Plugrush

[AdultKing]

Our criteria is that the ad zones are disabled.

Our position is clear. If the ad zones remain active then other pirates will form a view that Plugrush is a pirate friendly ad network. You will never rid yourself of the scourge that is piracy and neither will the industry.

Every time someone sees Plugrush on a site full of pirate content the natural conclusion is that Plugrush allows such sites. Only by disabling the ad zone do you send a message that piracy is not acceptable on the Plugrush network.

As I stated above, we will begin crawling and forwarding detections to abuse@. Then it's up to you how you choose to deal with it.

It's worth noting that not all of your ads direct surfers to pay sites, in fact many direct your surfers to things which have nothing to do with production content at all.

Examples:

http://www.justhookup.com
http://budbi.com
http://cams.camwithher.com

None of these steer the people looking at terabytes of content from file lockers to pay sites, in fact they just steer them to cams, dating sites etc. I've even seen pill ads on your network. Pill ads will not save the production content industry.

[nextri]

well, then you're showing that you are putting your own interest and agenda above what is good for the industry as a whole, not just the content production part. The more money we generate, the more we can spend on content production. Why should we make business decisions to satisfy you and your needs above what's good for all of us?

I've clearly stated why what we suggest is a better way to of doing it. I do not think that we promoting ourselves as a pirate friendly network by doing so. Any webmaster or pirate that will try to use us, will check out the source of our adzones and see the message. It's not like you can see that the adzone is from plugrush just by looking at it, and as you said, these pirates communicate via message boards, so I'm sure the word will spread quickly when they start noticing the message in the source.

Your arguments doesn't convince me that your way is better. So please give me a better reason, and I will consider it.

[AdultKing]

Originally Posted by nextri

well, then you're showing that you are putting your own interest and agenda above what is good for the industry as a whole, not just the content production part. The more money we generate, the more we can spend on content production. Why should we make business decisions to satisfy you and your needs above what's good for all of us?

Piracy is bad for all of us. Especially when it's commercialised in the way file lockers are.

For every dollar of consumer discretionary spending spent buying a file locker membership that's one less dollar that could come the way of this industry.

As it is, pirates think Plugrush is fair game. On WJunction there are tutorials on using Plugrush when "sharing" porn.

http://www.wjunction.com/13-tutorial...ng-domain.html

You even replied to one thread in the Blackhat section of WJunction where people have pirate sites in their signatures!

http://www.wjunction.com/100-blackha...-plugrush.html

I've clearly stated why what we suggest is a better way to of doing it. I do not think that we promoting ourselves as a pirate friendly network by doing so.

What other conclusion is there to draw ? It's not better to leave the ad zones working because others will come to the conclusion that Plugrush is a pirate friendly network.

It's not like you can see that the adzone is from plugrush just by looking at it

No ?

Your arguments doesn't convince me that your way is better. So please give me a better reason, and I will consider it.

The better reason is because it's the right thing to do.

You're either with the pirates or against them, you can't be sitting on both sides of the fence. You also risk a situation occurring where advertisers of things like pills click to the fact that they will get pirate traffic for free, so will then foster it knowing that we will report it to you then you will shut accounts down but keep ads running in ad zones. You and the pill advertiser are still getting the click-throughs.

The only logical reason you could object to shutting down pirate ad zones is that you suspect that a large proportion of your traffic comes from them.

[Fat Panda]

its time to go fucking NUCLEAR

merchant accounts, paypal, banking, ANYTHING financial etc that adult ad network parasites rely on

[Markul]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

Our criteria is that the ad zones are disabled.

Our position is clear.

Since it's now okay to just ask for a list of companies' clients/customers with little legal grounds, I'd like to know who exactly empowered and thus asked COPY CONTROL PTY LIMITED to take these current actions?

[AdultKing]

Originally Posted by Markul

Since it's now okay to just ask for a list of companies' clients/customers with little legal grounds, I'd like to know who exactly empowered and thus asked COPY CONTROL PTY LIMITED to take these current actions?

We haven't asked for any such thing. Plugrush offered a list of publisher domains then withdrew the offer. It didn't matter to us much anyway as we can crawl them all easily.

All we have asked for is that pirate ad zones are disabled once an infringing site is reported to Plugrush.

[Fat Panda]

lets also not forget about the USA federal bureau of investigation (FBI), interpol and other major nation state level law enforcement agencies

these fucking adult ad networks are willfully conspiring in the monetization of ILLEGAL content

!!! its time to take action !!!

[JOKER]

Originally Posted by nextri

I can send you a list of all the domain in our system so you can go through them if you want..

Last I checked the list was offered nobody demanded it

[Markul]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

We haven't asked for any such thing. Plugrush offered a list of publisher domains then withdrew the offer. It didn't matter to us much anyway as we can crawl them all easily.

All we have asked for is that pirate ad zones are disabled once an infringing site is reported to Plugrush.

Who do you represent?

[AdultKing]

Originally Posted by Markul

Who do you represent?

A growing number of rights holders who are fed up with their content appearing on these same pirate blogs, forums and ddl sites that Plugrush ads are showing on.

[Markul]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

A growing number of rights holders who are fed up with their content appearing on these same pirate blogs, forums and ddl sites that Plugrush ads are showing on.

Who are they? You know this info will come out at one point right?

[nextri]

I don't accept that disabling the adzone is a criteria. Your agenda is to stop these sites from benefiting from piracy. Our solution stops that, and that is all you can require of us. So that criteria has nothing to do with what your agenda is.
In my opinion we are helping this industry by doing it like we suggest, and I've also offered good solutions to make everyone accomplish what they want. If you are unwilling to compromise at all, or consider more than one solution to the problem, then so be it. Do what you want, I'm not worried about losing our payment processors. We can easily show them what we are doing in regards to piracy prevention, and those are really the only people we need to answer or prove anything to. I doubt they are gonna have the same criterias, so feel free to go ahead with your threats. I'm done..

[The Hun]

Well, in defense of AK, disabling the adzone would at least show the SURFER they're on a site infringing people's rights. There is a whole generation of surfers that are not used to paying for anything. I doubt this generation ever will... I personally see ads on sites with doubtful content, that does make it somehow seem less infringing... A message instead of an ad would send a far stronger message to everybody compared to someone selling pills making a buck or two...

[GUNNER]

Originally Posted by The Hun

Well, in defense of AK, disabling the adzone would at least show the SURFER they're on a site infringing people's rights. There is a whole generation of surfers that are not used to paying for anything. I doubt this generation ever will... I personally see ads on sites with doubtful content, that does make it somehow seem less infringing... A message instead of an ad would send a far stronger message to everybody compared to someone selling pills making a buck or two...

I see your point here and agree. Although, it doesn't really do much to make the whole situation right. Just slightly lessens the blow I suppose.

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by johnnyloadproductions

Here's probably what's going to happen.
Juicy Ads - Fully compliant and responsive, there good.
Plugrush - Resistant but at least they are talking, could be more responsive and reasonable.
Exoclick - Is going to be in a world of hurt soon.

AK should change the name of the campaign to Stop File Lockers And Ad Networks He Deems To Be Dodgy. He always said this was SOLELY about file lockers when people pointed out more piracy happened on Usenet, or even people swopping hard drives (as the RIAA says).

Or maybe change the name to I AM ADULT KING I AM FUCKING AWESOME.

[The Hun]

Agreed gunner... I also believe one needs to go after the problem. Pirates using ad networks is not the real problem, pirates hosting somewhere is not the real problem either... Going after ad networks or hosts might make things a little more difficult, but it's not solving the real problem. If people steal from others they should be hunted down and put to justice. The real problem though is that justice doesn't provide any means to do anything. A DMCA and a 'please don't do that until we catch you again' is all that can be done legally...

[nextri]

I agree that it would help send a message to surfers, and could probably educate them and might prevent a pirated download or two. But I don't see it as our responsibility as an ad network to do that. It's not our fight, and we don't believe it to be the best solution to the problem. Our suggested solution will help a lot more in getting surfers to pay for porn, regardless of whether they get educated or not. What counts is that they take out their credit cards..

[The Hun]

What counts is that we get people to play it fair. I honestly believe you can't educate people to pay for something by showing them ads. I also believe going after the ad networks is not attacking the root of the problem.

[mineistaken]

Another shady company exposed.

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by The Hun

Agreed gunner... I also believe one needs to go after the problem. Pirates using ad networks is not the real problem, pirates hosting somewhere is not the real problem either... Going after ad networks or hosts might make things a little more difficult, but it's not solving the real problem. If people steal from others they should be hunted down and put to justice. The real problem though is that justice doesn't provide any means to do anything. A DMCA and a 'please don't do that until we catch you again' is all that can be done legally...

So thats why he goes after the next best thing (hosts, ad networks etc that you mentioned). He can not go after "the problem" as you say because (as you say) there are no means.

[The Hun]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

So thats why he goes after the next best thing (hosts, ad networks etc that you mentioned). He can not go after "the problem" as you say because (as you say) there are no means.

So that's still not solving the problem. That's fixing the symptoms. I mean, shutting down every ISP in the world would solve the problem as well? Very noble to fight piracy in any way, but in this case not solving the issue. I believe that the ad networks could help making life hard for pirates, I just believe 'going after them' is not the right thing to do... I would do it in a different tone.

I am not doing any business with plugrush, they're blacklisted from thehun at the moment, but starting a fight with them doesn't fix this. I also believe showing ads to visitors on infringing sites is wrong. Both sides have their points, but I believe a discussing is starting (or in fact: taking place) that focussing on the wrong point...

There have been a lot of fights in the past where people forgot what they were fighting for... Don't let that happen here...

[looky_lou]

Originally Posted by nextri

I agree that it would help send a message to surfers, and could probably educate them and might prevent a pirated download or two. But I don't see it as our responsibility as an ad network to do that. It's not our fight, and we don't believe it to be the best solution to the problem. Our suggested solution will help a lot more in getting surfers to pay for porn, regardless of whether they get educated or not. What counts is that they take out their credit cards..

It is your responsibility if you truly are anti-piracy! Every step helps. You may not be the end all for anti-piracy, but you are an important step.

As a publisher Plugrush is an important piece to my current business model, but I am removing all of my Plugrush ad zones from my sites by the end of the day.

Please make an announcement if you finally choose to do the right thing by disabling ad zones from banned sites. I will consider adding your ad zones back into my sites.

[Biggy]

Let me get this straight.

So you have a special feature coded into your software that says if a publisher account is terminated for piracy, then you also don't charge the advertiser for this traffic?

That seems very, very strange. And you'd be the first ad network known to mankind that doesn't charge for impressions based upon terminated sites but delivers it for free. That an advertiser would login, and pay for less impressions than what you actually deliver?

Why put up such a wall? Why not just terminate and cut all ties. You're going to turn around then say you are doing a favor to the industry for this? You going to provide AK the back end and a walk through of your system to prove what you say is actually true. Hell, can anyone back up this guy's claim that he doesn't charge for those zones after he terminates the account? Who here is going to believe that on face value? My money says he won't pay the pub out after the acct is terminated, but he will most definitely continue to charge for those impressions and keep all the $. I'd bet money that he's telling a half truth, or else he'd cut all ties.

If you weren't enjoying some business benefit, then this is exactly what you would be doing... cutting all ties.

[ravo]

I'm a bit hesitant to get into the fray here, as I could be considered a competitor to Plugrush, and hence perhaps a bit unbiased (although our network is magnitudes smaller than PR so I'm not sure we're really in the same league).

I agree, that it's not Plugrush's (or any traffic broker's) responsibility to police their networks for copyright infringement (who's knows what's legal or not, on the face of it?), but once pointed out an obvious infringement (eg. siterips) they should do everything in their power to stop anyone from making any profits from that traffic.

That, in my mind, is to disable the domain and any associated ad zones.

Question: What if the site contained some sort of CP, or beast content? Would you let the adzone remain active?

[Biggy]

Scenario A
"I terminate the account, dont pay the pub out, and then deliver the traffic to all my advertisers for free! It's a special feature I coded out! And I'm doing the industry a huge favor!"

Scenario B
"I terminate the account, dont pay the pub out, but I continue to charge the advertisers for the traffic, thus lining my own pocket."

Which one is more realistic. Better yet, which one is less work.... Scenario B doesn't even need a custom code.

[The Hun]

Originally Posted by ravo

I'm a bit hesitant to get into the fray here, as I could be considered a competitor to Plugrush, and hence perhaps a bit unbiased (although our network is magnitudes smaller than PR so I'm not sure we're really in the same league).

I agree, that it's not Plugrush's (or any traffic broker's) responsibility to police their networks for copyright infringement (who's knows what's legal or not, on the face of it?), but once pointed out an obvious infringement (eg. siterips) they should do everything in their power to stop anyone from making any profits from that traffic.

That, in my mind, is to disable the domain and any associated ad zones.

Question: What if the site contained some sort of CP, or beast content? Would you let the adzone remain active?

Agreed...

[looky_lou]

Originally Posted by Biggy

Scenario A
"I terminate the account, dont pay the pub out, and then deliver the traffic to all my advertisers for free! It's a special feature I coded out! And I'm doing the industry a huge favor!"

Scenario B
"I terminate the account, dont pay the pub out, but I continue to charge the advertisers for the traffic, thus lining my own pocket."

Which one is more realistic. Better yet, which one is less work.... Scenario B doesn't even need a custom code.

Scenario A doesn't seem to make any sense to anyone other than Plugrush.

[The Hun]

If(in_array(affiliate,list_of_banned_affiliates))
Donotlogandcharge();
Else
Charge();

Doesn't take a lot of programming... Let's start fights for the right reasons. We pulled plugrush 'cause of their blind ads (difference of business ethics, no reason to fight) and the fact that some of their advertisers are banned by avg/google/etc for pushing malware on people's machines. I will not have my visitors exposed to that. Different story, not worth a fight either. But to say they're lying because the programming would be too hard is not right.

[JOKER]

Originally Posted by The Hun

What counts is that we get people to play it fair. I honestly believe you can't educate people to pay for something by showing them ads. I also believe going after the ad networks is not attacking the root of the problem.

So, in your opinion, what would be attacking the root of the problem, if it's not preventing the pirates from actually profiting from piracy and to stop encouraging other pirates from doing the same?

[signupdamnit]

Originally Posted by nextri

How exactly are we benefiting from piracy when we do not charge for the traffic after banning the account? I've said multiple times that I am against profiting from piracy. What is exactly our true colors? We disagree on how to best deal with it, that's ok. but saying we are some how part of the problem is completely bullshit, and you know it. We both want the same things, and we are willing to work with you. Please do it through or ticket system though, because we can the assign the task to the correct people in our company.
Your argument for why you want the adzones disabled though, is not good enough. Please explain why what we're doing is wrong? Should we encourage people to stay at sites with pirated content? Or help them get the hell out of there as soon as possible and towards content that costs?

If you REALLY aren't benefiting from the pirate ads then why not disable them? And come on this "we leave them up for the good of the industry" thing is just bullshit.

I don't know what is and isn't true but saying "we terminated that affiliate for X" while leaving the links up and accepting the traffic to secretly profit from it still is one of the oldest tricks in the book. It's probably been documented on this forum at least a thousand times.

Want to help the industry? Keep the adzones up but replace it with an "ad" which helps push the consumer towards avoiding piracy in the industry. Maybe something like "Support content creators so they can bring you more hot content. Purchase your porn!" Then it's clear the as was terminated and it really does help the industry.

[Plugrush]

Originally Posted by Biggy

Let me get this straight.

So you have a special feature coded into your software that says if a publisher account is terminated for piracy, then you also don't charge the advertiser for this traffic?

That seems very, very strange. And you'd be the first ad network known to mankind that doesn't charge for impressions based upon terminated sites but delivers it for free. That an advertiser would login, and pay for less impressions than what you actually deliver?

Why put up such a wall? Why not just terminate and cut all ties. You're going to turn around then say you are doing a favor to the industry for this? You going to provide AK the back end and a walk through of your system to prove what you say is actually true. Hell, can anyone back up this guy's claim that he doesn't charge for those zones after he terminates the account? Who here is going to believe that on face value? My money says he won't pay the pub out after the acct is terminated, but he will most definitely continue to charge for those impressions and keep all the $. I'd bet money that he's telling a half truth, or else he'd cut all ties.

If you weren't enjoying some business benefit, then this is exactly what you would be doing... cutting all ties.

Well it's a good thing we don't pay per impression

On our traffic trading, most publishers are far above 100% on trading too...I guess maybe we are just a really bad company all together???

[signupdamnit]

Originally Posted by looky_lou

Scenario A doesn't seem to make any sense to anyone other than Plugrush.

The thing is even if PR really is delivering the traffic for free to the advertisers it is still benefitting the advertisers and plugrush because it sweetens the deal for them. Plugrush can give their whales the traffic from the pirate sites in order to keep them around. Then other networks who might try to be honest such as say Juicy Ads then have to compete against this.

But the whole problem is that the traffic was generated using someone else's content so really PR is giving away something which really isn't theirs to give away in the first place. It would be like me giving my neighbor's car away to a neighboring business and saying "I am helping the economy".

[The Hun]

Originally Posted by JOKER

So, in your opinion, what would be attacking the root of the problem, if it's not preventing the pirates from actually profiting from piracy and to stop encouraging other pirates from doing the same?

No, but in my opinion is trying to bully the means of pirates making money into helping your cause isn't going to help. Know you enemy... But more importantly: know who your friend should be. Just saying that you'll catch more flies with honey than with trying to take a piss out of any company.

Like I said before: I'm not doing business with plugrush. On the contrary. But trying to force anybody in trying to enforce demands is only causing them to try and defend why they shouldn't. Reaching your goals lesson #1: don't loose focus. We're not fighting plugrush, we're fighting piracy...

[SplatterMaster]

So if I were to buy traffic from PR for a pay site, that traffic basically comes from pirate sites instead of normal affiliate sites that have paying customers? Even if PR deems a site inappropriate, I still get traffic from that site?

[JOKER]

Originally Posted by The Hun

No, but in my opinion is trying to bully the means of pirates making money into helping your cause isn't going to help. Know you enemy... But more importantly: know who your friend should be. Just saying that you'll catch more flies with honey than with trying to take a piss out of any company.

Like I said before: I'm not doing business with plugrush. On the contrary. But trying to force anybody in trying to enforce demands is only causing them to try and defend why they shouldn't. Reaching your goals lesson #1: don't loose focus. We're not fighting plugrush, we're fighting piracy...

I understand what you're saying and agree with it -in general- you see the reality is that we would love nothing more than to be nice to everyone, it would save us a ton of time, work and money.

We usually approach nicely at first, in cases like for example: Juicy Ads where sensible people are involved it works like a charm, we commend Juicy Ads for fully cooperating and taking a stance against piracy without any hard time or pushback, if every company were like that, these kinds of threads would never even have to come up.

Unfortunately in the whole time since this effort has started that was the minority of cases, so you have to turn up the heat to get results. I guess for some companies it's simply too sweet to rake in the piracy dough and they often think: HA, what the hell are they gonna do to us?

Which brings us here and to the next steps later on.

[georgeyw]

Originally Posted by Biggy

Let me get this straight.

So you have a special feature coded into your software that says if a publisher account is terminated for piracy, then you also don't charge the advertiser for this traffic?

That seems very, very strange. And you'd be the first ad network known to mankind that doesn't charge for impressions based upon terminated sites but delivers it for free. That an advertiser would login, and pay for less impressions than what you actually deliver?

Why put up such a wall? Why not just terminate and cut all ties. You're going to turn around then say you are doing a favor to the industry for this? You going to provide AK the back end and a walk through of your system to prove what you say is actually true. Hell, can anyone back up this guy's claim that he doesn't charge for those zones after he terminates the account? Who here is going to believe that on face value? My money says he won't pay the pub out after the acct is terminated, but he will most definitely continue to charge for those impressions and keep all the $. I'd bet money that he's telling a half truth, or else he'd cut all ties.

If you weren't enjoying some business benefit, then this is exactly what you would be doing... cutting all ties.

I would say that these pirate sites deliver a huge number of impressions and therefore quite a large sum of money....

[Paully]

Originally Posted by The Hun

No, but in my opinion is trying to bully the means of pirates making money into helping your cause isn't going to help. Know you enemy... But more importantly: know who your friend should be. Just saying that you'll catch more flies with honey than with trying to take a piss out of any company.

Like I said before: I'm not doing business with plugrush. On the contrary. But trying to force anybody in trying to enforce demands is only causing them to try and defend why they shouldn't. Reaching your goals lesson #1: don't loose focus. We're not fighting plugrush, we're fighting piracy...

I can't speak for Adult King or Joker but just sending out DMCA's like Max and I do for 3 hours or so a day doesn't always get the job done.

Believe me when I say I have better things to do than come on this board and act like a jackass but unfortunately that does get the job done.

Going after pirates and those who fence their stolen goods is making a difference.

A year ago Max Hardcore content was everywhere. Now, not so much.

Paully

[bean-aid]

^^screaming into your computer monitor is not sending out dmca's

[AdultKing]

Originally Posted by nextri

I don't accept that disabling the adzone is a criteria. Your agenda is to stop these sites from benefiting from piracy. Our solution stops that, and that is all you can require of us. So that criteria has nothing to do with what your agenda is.

Your solution does not stop anyone benefiting from Piracy. The ads remain, the advertiser still gets benefit from the traffic from a pirate site and nobody in the outside world knows that the publisher has been terminated.

How much of your traffic do you think comes from pirate or piracy related websites ? How many of those publishers domains do you think are legitimate ?

Originally Posted by The Hun

Well, in defense of AK, disabling the adzone would at least show the SURFER they're on a site infringing people's rights.

It would also show other pirates that there is zero tolerance for piracy at Plugrush, right now it's sounding as if Plugrush isn't all that concerned about the issue.

Originally Posted by The Hun

Agreed gunner... I also believe one needs to go after the problem. Pirates using ad networks is not the real problem, pirates hosting somewhere is not the real problem either...

We shut down file lockers and other sites in the file locker eco system by taking every supply of money away from them and getting their hosting shut down.

We go after their payment processing, their hosting, their ad revenue streams and anything else that supplies a cash flow to their infringing site or service.

Take the money away and commercial piracy fails. We have seen site after site shut down when they have run out of money.

Originally Posted by nextri

Our suggested solution will help a lot more in getting surfers to pay for porn, regardless of whether they get educated or not. What counts is that they take out their credit cards..

Your suggested solution is nothing but a cynical attempt to keep benefiting from pirate traffic. Even if you're not charging for the ad clicks, the network is getting exposure and you're still providing your advertisers click throughs.

So your solution is that if it's a pirate website you will still display ads, for no other reason than it's not your fight and your ads might cause a pirate to go pay for a porn site.

By your logic if it was a child pornography site you would display the ads, because child protection isn't your fight and your ads might cause a pedophile to go to an adult porn site.

When you take your rationale to the furthest possible extreme your rationale fails, just as in the alternative scenario described above.

Originally Posted by The Hun

What counts is that we get people to play it fair. I honestly believe you can't educate people to pay for something by showing them ads. I also believe going after the ad networks is not attacking the root of the problem.

To be fair until now we have not been going after the ad networks, we have been asking the ad networks to terminate the accounts of pirates. That's all we are asking. Terminate the financial accounts of pirates and shut their ads down depriving them of a way to make money.

Originally Posted by mineistaken

Another shady company exposed.

Yes, I must admit I am quite disappointed, I had hoped once they were shown the scale of the problem that they would want to be good corporate citizens.

Originally Posted by mineistaken

So thats why he goes after the next best thing (hosts, ad networks etc that you mentioned). He can not go after "the problem" as you say because (as you say) there are no means.

Correct. We take away the payment processing, ad revenue and hosting (where possible) of commercial pirates. Without revenue the sites close, we have proven that time and time again.

None of the pirate sites displaying Plugrush ads are "sharing is caring" pirates. They're all in it for a buck.

[AdultKing]

Originally Posted by The Hun

So that's still not solving the problem. That's fixing the symptoms. I mean, shutting down every ISP in the world would solve the problem as well? Very noble to fight piracy in any way, but in this case not solving the issue. I believe that the ad networks could help making life hard for pirates, I just believe 'going after them' is not the right thing to do... I would do it in a different tone.

We don't want to go after anyone in this industry. Do you think I enjoy sitting up all night repeating the same arguments ad infinitum ?

My preference would be that Plugrush stand up and be a good corporate citizen and send a clear message that piracy is not tolerated on their network and when infringing sites are reported and found by them to be infringing that the publisher's accounts are terminated and ad zones blocked.

Sometimes when dealing with third parties we get push back, just like we are getting on this issue from Plugrush. That's unfortunate.

Originally Posted by looky_lou

It is your responsibility if you truly are anti-piracy! Every step helps. You may not be the end all for anti-piracy, but you are an important step.

Correct.

Originally Posted by Biggy

Let me get this straight.

So you have a special feature coded into your software that says if a publisher account is terminated for piracy, then you also don't charge the advertiser for this traffic?

That seems very, very strange. And you'd be the first ad network known to mankind that doesn't charge for impressions based upon terminated sites but delivers it for free. That an advertiser would login, and pay for less impressions than what you actually deliver?

Why put up such a wall? Why not just terminate and cut all ties. You're going to turn around then say you are doing a favor to the industry for this? You going to provide AK the back end and a walk through of your system to prove what you say is actually true. Hell, can anyone back up this guy's claim that he doesn't charge for those zones after he terminates the account? Who here is going to believe that on face value? My money says he won't pay the pub out after the acct is terminated, but he will most definitely continue to charge for those impressions and keep all the $. I'd bet money that he's telling a half truth, or else he'd cut all ties.

If you weren't enjoying some business benefit, then this is exactly what you would be doing... cutting all ties.

You would think that the last thing Plugrush would want is pirate publishers adding to the load on their network if there is no commercial benefit from doing so. We've all seen ad networks buckling under the strain of high traffic volumes from time to time, there is no way any ad network would want unnecessary traffic that isn't some how being paid for. It doesn't pass the smell test.

Originally Posted by ravo

I'm a bit hesitant to get into the fray here, as I could be considered a competitor to Plugrush, and hence perhaps a bit unbiased (although our network is magnitudes smaller than PR so I'm not sure we're really in the same league).

I agree, that it's not Plugrush's (or any traffic broker's) responsibility to police their networks for copyright infringement (who's knows what's legal or not, on the face of it?), but once pointed out an obvious infringement (eg. siterips) they should do everything in their power to stop anyone from making any profits from that traffic.

That, in my mind, is to disable the domain and any associated ad zones.

Question: What if the site contained some sort of CP, or beast content? Would you let the adzone remain active?

Exactly, my point above. Do they still show ads on CP sites because they see it as a public service to steer pedophiles away from nasty stuff in the hope that they will buy a normal adult website membership ? It's not a standpoint that makes any sense at all.

Originally Posted by signupdamnit

If you REALLY aren't benefiting from the pirate ads then why not disable them? And come on this "we leave them up for the good of the industry" thing is just bullshit.

After sleeping on this issue, I tend to agree. It just doesn't pass the smell test.

Originally Posted by Plugrush

Well it's a good thing we don't pay per impression

On our traffic trading, most publishers are far above 100% on trading too...I guess maybe we are just a really bad company all together???

Nobody is saying you're a bad company, however we are asking questions like:

1. Why have you been harbouring support on piracy webmaster forums ?

2. Why not take a clear stance anti piracy and disable piracy ad zones ?

The only thing I can conclude from your position is that you think you will lose a fair chunk of traffic from your network or you are worried about how much of your network is actually piracy derived.

What are you going to do if we find out that 50% of your network's reach is piracy related ?

Originally Posted by signupdamnit

The thing is even if PR really is delivering the traffic for free to the advertisers it is still benefitting the advertisers and plugrush because it sweetens the deal for them. Plugrush can give their whales the traffic from the pirate sites in order to keep them around. Then other networks who might try to be honest such as say Juicy Ads then have to compete against this.

Any responsible corporate citizen would disable the ad zones, if for no other reason that to send a clear message that "pirates aren't welcome on our network".

Originally Posted by The Hun

No, but in my opinion is trying to bully the means of pirates making money into helping your cause isn't going to help. Know you enemy... But more importantly: know who your friend should be. Just saying that you'll catch more flies with honey than with trying to take a piss out of any company.

Not every action taken through third parties has been taken easily. If you remember back to the genesis of this campaign even Paypal pushed back against helping us shut off sites payment processing.

It took weeks before we reached a point with Paypal where we had a system in place to deal with the issue. Now a file sharing or piracy site is barely able to offer Paypal a few days before we kill them off.

Originally Posted by SplatterMaster

So if I were to buy traffic from PR for a pay site, that traffic basically comes from pirate sites instead of normal affiliate sites that have paying customers? Even if PR deems a site inappropriate, I still get traffic from that site?

Does anyone really want traffic from the same community that uses stolen credit cards to rip sites content and then place that content on file lockers ?

From a risk management point of view, the last traffic anyone should want is nefarious.

[J.Houser]

Originally Posted by nextri

Your arguments doesn't convince me that your way is better. So please give me a better reason, and I will consider it.

Sounds like someone is backing down outta cowardly fear.
You went from Iron Mike to brittle tissue paper bro. Tell AK to go fuck himself an go about your biz. The more you post the more stupid you're appearing.

[Paully]

Originally Posted by J.Houser

Sounds like someone is backing down outta cowardly fear.
You went from Iron Mike to brittle tissue paper bro. Tell AK to go fuck himself an go about your biz. The more you post the more stupid you're appearing.

Maybe, just fucking maybe he realizes he has a lot to lose by harboring pirates and other scumbags.

I'm hoping they do the right thing because we aren't going anywhere until they get it straightened out.

[bean-aid]

Originally Posted by Paully

Maybe, just fucking maybe he realizes he has a lot to lose by harboring pirates and other scumbags.

I'm hoping they do the right thing because we aren't going anywhere until they get it straightened out.

And you're going to get loco on them all? Meth head and all?

[topnotch, standup guy]

Originally Posted by beaner

And you're going to get loco on them all? Meth head and all?

Hey beaner, you're usually okay and everything but..

This is the wrong thread for this.

Besides, Paully can be found in plenty of other threads
.

[bean-aid]

Originally Posted by topnotch, standup guy

Hey beaner, you're usually okay and everything but..

This is the wrong thread for this.

Besides, Paully can be found in plenty of other threads
.

I'm out... I will troll him in other threads... he is the one that decided to put my name in his sig. No idea what it means except trying to sabotage business

[Paully]

Good morning Plugrush. Slept well I hope.

[Fat Panda]

keep this thread up top.

the proof is in the pudding, plugrush is a parasitic adult ad network

[arock10]

When a zone is disabled but still showing the plug rush thumbs, does it show the ads, the trade thumbs or both?

[Rik Lear]

Originally Posted by Fat Panda

its time to go fucking NUCLEAR...

Hahahah - I almost spit out my morning coffee on this one!

That was good

[Fat Panda]

bump for taking down motherfuckers that profit off piracy

adult king you have the contacts

take down their fucking paypal, paxum, payoneer, redpass, merchant accounts, bank accounts, etc !!!!