![]() |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||||||
| Notices |
| Legacy Archived Main Board Business chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here. |

![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Payserve SUX
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,988
|
cool RCourt, I have gotten the point you are making. You feel that this suit is, at best, on shaky ground if i understand you correctly.
what I am saying, as I can't speak for anyone else here, is that if i click on a site that has the text 'Meet a girl from _______ for fucking tonight' where ____ = your local area and fucking tonight being any one of the dozens of ways I have personally seen this program advertised, that it is akin to fraud in as much as there is outright deception, not clever marketing, but outright lying going on to the consumer. I create text to put on our tours, in order for me to write the text I actually have to watch the videos and then turn that into sales text. http://www.drunkenteenorgies.com is a very good example of this. Hard as it may be to believe I am mono-lingual, so i do not understand the spoken Russian language. So while I do have to invent details for the text, the general feel for each video coincides with the text I write. If I say you are going to see 'lots' of 'gorgeous' teen girls in 'hot' action. then all of that is subjective. but if i say you will see over 300 of the hottest cum sluts alive... then I better have at least 301 videos or videos/picture sets in there with a different girl in each set.... or it is fraud. AFF uses specific girls with specific screen names and they say they are from specific locations which is just plain bullshit, a clever script trick for geotargetting........ in my opinion, that is fraudulent marketing practices. But that is my opinion and the only one that ultimately matters is the opinion given by a judge in court. spaz |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Fat Fucking Nobody
Want to see your own Advertising Here!
|
You have to remember Rcourt thinks that this is ok but he thinks that google steals from everyone with adwords.
I dont know if I should laugh or cry.
__________________
We are putting the bastards of this world on notice; greed and corruption will always be met with "a voice made of ink and rage." "Never try and be like anyone else" - Hunter S. Thompson "The truth is the truth no matter how you try and package a lie" - Shellee Hale
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Filling Bishop's Pond
Respin bullshit press Your Comments Are Welcomed
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,942
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Filling Bishop's Pond
Respin bullshit press Your Comments Are Welcomed
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,942
|
Quote:
I appreciate you trying to explain this to me , especially without some sort of insult towards my direction. Thank you , I respect that.But I'm sorry, I just won't give in. As long as its ok to malipulte or brainwash children & adults with some Red Suit Guy, which with result in the end with a donation OR purchase of a product. Then I will continue to stand my ground and support AFF. Because they're not doing anything different. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Payserve SUX
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,988
|
Quote:
and I can see the connection, albeit slight, between the practices of AFF and Madison Ave. But Santa, charitible organizations and the mainstream marketing are not currently facing a lawsuit either. AFF is and I can honestly see this one going either way depending on who appointed the Fed Judge it comes in front of. spaz |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Filling Bishop's Pond
Respin bullshit press Your Comments Are Welcomed
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,942
|
Quote:
I assume the same rules will apply for a few other million dollar websites that I see practicing the same or similar tactics. "of which I can prove" So if they take one down, they better also be challanging the others. Otherwise I'll see it as discriminatory. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Filling Bishop's Pond
Respin bullshit press Your Comments Are Welcomed
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,942
|
I was re-reading my last post & wanna point out that when I say: "of which I can prove". meaning it would be easy to do, and not that I have any actual form of prove to this sort of activity.
Someone just told me, I could get in a shitload of trouble if that is interpreted the wrong way. So I wanted to correct this. Peace
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|