing" is pretty fucking tangible, especially when something of yours gets stolen.

You can put up an ad on CL about a "Job" (Fraud), or you can post an ad about a job board with an offer or two within it (BH). OR, you can post an info request ad for college search leads and scholarship leads (BH). Of these, only one is illegal and unethical and two are BH.

Click to expand...

The definition has nothing to do with ethics.

I'm not talking about Acai berry companies hiding the TOS being fraud. That it self is more of a legal scam. But if you do more research you will see that the companies will still charge even if you cancel the subscription. That is fraud because the customer has stated clearly that they don't want the product anymore. So basically the company is stealing money with the customer's credit card info.

I agree that BH would be to spamming offers on CL without tricking the customer. Tricking them to fill in the lead would be fraud.

Like I said before, you wont get caught. But at least admit that you're committing fraud.

Just wanted to thank everyone that has put some thought into this post. It has been a very good read. I'll tell you.. I have held high positions in companies for the past 10-12 years and I can say that if you think that some of these techniques are shady, think again.

People using fake listings to get sign ups for a credit report, or the e-whore that gets an age verification sign up are looking out for 1 person... C level execs are using methods to push the whole company ahead of the game... Just look at the banking mess we are in (inflated loans that were not sustainable in the first place) or the BS lawsuits with stock inflation (Gotta get that IPO!) or even companies searching for loopholes in intellectual property laws to take out their competitors (by finding patent infringements, etc...). Is that considered Black Hat? Or just smart business. Not sure where the line is.

There are a ton of questionable business practices, but I guess if you can get away with it... it would be considered Black Hat... Even if you are the e-whore or CL poster lookin out for numero uno.

headliner said:

Just wanted to thank everyone that has put some thought into this post. It has been a very good read. I'll tell you.. I have held high positions in companies for the past 10-12 years and I can say that if you think that some of these techniques are shady, think again.

People using fake listings to get sign ups for a credit report, or the e-whore that gets an age verification sign up are looking out for 1 person... C level execs are using methods to push the whole company ahead of the game... Just look at the banking mess we are in (inflated loans that were not sustainable in the first place) or the BS lawsuits with stock inflation (Gotta get that IPO!) or even companies searching for loopholes in intellectual property laws to take out their competitors (by finding patent infringements, etc...). Is that considered Black Hat? Or just smart business. Not sure where the line is.

There are a ton of questionable business practices, but I guess if you can get away with it... it would be considered Black Hat... Even if you are the e-whore or CL poster lookin out for numero uno.

Click to expand...

There are many legit corporations. I think people are exaggerating the bad companies. People are just jealous so they think all corporations are greedy assholes.

I know what you mean but that shouldn't be an excuse for people to be dicks.

@ yao1994 ... the advertiser network ( the sponsors / companies who buy practically the advertisement's ... ) don't wanna such leads . THAT's NOT MAKE THEM ILLEGAL . aren't following their TOS ? right .... but that aren't make it illegal . ILLEGAL things are when the law's come in hand and you are found guilty for doing such .

The VCC thing ... it's perfectly legal for peoples who have it , it's just a damn service from a bank who offer this service for their customers . HOW it's used this vcc it's not bank responsibility !.

About Acai Beri .... take a look back in time and let's see what's about , colon cleanse products exist since ancient times dude , isn't oprah or anyone who invented it , on europe are some medicinal plants used for this like infusions / tea since time's when america wasn't even discovered ... on india and most of asia countries natural medicine it's even far away older . The Acai Beri stuff come on such boom just because Oprah had that doc like guest on her show , it's an well know thing worldwide that fat biatch take money to invite different peoples on her show to promote different garbage's just for money . The companies who had promoted such offers had their cut from the pie and they practically cheated their customers selling just a thing well know since hundreds of years ... why ? because us marketplace can '' buy '' anything what's promoted .

keinehabe said:

@ yao1994 ... the advertiser network ( the sponsors / companies who buy practically the advertisement's ... ) don't wanna such leads . THAT's NOT MAKE THEM ILLEGAL . aren't following their TOS ? right .... but that aren't make it illegal . ILLEGAL things are when the law's come in hand and you are found guilty for doing such .

The VCC thing ... it's perfectly legal for peoples who have it , it's just a damn service from a bank who offer this service for their customers . HOW it's used this vcc it's not bank responsibility !.

About Acai Beri .... take a look back in time and let's see what's about , colon cleanse products exist since ancient times dude , isn't oprah or anyone who invented it , on europe are some medicinal plants used for this like infusions / tea since time's when america wasn't even discovered ... on india and most of asia countries natural medicine it's even far away older . The Acai Beri stuff come on such boom just because Oprah had that doc like guest on her show , it's an well know thing worldwide that fat biatch take money to invite different peoples on her show to promote different garbage's just for money . The companies who had promoted such offers had their cut from the pie and they practically cheated their customers selling just a thing well know since hundreds of years ... why ? because us marketplace can '' buy '' anything what's promoted .

Click to expand...

It does make it illegal. You signed a contract with the company when you signed up to get an account. Therefore if you breach that agreement, they can sue you.

I do agree that it's only matters if you get caught.

But at least admit that you are committing fraud. First you said that it isn't illegal at all then you say it doesn't matter if you don't get caught. You contradicting yourself.

And saying Oprah straight out lies to her fans for profit is a complete lie... Even though I don't her because she doesn't know shit about shes talking about she does have a good intention for her fans.

Acai berry has been known for a long time but there is no scam in selling something well known. It might be over priced but the customers are getting what they want. It's the way the CPA merchants are selling it that makes it a scam.

This is the process for selling acai:

1.Make up COMPLETELY BULLSHIT facts about the product (illegal)

2.Hide the TOS that says they will be charged $100 after 14 days. (legal but unethical)

3. Send the item on the 13th day so the customer can't return the product and cancel on the 14th day. (legal but unethical)

4. They get charged $100 for a shit product that's worth nothing. (legal but unethical)

5. Customers find out the product is crap and try to cancel the subscription but is put on a line that needs to wait 1 hour to for a representative to talk to. (legal but unethical)

6. They finally cancel but the company still charges them after they cancel. (illegal)

So it's hell for the customer who could of went to walmart and buy it for $20...

Black hat is something you tell yourself before u're convicted, fraud its what they tell you when you faild at court.

yack09 said:

Black hat is something you tell yourself before u're convicted, fraud its what they tell you when you faild at court.

Click to expand...

That's not true. I can see your logic but the thing is black hat has got nothing to do with fraud.

Black hat marketing is black hat marketing. Fraud is fraud.

And technically people are still committing a crime even if they don't get caught. If I sold drugs and got away with it, would that make selling drugs legal? But the thing is illegal or not, if you're not caught it doesn't really matter (legally). But consciously you still know you're committing a crime.

yao1994 said:

That's not true. I can see your logic but the thing is black hat has got nothing to do with fraud.

Click to expand...

Not exactly. I'll tell you why.
All black hat is screwing someone.
Crime and fraud is kind of screwing someone that is noted especially in the law.
If blackhatters would screw enough people goverment would make known blackhat techniques a crime or fraud.
Threfor blackhat is just a step before fraud.

You can arguee that black hat is not screwing anybody.
I'll give you example- seo.
People assume its not illegal.
You can make as many faked sites as you want its your right.
Assume extreme: you do as many pages and links as you want,
and put your own page on first place for every keyword out there.
Its extreme example so assume your page is full of ads and does nothing usefull.
Now its still not illegal. right?
Its not a fraud.
And common logic is that, that if google bot sucked it up then its googlebots fault.
Every body leaves google becouse its now just full of ads.
You ruined 20bln dollar a year company.

And now goes question.
Is ruining someones else company for own profit, legal in US?

I made a post in law forum to find out:
http://forum.freeadvice.com/starting-operating-business-3/ruining-someone-else-company-own-profit-492612.html

How does it relates to the topic?

Simply. In seo example you screwing google.
Buy doing fake pages you decrease value of google product which is
manily results of pages.

If you do, cookie stuffing, you screw real affliates that bring visitors.
If you doing fake cpa leads you screwing merchants that pay for thoes.
Any other example that is black hat can be reduce to screwing someone bigger or smaller.

Now i'm waiting to see if lawyers will answer the question.
Before i'll found out, i'd be glad to read your answer.

This is a funny thread.

Seriously guys. Does definition really matter?

yack09 said:

Not exactly. I'll tell you why.
All black hat is screwing someone.
Crime and fraud is kind of screwing someone that is noted especially in the law.
If blackhatters would screw enough people goverment would make known blackhat techniques a crime or fraud.
Threfor blackhat is just a step before fraud.

You can arguee that black hat is not screwing anybody.
I'll give you example- seo.
People assume its not illegal.
You can make as many faked sites as you want its your right.
Assume extreme: you do as many pages and links as you want,
and put your own page on first place for every keyword out there.
Its extreme example so assume your page is full of ads and does nothing usefull.
Now its still not illegal. right?
Its not a fraud.
And common logic is that, that if google bot sucked it up then its googlebots fault.
Every body leaves google becouse its now just full of ads.
You ruined 20bln dollar a year company.

And now goes question.
Is ruining someones else company for own profit, legal in US?

I made a post in law forum to find out:
http://forum.freeadvice.com/starting-operating-business-3/ruining-someone-else-company-own-profit-492612.html

How does it relates to the topic?

Simply. In seo example you screwing google.
Buy doing fake pages you decrease value of google product which is
manily results of pages.

If you do, cookie stuffing, you screw real affliates that bring visitors.
If you doing fake cpa leads you screwing merchants that pay for thoes.
Any other example that is black hat can be reduce to screwing someone bigger or smaller.

Now i'm waiting to see if lawyers will answer the question.
Before i'll found out, i'd be glad to read your answer.

Click to expand...

The difference is that you're not signing a contract with Google that says you won't build links. They take it on themselves to gather and "rate" the sites and if they can't screen out bad sites, that's on them. They fall victim to their own system. If they get ruined, it's because they poorly implemented their business strategy.

sirtaxster said:

This is a funny thread.

Seriously guys. Does definition really matter?

Click to expand...

In a way it doesn't matter because nobody's going to suddenly say, "Wow, I didn't know ewhoring was fraud. I'll quit now.", and nobody's going to say, "Hmmm, if ewhoring isn't fraud, I'll give it a go.", based on this thread.

Let's face facts, in real-world terms, IM is a baby as far as businesses go. The things that go on have outpaced the law's ability to deal with them, so (for now) the internet is basically self-policing.

As much money as there is flowing online, it's a tiny, tiny bit compared to the physical world. As it grows, you can be sure the laws will eventually catch up.

The way things stand, breaking an online contract is only technically illegal in situations where there are carryover laws from the physical businesses (like banking, real estate, or investment industries).

I believe, sooner or later, knowingly sending a fake lead to a CPA network will be just as illegal as knowingly walking into a convenience store and dropping a Snickers bar into your pocket without paying for it.

It's worth discussing because a law could be passed tomorrow that would change 98% of the people here from "blackhatter" to "fugitive from justice".

Classic blackhat, on the other hand, will never be illegal (though it will always change as companies change the way they implement their business plan). Classic blackhat is not tricking anybody. It's taking advantage of how the companies do business (like the Google example above, or someone who only buys items with double coupons from grocery stores and walks out with a bag of groceries AND a refund).

I haven't seen one person post here that those of you tricking people are scum and need to be put in prison, some of us are just saying that you should be aware that tricking someone for monetary gain is illegal in the real world and it will eventually be illegal in the online world so put some of your efforts into things that don't involve tricking people so that, when that happens, you won't instantly go to zero income...

It's easy to see the direction the wind is blowing. Spam is illegal. They're working on regulation to prosecute people who lie (or even just hint at something misleading) in online advertising. Putting legal teeth behind the TOS that affiliates agree to is the logical next step.

sam12six said:

The difference is that you're not signing a contract with Google that says you won't build links. They take it on themselves to gather and "rate" the sites and if they can't screen out bad sites, that's on them. They fall victim to their own system. If they get ruined, it's because they poorly implemented their business strategy.

Click to expand...

Exact opposite i addressed in my earlier post
near the lines starting with:

And common logic is that, that if google bot sucked it up then its googlebots fault.

Click to expand...

For me its narrow view. Difference is that doing seo you aim to abuse someone else. I asked on law forum if thats legal, they might answer.

I'll tell you some another example.

You make a site, with virus that if google system will pickt it up then that virus will erase all google data leaving them empty.

According to your argument, its google faults because they implement their business strategy poorly.

I guess that any good lawyer would prove its crime in court.

You may argue that virus is for destruction and seo is for my profit.
In that argument someone would tell that seo isn't destructing google.
Seo is leaving page that are worser then other pages in front of people faces, reducing the quality of googles product.

Assume there are free cookies on promotion in big shop.
You go in with a self made razorblade cookie with surface identical to
thoes free once on promotion.

You may argue that you don't sign contract, and its shops fault that they didn't screen all the people with that walking around the cookie.
Assume that some one eat that razor blade cookie and choked with blood to death.
According your way of thinking you,
the razorblade cookie maker isn't guilty of killing man cause
1. you dint sing contract with shop
2. its shop fault that they didnt stoped you to ut that cookie.


While waiting for the lawyers answers i'd like to hear other arguemnts on the topic.

The current laws of the country of the blackhatter and the contract you agree with your ISP, affiliate, client, partner...

The definition of fraud is vague at the best of times - when a case goes to court, the prosecution lawyer argues that it's fraud, the defence lawyer argues that it isn't fraud. Smartest lawyer wins and the definition in that particular set of circumstances is updated until the next time, when it may or may not change.

Of course, this is only applicable when it is a grey area, but the definition of fraud very often is a grey area, as this thread is proving.

yack09 said:

Exact opposite i addressed in my earlier post
near the lines starting with:
For me its narrow view. Difference is that doing seo you aim to abuse someone else. I asked on law forum if thats legal, they might answer.

I'll tell you some another example.

You make a site, with virus that if google system will pickt it up then that virus will erase all google data leaving them empty.

According to your argument, its google faults because they implement their business strategy poorly.

I guess that any good lawyer would prove its crime in court.

You may argue that virus is for destruction and seo is for my profit.
In that argument someone would tell that seo isn't destructing google.
Seo is leaving page that are worser then other pages in front of people faces, reducing the quality of googles product.

Assume there are free cookies on promotion in big shop.
You go in with a self made razorblade cookie with surface identical to
thoes free once on promotion.

You may argue that you don't sign contract, and its shops fault that they didn't screen all the people with that walking around the cookie.
Assume that some one eat that razor blade cookie and choked with blood to death.
According your way of thinking you,
the razorblade cookie maker isn't guilty of killing man cause
1. you dint sing contract with shop
2. its shop fault that they didnt stoped you to ut that cookie.


While waiting for the lawyers answers i'd like to hear other arguemnts on the topic.

Click to expand...

Google scrapes content off you so there is no such thing as damaging their product.

There is no such thing as a virus for google. Even if there was you would be intentionally damaging their property.

The cookie example is a bit weird but I know hat you mean. You would be hurting the person intentionally by tricking them into thinking the product is safe. Just because something is free does not exclude them from the law.

guys aren't you a quite far away from thread question ? ... it's not important how much arguments you guys come ... easy facts : difference betwen them it's the coverage of the penal law's . IF ... an action it's covered by law's restrictions means it's illegal easy like hell to understand . IF the action isn't covered or restricted by the fkin law then none care about it.

Just make a product, put up a website, and sit on your couch and watch TV and wait for people to buy it - NOT

Where is Don Lapree When you need him?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mubCkCAEiDQ

keinehabe said:

guys aren't you a quite far away from thread question ? ... it's not important how much arguments you guys come ... easy facts : difference betwen them it's the coverage of the penal law's . IF ... an action it's covered by law's restrictions means it's illegal easy like hell to understand . IF the action isn't covered or restricted by the fkin law then none care about it.

Click to expand...

The law doesn't have to be your mother and tell you exactly what is wrong. The thing is the fraud that is going on the internet is covered by the law. There doesn't have to be a law that states "sending fake leads to CPA networks is illegal", or "cookie stuffing the eBay Partnership Network is a crime".

The network would waste more time and money suing you than for them to just let you go. But if damages are high, such as the eBay and DP owner cookie stuffing case, you will get your ass kicked.

NO no no no! BIG BIG Difference(lookie here!)

"blackhat" is spelled

B-L-A-C-K-H-A-T

whereas "fraud" is spelled

F-R-A-U-D or F-R-A-W-D ? or is it C-R-A-I-G-N-E-W-M-A-N ??

Like I said, if you can't spell a word at least 3 or 4 different ways by time your my age (98), you just haven't had a full education
let that be a lesson to you! glad I cleared that up! (donations will be accepted!)
(an wipe that beaver off you face, and get down stairs we havin company!)

(I think I shared a cell with Lapre)

ethics from my perspective...i don't do things that are illegal by law and such, but somethings people do certainly aren't ethical, but who cares unethical to me isn't illegal

Emmm, jail!?