Just bought www.dlickbank.com :)
- Thread starter HenryHavoc
- Start date
AffGuy08
BANNED
- Nov 14, 2008
- 873
- 496
snowwhite
Power Member
- Feb 12, 2008
- 715
- 1,430
artists has multitudes of ways to interpret a song
the way I do it is me
if you have a problem with that, then call my mom
based from your comments, it seems youre also ignorant about the things I have just explained, is that the reason why youre saying im obnoxious to the guy because the guy youre talking about also represents you? psycho 101
you even said "it may be illegal" when its actually plain ILLEGAL. Dear theres no such thing as "may be". If youre unsure about things, it means youre ill-informed and the best solution is education
now if you still have other things you want to tell me, write it in a paper, fold it and flush it in your toilet
HH - You said you wanted to learn well here's some reading material for you...
and...
...knock yourself out.
I've been involved in the Internet game and domains for MANY years, almost as long as you've been on this Planet and I've had a couple of UDRP's filed against me. Don't believe it can happen? Wake up! It's happenig EVERY day.
Companies hire lawyers specifically to track down and deal with this. It's a big issue to them and they do take it very seriously.
If it hasn't happened to you yet or any of the others then that's great. It may never happen but then again it just might.
Being naive will not stand up to much when they get around to you and the UDRP gets filed.
I can tell you from personal experience that Playboy takes this kind of thing VERY seriously indeed
Good luck and to be honest I think you're the one that needs to 'take a chill pill'. SW was just trying to educate you, maybe in a harsh manner, but then again some people respond better to a kick in the pants rather than a gentle hand. Which one are you?
L
PS: If/when they ever do decide to come a knocking you can be sure this thread 'will be used against you in a court of law' - Again it happened to me. They pulled up the thread where I'd bought the domain from years ago and quoted me directly in the complaint.
Code:
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/index.htmland...
Code:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UDRP...knock yourself out.
I've been involved in the Internet game and domains for MANY years, almost as long as you've been on this Planet and I've had a couple of UDRP's filed against me. Don't believe it can happen? Wake up! It's happenig EVERY day.
Companies hire lawyers specifically to track down and deal with this. It's a big issue to them and they do take it very seriously.
If it hasn't happened to you yet or any of the others then that's great. It may never happen but then again it just might.
Being naive will not stand up to much when they get around to you and the UDRP gets filed.
I can tell you from personal experience that Playboy takes this kind of thing VERY seriously indeed
Good luck and to be honest I think you're the one that needs to 'take a chill pill'. SW was just trying to educate you, maybe in a harsh manner, but then again some people respond better to a kick in the pants rather than a gentle hand. Which one are you?
L
PS: If/when they ever do decide to come a knocking you can be sure this thread 'will be used against you in a court of law'
- Again it happened to me. They pulled up the thread where I'd bought the domain from years ago and quoted me directly in the complaint.
Arthas
BANNED
- Jan 5, 2009
- 637
- 329
im taking a side here. I side with the OP and I think he's done a good job if hes getting traffic. He should definitely send it all to his network's affiliate referral link but MASK REFERRER!!
also please use visa gift cards purchased with cash to buy these domains with false info and cookie stuff the user with the affiliate link and give him a fucked up page rather than just redirect him to the aff link and you'll be golden for some black hat. kthxbi.
also please use visa gift cards purchased with cash to buy these domains with false info and cookie stuff the user with the affiliate link and give him a fucked up page rather than just redirect him to the aff link and you'll be golden for some black hat. kthxbi.
It doesn't really work that way. If a trademark owner suspects -- or can demonstrate -- that a domain registrar is using/abusing or infringing upon that trademark, you'll be in violation of U.S. Constitutional as well as international copyright law.
Forwarding a domain such as "dlickbank.com" to your hoplink? Yeah, very stealthy; they'll never figure it out.
Nothing may happen at all. But if you do hear from ClickBank legal council, be prepared to turn over the domain and possibly pay legal fees, court costs and/or make financial reparations to the copyright holder.
Generally, copyright infringement isn't recommended. Sure it's done all the time, but with precautions toward preventing detection in place.
Owning the newly-registered domain (your registrar will give you up as soon as a request is received) and/or forwarding that domain to your ClickBank hoplink is anything but undetectable; in fact it's a big fluttering red flag, with extra flashing lights, blinking neon arrows and loud sirens for extra effect.
Last edited:
stinky_boy
Junior Member
- Nov 21, 2008
- 126
- 36
If possible try to get LickBank.com that will be more horny
I love it. I laughed so hard when I saw this thread. dlickbank!!! Too bad you just couldn't shorten to dickbank.
All CB products have completely unique referral links, so stuffing doesn't get you the milage that you may enjoy on Am4z0n, Eg4y and similar.
You get your name highlighted in white and apparently that makes you better than everyone else.
If you get too spooked about it, simply move it to a sever not located in the US. All you would be doing is redirecting to your affiliate link, so server speed isn't a problem. Move the domain to a Chinese server. Problem solved as Clickbank has no presence in China.
Mr. Execute VIP was too busy calling everyone names and looking down on people to actually contribute.
Last edited:
Oh c'mon. That's bullshit. we're all held to the same standards here.
However, if you're often found to be giving especially poor advice(see below) , you may be held to more of those "same standards" than others.
The location of the server has no relevance in this case. If the domain registrar is compliant with international copyright law, the domain owner will be held to international copyright law if/when the issue arises. If the domain registrar is not compliant with international copyright law, expect the domain to be blacklisted by most -- if not all -- compliant ISPs.
Last edited:
eclecticnewyork
Registered Member
- Sep 28, 2008
- 98
- 104
I can see by this post (and your other posts) that you can rationalize and frame anything in a manner that makes sense to you. You'd be a good lawyer. Unfortunately it doesn't make you any more correct in your assumptions about my "psyche" or any less obnoxious. Unlike you, I'm not worried about being right here. I was just pointing out the obvious fact that you were being a bitch... simple as that. No more - no less. Don't read into it, because you're not good at it.
I believe the highlighting of his name went to his head. Clearly he believes he's better than everyone here.
The location of the server definitely has relevance. Do you even know what International Copyright Law is? I always see people throwing that around as if it means whatever laws are executed here in the US, are the same in other countries and will be executed the same. That simply isn't the case. It still comes back to whether that country has protection against the infringing matter in their national law. So yes, moving the domain to a country which doesn't have protection against such matters would make a difference.
Mason you are categorically and unequivocally wrong!
Read up on the links I provided above and you'll see how cybersquatting, which is essentially what the OP is doing, is dealt with.
I make no judgement whether he's right or wrong. Quite frankly I don't care. But as we all know ignorance is no defense and it pays to know what the possible consequences are. If one chooses to ignore them that's their concern.
L
Read up on the links I provided above and you'll see how cybersquatting, which is essentially what the OP is doing, is dealt with.
I make no judgement whether he's right or wrong. Quite frankly I don't care. But as we all know ignorance is no defense and it pays to know what the possible consequences are. If one chooses to ignore them that's their concern.
L
Last edited:
Sniper
Regular Member
- Dec 30, 2008
- 472
- 218
I find it strange that when I Google "clickbank" I see many sites with clickbank in the URL. Chances are these sites are promoting clickbank, and clickbank did not take the time to send an S&D letter to the website owner. I would guess Clickbank somehow enjoys this traffic, much like I, as a product developer and publisher, enjoys when someone uses my product names in their url, such as productnamescam.com or productnamereview.com, to promote my products.
Depending on what you are going to do with the URL probably really depends on the outcome of the response on the trademark you are potentially infringing upon.
In the case of Nike, where I am not aware of any affiliate program that they offer directly in sale of their merchandise, it would make sense not to try and use squatting or infringement tactics to try and make some sort of financial gain. Pardon my ignorance, but if Nike had an affiliate section on their site, I would harbor a guess that they would be lenient on the types of domains that drive traffic to .... you guessed it.. an end sale. But, they must worry about their brick and mortar merchants, so it more than likely doesn't work this way.
At one point in time I used to sell service manuals for HP Laserjet Printers on ebay. I was a printer / photocopier technician, so I took advantage of the ebay market at the time. I received an S&D from HP and quit right away.. no further problems.
I would suspect that if you continue with dlickbank.com, and you are using the name to take revenue from the pocket of the copyright holder rather than drive revenue, for example, drive all dlickbank traffic to CJ, then chances are you will have an issue with a lawyer. And when that happens, the first course of action will be a simple cease and desist. From there, you can plan your course.
Otherwise, if you are creating revenue, I don't see why that would be an issue, especially in the case of clickbank. After all.. has anyone ever reported being shut down for cookie stuffing clickbank products? Really, what is the lesser of the two evils... stealing commissions from white hatters or hoping (or should I say hopping HAHAHAH) for a typo?
Depending on what you are going to do with the URL probably really depends on the outcome of the response on the trademark you are potentially infringing upon.
In the case of Nike, where I am not aware of any affiliate program that they offer directly in sale of their merchandise, it would make sense not to try and use squatting or infringement tactics to try and make some sort of financial gain. Pardon my ignorance, but if Nike had an affiliate section on their site, I would harbor a guess that they would be lenient on the types of domains that drive traffic to .... you guessed it.. an end sale. But, they must worry about their brick and mortar merchants, so it more than likely doesn't work this way.
At one point in time I used to sell service manuals for HP Laserjet Printers on ebay. I was a printer / photocopier technician, so I took advantage of the ebay market at the time
. I received an S&D from HP and quit right away.. no further problems. I would suspect that if you continue with dlickbank.com, and you are using the name to take revenue from the pocket of the copyright holder rather than drive revenue, for example, drive all dlickbank traffic to CJ, then chances are you will have an issue with a lawyer. And when that happens, the first course of action will be a simple cease and desist. From there, you can plan your course.
Otherwise, if you are creating revenue, I don't see why that would be an issue, especially in the case of clickbank. After all.. has anyone ever reported being shut down for cookie stuffing clickbank products? Really, what is the lesser of the two evils... stealing commissions from white hatters or hoping (or should I say hopping HAHAHAH) for a typo?
Last edited:
Not sure where you get that that impression. I think I've been pretty honest here. If you have issues with debate, stay out of forums.
If you really need to use a possessive pronoun in responding to my posts, you may as well use "her", not "his".
Seems we're confusing registrar (domain) registry with server location. That said, international copyright applies to the lion's share of the market for CB type products, as well as their ISPs.
Sure, you can get a registrar and hosting in China or Russia. Do you really think that will work with CB products?
But look, we're talking about making money ... right? Why go out of your way to violate TOS of those whom write the check and can ban you so easily? Why not remain within TOS and just get paid on a regular basis?
"Blackhat" is not an end in and of itself. It's a means to an end. If the means subvert the end, it's not a viable means.