Attorney General Madigan Files Suit Against local affiliate marketer
- Thread starter pocketrockets
- Start date
It sounds pretty simple to me, they're basically saying don't do this:
And you'll be fine.
- Mods: this is from the lawsuit, which is public record but if you think it's outing an LP then go ahead and remove it.
Yeah whoevers page that is is dumb as a box of rocks
I can't beleive people were promoting shit like that
Hi my name is Dr Oz by my products :error:
WTF.. o.0
These sheeple scare the crap out of me - "I only supported Obama because he was an Oprah endorsement" ... Geezus, no wonder.
I took the hit and bought their docs from PACER...whoever's named in this is fucked.
They have screenshots of all the text ads on the big 3 advertising on the names "Dr.Oz","Oprah". In Google this includes the content network. 40 pages of text ads all said.
In addition, they have a screenshot of every landing page, cross referenced with the product they promoted, and the vendor of that product.
http://bit.ly/2DDNvE <---Rar file containing all the Exhibits (1-10)
They have screenshots of all the text ads on the big 3 advertising on the names "Dr.Oz","Oprah". In Google this includes the content network. 40 pages of text ads all said.
In addition, they have a screenshot of every landing page, cross referenced with the product they promoted, and the vendor of that product.
http://bit.ly/2DDNvE <---Rar file containing all the Exhibits (1-10)
As it's a public document would you consider uploading it with the RECAP firefox plugin so the rest of us could take a look?
edit: NM you beat me to it.
Re
ACER - Has anyone tried https://www.recapthelaw.org/ to get PACER docs for free? Wonder if these are available yet through RECAP.
Only 2 docs were last I checked. Mine would've been uploaded, but apparently the FF plugin doesn't work if you buy multiple at once(it gives them to you in a .rar instead).Re
Thanks for sharing those docs. It looks like they're even citing use of Oprah and Oz TMs in meta tags and for PPC keyword bidding. The scope of this suit is stunning.
Something I don't understand: is each URL in the exhibits representative of an "ABC 1-500" defendant? And the owners of those URLs are going to be served? Or are those just examples, and the only ones to be served are in the main document?
Talk about incompetence ... If that's all Harpo got then they REALLY dropped the rock on this one.
It looks like they think engines work like this ... Enter "dr oz" into the google and all the ads that contain "dr oz" will be returned. I have friends that really dodged a bullet if thats all they've got.
Advice to Oprah: Fire your research team and hire ones that know just a little bit about the industry. I've got bots smarter than your people.
fixed ... meta-tags lulz
It looks like they think engines work like this ... Enter "dr oz" into the google and all the ads that contain "dr oz" will be returned. I have friends that really dodged a bullet if thats all they've got.
Advice to Oprah: Fire your research team and hire ones that know just a little bit about the industry. I've got bots smarter than your people.
fixed ... meta-tags lulz
Yeah, the legal team really went overboard in making their case. They had more than enough at URLs, LPs, and Ad copy. Dragging SEO/SEM into it is just plain retarded. Seems they outsourced the evidence gathering to wannabe IMers. Probably good news for defendants with halfway competent lawyers.
Despite all this, some noob on a search engine that will remain unnamed is in the top 3 promoting a berry i won't name. They are using Dr.OZ, Oprah, and Rachel Ray to sell this said berry.
You'd think some affiliates would have stopped their campaigns lol...
You'd think some affiliates would have stopped their campaigns lol...
lol yeah 2 ads still on yahoo search for a main keyword... also all over their landing pages!! :bowdown:
yeah its totally ridiculous. one would assume every men on earth would give a shit about US copyright laws, some say the world has turned upside down lately. who knows...