Hey TopBucks, what did I do? - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

payrollpete · 06-20-2002, 09:52 AM

allison,

apic should be going to the webmaster first, and asking some questions and for a license or something

they never do that, even though that is like a very vital part

ServerGenius · 06-20-2002, 09:54 AM

APIC is far from always right.....the examples are too numerous.
Then the theory of chasing sponsors instead of thieves is a very
weird one...

I would steal a car and drive it to my work....APIC would sue
my boss because I stole a car and because I probably won´t
pay any attention to APIC therefore it´s OK for APIC to go
after my boss in order to get the car back?

I don´t think this will stand long in any court case

DynaMite

ServerGenius · 06-20-2002, 09:56 AM

I should add offcourse that APIC would only assume I stole the
car because it happens to be a blue one just like the car that
was stolen....

It was not checked and verified that the car I drive was stolen
but they still would go after my boss?

Come this doesn´t make any sense....besides that it´s completely
redigouloug

DynaMite

Allison · 06-20-2002, 10:01 AM

Originally posted by CDSmith
Allison, just a thought here.... why not work it out with the webmaster FIRST and THEN deactivate if the webmaster is proven to be in error? (Like Lensman does)
Again, just a thought.

Well, a few reasons.

Again

a) deactivation does not affect stats
b) webmasters are more likely to react promptly when they realize they can't log into their stats
c) webmasters don't always update their email addys with us or have multiple accounts, so if they do not get our email- when they see their account is deactivated they know something is up and contact us

Lensman's policy works for his company and I'm under the impression that he does that because the other option is to just terminate the webmaster's account and by doing that it would be unfair.

~Alli

Quoth the Raven · 06-20-2002, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by volante
Lol, APICS aren't renowned for their accuracy - I had a similar email once concerning some pornstar pics on a gallery I made.

The pics were from the sponsor I was promoting on the gallery...

Same here. The worst part was that all the pics and thumbs had the sponsor's url and name on them.

Allison · 06-20-2002, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by payrollpete
allison,

apic should be going to the webmaster first, and asking some questions and for a license or something

they never do that, even though that is like a very vital part

Then people should contact APIC about their policies.

I think TopBucks' policy is very fair and allows webmasters to work this out quickly. If we did not deactivate the accounts I know it would take much longer to work things out because there would be much less urgency to the matter.

~Alli

hyper · 06-20-2002, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Allison

I believe APIC contacts the sponsors and hosts because those are 2 companies the webmaster will listen to and work with because webmasters want their money and they don't want to lose their hosting

~Alli

they probably just go after the sponsors and hosts without contacting the webmaster.

let you sort the situation out. then notify the complaintant of the status.

That way they get paid for your hard work in resolution of the matter

LoveAsianChicks · 06-20-2002, 10:27 AM

still wouldn't use topbucks after reading your last few replies. If you take APIC's word first & webmaster second it shows you don't treat webmasters right.
Who wants to help make you rich with that attitude?

Lensman has a better solution which is to treat the webmaster with respect until proven guilty.

BTW if a person is using stolen content it isn't the sponsors job to nail the thief, it would be the owner of the content.
The owner can take them to court and get the stolen content removed. APIC is making you police what should be their job.

payrollpete · 06-20-2002, 10:29 AM

i would use topbucks

they pay, they have good sites

if apic screws up your business with topbucks, then sue apic

they would be at fault

payrollpete · 06-20-2002, 10:30 AM

i don't think that law makes the sponsor liable to go after

i think somebody is twisting around the wording of that law

Sly_RJ · 06-20-2002, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LoveAsianChicks
still wouldn't use topbucks after reading your last few replies. If you take APIC's word first & webmaster second it shows you don't treat webmasters right.
Who wants to help make you rich with that attitude?

Lensman has a better solution which is to treat the webmaster with respect until proven guilty.

BTW if a person is using stolen content it isn't the sponsors job to nail the thief, it would be the owner of the content.
The owner can take them to court and get the stolen content removed. APIC is making you police what should be their job.

What sponsor wants affiliates who use stolen content? It makes them look like shit and is defined in most every T&C I've read. The sponsor has great interest in shutting thieves down, and I think they should, but the method and attitude of Top Bucks towards the situation is complete BS.

Allison · 06-20-2002, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by payrollpete
i don't think that law makes the sponsor liable to go after

i think somebody is twisting around the wording of that law

Yes the sponsor does become liable because if we allow the webmaster to earn $ off of stolen content constantly then we do put ourselves in a position where we are liable. Thats basically paying someone else to advertise our sites with stolen content.

It's like a pawn shop purchasing a product that they suspect may be stolen.

~Alli

Allison · 06-20-2002, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

What sponsor wants affiliates who use stolen content? It makes them look like shit and is defined in most every T&C I've read. The sponsor has great interest in shutting thieves down, and I think they should, but the method and attitude of Top Bucks towards the situation is complete BS.

Sly_RJ we admitted that the APIC email to the webmaster from us was unclear about our policy (which I have explained numerous times now) and seemed harsh. A new member of our support team created the e-mail and did not completely understand our policy. We apologized to Kenny and let him and other webmasters know that we will be sure to clarify how we deal with APIC's concerns in the future.

~Alli

UBIQUITOUS · 06-20-2002, 11:47 AM

How about a counter organisation? If the content providers out there have an organisation designed to help them deal with content theives than the webmasters should have one to combat false accusations when they occur. If someone were to make it a point to gather all the evidence every time APIC were to falsely accuse someone and hold it in a central database. These people would hold alot of power over APIC. Anytime a webmaster was falsely accused they would report it to this new organisation. This organisation could then contact APIC and threaten them with a class action law suit based upon all of the evidence collected. This group could also keep a list of all sponsors, hosts, etc. who were too "eager" to comply with APIC before proof had been given. That way we have a good system of checks and balances. APIC wouldn't be so quick to throw around accusations, The sponsors/Hosts would have more reason to check things out before shutting off accounts, and APIC would still be free to go after people who actually steal content. As it stands APIC seems to be holding way to much of the power and it seems they aren't afraid to misuse it.

CDSmith · 06-20-2002, 12:06 PM

I just don't like the idea that someone can arbitrarily point the finger at me and my account or my site can be "put on hold" without me even getting the chance to say my side of the issue.

I don't like that at all.

I'll go so far as to say that I don't fucking like that at all. (at the risk of sounding "unprofessional")
My professional integrity is one of my most prized possessions and I make no effort to hide that fact, and I don't like when it is called into question, much less having any of my accounts affected in any way. As I said, if this were ever to happen to me, I would be very tempted to discontinue business with a company that would treat me this way.

I am not adverse to taking others to court either, unlike some that would rather avoid it. If I'm in the wrong it would be because of an unintentional mistake only, so accusations better be backed up solidly with proof, at least where myself and my businesses are concerned.

Sly_RJ · 06-20-2002, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Allison

Sly_RJ we admitted that the APIC email to the webmaster from us was unclear about our policy (which I have explained numerous times now) and seemed harsh. A new member of our support team created the e-mail and did not completely understand our policy. We apologized to Kenny and let him and other webmasters know that we will be sure to clarify how we deal with APIC's concerns in the future.

~Alli

I know you did, and I respect that. Very professional, thumbs up. However, I wasn't referring to your handling of email to the least bit.

Instead, I was referring to your general policy of deactivation. Completely ridiculous if you ask me. You claim its a way to get the users proper attention, damn right it would get my attention! And piss me off, too. There are much better ways of getting an affiliates attention. I realize you folks are busy, but if this matter is important to you (I'm assuming it is), I think a phone call to the affiliate would be most appropriate. If someone was accusing me of theft, the least they could do is give me a buzz.

And instead of leaving the affiliate hanging by not allowing them to login (that would seriously piss me off), you should print up a screen that says there are a few concerns regarding theft, please contact TB immediately so we can clear your name.

You're making the affiliate feel like absolute shit. Is that really what you want your policy to do?

Allison · 06-20-2002, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

I know you did, and I respect that. Very professional, thumbs up. However, I wasn't referring to your handling of email to the least bit.

Instead, I was referring to your general policy of deactivation. Completely ridiculous if you ask me. You claim its a way to get the users proper attention, damn right it would get my attention! And piss me off, too. There are much better ways of getting an affiliates attention. I realize you folks are busy, but if this matter is important to you (I'm assuming it is), I think a phone call to the affiliate would be most appropriate. If someone was accusing me of theft, the least they could do is give me a buzz.

Well, I'm fine with calling the webmasters, but I think many webmasters out there don't always appreciate being called because of time differences or because they may be trying to hide what they do from the people that might be answering the phone. But if webmasters generally agree that a phone call is better then I'd be happy to buzz.

In regards to our policy, after this thread we have made some changes. We will be clear to state that the webmaster log in is temporarily deactivated and that all sales/stats info is still being logged.

I do like your recommendation for the screen for when they log in and will see if we can implement that as well

thnx

alli

FATPad · 06-20-2002, 01:17 PM

OMG. TOPBUCKS KILLED KENNY!

(sorry, if it was already said, I didn't read the whole thread)

CDSmith · 06-20-2002, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Allison
if webmasters generally agree that a phone call is better then I'd be happy to buzz.

I for one would be very happy to be phoned and given a chance to clear up any misunderstandings, before my account was deactivated or changed in any way. No matter what time of day or night, I would want to address that kind of issue immediately, and my answering machine is on 24/7. If a message was left, including a phone # for me to call back, you bet I'd get my arse out of bed and call you back, and try to resolve the problem on the spot.

If you were to implement that practise into your existing policy, I'm sure a lot of webmasters would feel much better about things here, and hopefully other sponsors will take a cue from you Alisson, and from Lensman too.

Thanks,

quiet · 06-20-2002, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chodadog

The alternative is what quiet does. Like he said, works for him. And he doesn't have to deal with a bunch of incompetant morons like APIC.

exactly :) it is incredibly easy to shut down an infringer's site via their isp if they are violating copyright. i've never run into a SINGLE case where the isp won't kill the site of a proven copyright violator asap. and i've literally taken down *hundreds* of sites/pages over the years. blah, blah, blah. some helpful dmca links:

http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l2.html (to infringer)
http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l3.html (to isp)

Fletch XXX · 06-20-2002, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by quiet

exactly it is incredibly easy to shut down an infringer's site via their isp if they are violating copyright. i've never run into a SINGLE case where the isp won't kill the site of a proven copyright violator asap. and i've literally taken down *hundreds* of sites/pages over the years. blah, blah, blah. some helpful dmca links:

http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l2.html (to infringer)
http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l3.html (to isp)

nice post...

Choker · 06-20-2002, 04:02 PM

Quote:

I don't think our policy is harsh at all. We give webmasters the opportunity to work this out and again it is a temporary deactivation which is easily undone on our end when the webmaster makes an effort to work this out with us and/or APIC

What a crock of shit this is. Why even temporary deactivate an account?? You are fucking with peoples money here. Fuck you and APIC. ""When the webmasters makes an effort""

""We give webmasters the opportunity""

No, it doesn't work that way. If you accuse someone of something, YOU provide the proof. Unless I woke up in Cuba this morning I am missing something here.

I don't think I will be dealing with anybody who promotes Porncash for some time to come.

Allison · 06-20-2002, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by quiet

exactly it is incredibly easy to shut down an infringer's site via their isp if they are violating copyright. i've never run into a SINGLE case where the isp won't kill the site of a proven copyright violator asap. and i've literally taken down *hundreds* of sites/pages over the years. blah, blah, blah. some helpful dmca links:

http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l2.html (to infringer)
http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l3.html (to isp)

Well the APIC should be going to the ISP directly and not to the sponsor. Sponsor's don't have the time to be going back and forth between APIC, the webmaster, and wherever the webmaster purchased/stole the content from to decide what to do.

Choker- In this industry as we all know, we are all responsible for providing the proof ourselves that the images are legal and are licensed. AOL, ISP's, Feds or whoever can make claims and take action against you for images that look under 18 and YOU are the one who has to provide proof they are over 18 not them.

~Alli

JFPdude · 06-20-2002, 04:35 PM

Agreed that APIC should be going to the host after all attempts to contact the webmaster directly from APIC has been exhausted. Then and only then should APIC go to the host and the host can contact the webmaster.

As far as any sponsor siding with APIC and doing ANYTHING to a webmasters account without any proof crosses lines myself as a webmaster sees as shady and after a chat with my attorney tonight ILLEGAL.

I guess I will sign up for topbucks and then get ahold of some "borrowed" content. I have an attorney drooling over this one. And yes he has read all the TOS's involved.

Allison up till now everybody has spoken highly of you and your program. And 95% or more of the webmasters on this board believe in keeping everything legal. But I must say you did your program a great diservice today by publicly announcing that this is your company's position. I strongly suggest you go back to the board of directors and fix this policy or I have a feeling you will see a sharp slowdown in reputable webmasters dealing with your company.

+

= 4cents but it was needed

JFPDude

Allison · 06-20-2002, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JFPdude

As far as any sponsor siding with APIC and doing ANYTHING to a webmasters account without any proof crosses lines myself as a webmaster sees as shady and after a chat with my attorney tonight ILLEGAL.

I guess I will sign up for topbucks and then get ahold of some "borrowed" content. I have an attorney drooling over this one. And yes he has read all the TOS's involved.

+ = 4cents but it was needed

JFPDude

How does your attorney feel about you "borrowing content" and attempting to make $ off of it when you don't have a license for it and there for also don't have access to the 2257?

TopBucks' actions don't affect webmasters payments and have nothing to do with accusing webmasters of anything. Rather its passing the word to the webmaster that APIC has an issue with them and needs it to be resolved. If sponsors do support webmasters who use stolent content then there are even Bigger legal issues.

~Alli

ChrisH · 06-20-2002, 05:17 PM

Apics a fucking joke!

I am seeing more, and more of these screwups. It's becoming an epidemic!

Allison · 06-20-2002, 05:19 PM

Ok Guys... GOOD NEWS... TopBucks has made a compromise and would like to announce our new policy towards APIC situations.

We will be contacting the webmaster first asking the webmaster to remove the pictures or provide license info to APIC within 2 days. If we do not get a response within 2 days the account may be temporarily deactivated from log in (again all sales/click stats continue to be logged).

I think this is a very fair compromise and I apologize to anyone who felt our previous policy was too harsh. Thank you for all the webmaster suggestions.

~Alli

jimmy3way · 06-20-2002, 05:20 PM

BY FAR the funniest thing about this post is how many cease and desists TopBucks used to get back in the day for swiping content.

ChrisH · 06-20-2002, 05:21 PM

Alli,
Good move. I know that if I was falsely accused and had to prove myself first to get my account reactivated, I'd move all my traffic that day!!

jimmy3way · 06-20-2002, 05:22 PM

Bad idea Alli, you should have stuck to your guns, the damage is done and your policy was fair as hell.

To change it now means you are admitting that it wasn't fair, when it was and by doing it spur of the moment after one complaint you're really telling webmasters that despite what you said the policy wasn't very well thought out at all.

kenny · 06-20-2002, 05:22 PM

I am under the impression that APIC took action agaisnt me because I didn't have a link to the license on the page.
Should I put a link on every site and gallery I make going to a copy of the license agreement?

Allison · 06-20-2002, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmy3way
Bad idea Alli, you should have stuck to your guns, the damage is done and your policy was fair as hell.

To change it now means you are admitting that it wasn't fair, when it was and by doing it spur of the moment after one complaint you're really telling webmasters that despite what you said the policy wasn't very well thought out at all.

It's more of us listening to webmaster suggestions. I understand what the webmasters are saying and also understand that APIC is attempting to provide a good service. The compromise still meets everyone's needs

~Alli

Choker · 06-20-2002, 05:28 PM

Quote:

TopBucks' actions don't affect webmasters payments and have nothing to do with accusing webmasters of anything. Rather its passing the word to the webmaster that APIC has an issue with them and needs it to be resolved. If sponsors do support webmasters who use stolent content then there are even Bigger legal issues.

WTF< of course it affects webmaster's payments. You might want to stop posting in this thread before you completely swallow that shoe sticking out of your mouth. I just lost all respect for you and your sites. Porncash should do better than this. Why don't they send someone here to explain their position that does not contradict theirself so much. When you deactivate their stats, you just ACCUSED them of cheating. You can hind behind "It's in our interest" crap all you want. Bottom line is you accused them. Not very smart thing to do imo.

jimmy3way · 06-20-2002, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Allison

It's more of us listening to webmaster suggestions. I understand what the webmasters are saying and also understand that APIC is attempting to provide a good service. The compromise still meets everyone's needs

Naw...you caved. It looks like you caved, so that's the way it is.

I'm not telling you anything someone with your public relations background doesn't know.

Allison · 06-20-2002, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Choker

When you deactivate their stats, you just ACCUSED them of cheating. You can hind behind "It's in our interest" crap all you want. Bottom line is you accused them. Not very smart thing to do imo.

We don't deactivate their stats. We were blocking them from logging in until matters are resolved. We changed the policy to a fair compromise as mentioned earlier. APIC is the one doing the accusing- as a sponsor we really are unable to tell what content is stolen or not

~Alli

cherrylula · 06-20-2002, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kenny
I am under the impression that APIC took action agaisnt me because I didn't have a link to the license on the page.
Should I put a link on every site and gallery I make going to a copy of the license agreement?

That's a good question.

Allison · 06-20-2002, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kenny
I am under the impression that APIC took action agaisnt me because I didn't have a link to the license on the page.
Should I put a link on every site and gallery I make going to a copy of the license agreement?

Here's a better question. Will kenny be gettin' the dvd player?

Sly_RJ · 06-20-2002, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Allison

Here's a better question. Will kenny be gettin' the dvd player?

Trying to crack a joke after being under fire? Clever.

Choker · 06-20-2002, 05:38 PM

Ally, I don't know you and very rarely post here about anything that does not directly effect me. But I hate schoolyard bullies. And APIC is the biggest bully on the playground. Just the fact that after this debacle, you are still using APIC says a lot about you. Do a search on this board about APIC. They are a joke. And you just made yourself a joke by aligning yourself with them. You think the service APIC provides your company is worth the respect and revenues you just lost??? Webmasters have memories like elephants. Well, some of them do anyway. I for one will make it a point not to promote any sponsor that uses APIC.

jimmy3way · 06-20-2002, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Allison

Here's a better question. Will kenny be gettin' the dvd player?

I'll help.

jimmy3way · 06-20-2002, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Choker
Well, some of them do anyway. I for one will make it a point not to promote any sponsor that uses APIC.

Don't worry there are 20 newbies willing to take your place.

kenny · 06-20-2002, 05:44 PM

If the email from Topbucks was more detailed and included a phone number of some other means of contact information rather then being so blunt and harsh, this thread would have never been posted.
Topbucks did however resolve this matter for me.
I still think APIC should have a different means of action besides involving outside parties such as a sponsor.
I am sure that that sponsors would rather not worry about where webmasters get their content from as well.

Choker · 06-20-2002, 05:45 PM

Quote:

APIC is the one doing the accusing

So fucking what ?? Who the fuck are they, self appointed internet police?? Fuck them and anyone who uses them. You think I am going to defend myself everytime someone complains about me?? Fuck that and fuck APIC. If APIC has proof, then let them show it , else they can go smoke a pole. Just because some dumbass accuses someone of something, does not mean webmasters should have to worry about getting their accounts canned.

BTW, I do respect you staying here and defending Porncash and making things happen. You do have big balls.

chodadog · 06-20-2002, 05:53 PM

I think it's great that Topbucks still track your clicks and sales during this deactivation period. That's certainly a step up from the way i thought it was. But the lack of good faith for their webmasters is still an issue i feel.

kenny · 06-20-2002, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chodadog
I think it's great that Topbucks still track your clicks and sales during this deactivation period. That's certainly a step up from the way i thought it was. But the lack of good faith for their webmasters is still an issue i feel.

Yea,it kept track of the hits while deactivated, again the email should have been more detailed

jimmyf · 06-20-2002, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Allison

I don't think our policy is harsh at all. We give webmasters the opportunity to work this out and again it is a temporary deactivation which is easily undone on our end when the webmaster makes an effort to work this out with us and/or APIC

~Alli

Your not getting it Allison... I think a few of your customers and maybe potential customers are trying to tell you... just maybe Topbucks should look at changing there policy.... Myself I do think it is harsh... And it look likes you ar just looking for away to not pay a webmaster...

jimmyf · 06-20-2002, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Krome
Funny how the moment a few people started calling Top Bucks inadequate and started questioning there methods.

and a few other posts along those lines Alison has disappeared. I think there policy is about as effective as that shit entry console they have...

I have not read all the post yet in this thread yet, but I agree with you 100%... I stopped using Topbucks some time ago.... I know my traffic... I do not send alot of hits to my sponsors...but I do send unigue traffic from search engines... That's all am going to say... about it..

Rich J. · 06-20-2002, 06:29 PM

I don't think Allison caved at all. The webmasters spoke and she made a compromise on the policy. Also... it seams some people are confused and think Top Bucks is "using" APIC. From what I understand (with the new policy) they are just taking a tip from someone that they might be dealing with a cheater, checking it out, and then deciding what, if anything should be done about it. Sounds fair to me.

What if someone were to tell you that your sponsor was shaving 50% of your signups? Chances are you wouldn't even give them the chance to explain themselves or prove themselves in the right. You would most likely just cut off their traffic. Top Bucks new policy on this seams about as fair as anyone could ask for in my opinion.

P.S.
I don't personally know Allison or anyone else at Top Bucks. Just calling it as I see.

chodadog · 06-21-2002, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich J.
I don't think Allison caved at all. The webmasters spoke and she made a compromise on the policy. Also... it seams some people are confused and think Top Bucks is "using" APIC. From what I understand (with the new policy) they are just taking a tip from someone that they might be dealing with a cheater, checking it out, and then deciding what, if anything should be done about it. Sounds fair to me.

The point i was making was this. It seems like the webmaster is assumed guilty. I much prefer the way Lensman handled APIC's emails than the way topbucks have.

Quote:

What if someone were to tell you that your sponsor was shaving 50% of your signups? Chances are you wouldn't even give them the chance to explain themselves or prove themselves in the right. You would most likely just cut off their traffic. Top Bucks new policy on this seams about as fair as anyone could ask for in my opinion.

Hmm, if my conversions weren't doing too well, that would probably be an incentive to stop using them. If i was happy with the conversions, i wouldn't really give a damn.

phogirl69 · 06-21-2002, 02:48 AM

Choker,

Ummm...it's TOPBUCKS, not PORNCASH... Just thought I'd point that out

06-20-2002, 09:54 AM	#102
ServerGenius Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 9,377	APIC is far from always right.....the examples are too numerous. Then the theory of chasing sponsors instead of thieves is a very weird one... I would steal a car and drive it to my work....APIC would sue my boss because I stole a car and because I probably won´t pay any attention to APIC therefore it´s OK for APIC to go after my boss in order to get the car back? I don´t think this will stand long in any court case DynaMite __________________ \| http://www.sinnerscash.com/ \| ICQ: 370820 \| Skype: SinnersCash \| AdultWhosWho \|

06-20-2002, 09:56 AM	#103
ServerGenius Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 9,377	I should add offcourse that APIC would only assume I stole the car because it happens to be a blue one just like the car that was stolen.... It was not checked and verified that the car I drive was stolen but they still would go after my boss? Come this doesn´t make any sense....besides that it´s completely redigouloug DynaMite __________________ \| http://www.sinnerscash.com/ \| ICQ: 370820 \| Skype: SinnersCash \| AdultWhosWho \|

06-20-2002, 10:01 AM	#104
Allison Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: http://www.topbucks.com Posts: 2,068	Originally posted by CDSmith Allison, just a thought here.... why not work it out with the webmaster FIRST and THEN deactivate if the webmaster is proven to be in error? (Like Lensman does) Again, just a thought. Well, a few reasons. Again a) deactivation does not affect stats b) webmasters are more likely to react promptly when they realize they can't log into their stats c) webmasters don't always update their email addys with us or have multiple accounts, so if they do not get our email- when they see their account is deactivated they know something is up and contact us Lensman's policy works for his company and I'm under the impression that he does that because the other option is to just terminate the webmaster's account and by doing that it would be unfair. ~Alli __________________ Allison President TopBucks.com\| PinkVisual.com\| [email protected] Follow Me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/PV_Alli ICQ: 120353154 Check out PVLocker.com

06-20-2002, 10:27 AM	#108
LoveAsianChicks Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: -CANADA- Posts: 1,464	still wouldn't use topbucks after reading your last few replies. If you take APIC's word first & webmaster second it shows you don't treat webmasters right. Who wants to help make you rich with that attitude? Lensman has a better solution which is to treat the webmaster with respect until proven guilty. BTW if a person is using stolen content it isn't the sponsors job to nail the thief, it would be the owner of the content. The owner can take them to court and get the stolen content removed. APIC is making you police what should be their job. Last edited by LoveAsianChicks; 06-20-2002 at 10:31 AM..

06-20-2002, 12:06 PM	#115
CDSmith Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: My network is hosted at TECHIEMEDIA.net ...Wait, you meant where am I located at? Oh... okay, I'm in Winnipeg, Canada. Oops. :) Posts: 51,460	I just don't like the idea that someone can arbitrarily point the finger at me and my account or my site can be "put on hold" without me even getting the chance to say my side of the issue. I don't like that at all. I'll go so far as to say that I don't fucking like that at all. (at the risk of sounding "unprofessional") My professional integrity is one of my most prized possessions and I make no effort to hide that fact, and I don't like when it is called into question, much less having any of my accounts affected in any way. As I said, if this were ever to happen to me, I would be very tempted to discontinue business with a company that would treat me this way. I am not adverse to taking others to court either, unlike some that would rather avoid it. If I'm in the wrong it would be because of an unintentional mistake only, so accusations better be backed up solidly with proof, at least where myself and my businesses are concerned. __________________ *Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!* ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!! Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634

06-20-2002, 09:52 AM	#101
payrollpete Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,527	allison, apic should be going to the webmaster first, and asking some questions and for a license or something they never do that, even though that is like a very vital part

06-20-2002, 10:29 AM	#109
payrollpete Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,527	i would use topbucks they pay, they have good sites if apic screws up your business with topbucks, then sue apic they would be at fault

06-20-2002, 10:30 AM	#110
payrollpete Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,527	i don't think that law makes the sponsor liable to go after i think somebody is twisting around the wording of that law

06-20-2002, 11:47 AM	#114
UBIQUITOUS Registered User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1	How about a counter organisation? If the content providers out there have an organisation designed to help them deal with content theives than the webmasters should have one to combat false accusations when they occur. If someone were to make it a point to gather all the evidence every time APIC were to falsely accuse someone and hold it in a central database. These people would hold alot of power over APIC. Anytime a webmaster was falsely accused they would report it to this new organisation. This organisation could then contact APIC and threaten them with a class action law suit based upon all of the evidence collected. This group could also keep a list of all sponsors, hosts, etc. who were too "eager" to comply with APIC before proof had been given. That way we have a good system of checks and balances. APIC wouldn't be so quick to throw around accusations, The sponsors/Hosts would have more reason to check things out before shutting off accounts, and APIC would still be free to go after people who actually steal content. As it stands APIC seems to be holding way to much of the power and it seems they aren't afraid to misuse it.

06-20-2002, 01:17 PM	#118
FATPad Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,693	OMG. TOPBUCKS KILLED KENNY! (sorry, if it was already said, I didn't read the whole thread) __________________ <a href="http://www.adultcontent.co.uk">Adult Content UK - Great British Content</a>

06-20-2002, 04:35 PM	#124
JFPdude Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Mountains of Western North Carolina. Posts: 4,027	Agreed that APIC should be going to the host after all attempts to contact the webmaster directly from APIC has been exhausted. Then and only then should APIC go to the host and the host can contact the webmaster. As far as any sponsor siding with APIC and doing ANYTHING to a webmasters account without any proof crosses lines myself as a webmaster sees as shady and after a chat with my attorney tonight ILLEGAL. I guess I will sign up for topbucks and then get ahold of some "borrowed" content. I have an attorney drooling over this one. And yes he has read all the TOS's involved. Allison up till now everybody has spoken highly of you and your program. And 95% or more of the webmasters on this board believe in keeping everything legal. But I must say you did your program a great diservice today by publicly announcing that this is your company's position. I strongly suggest you go back to the board of directors and fix this policy or I have a feeling you will see a sharp slowdown in reputable webmasters dealing with your company. + = 4cents but it was needed JFPDude

06-20-2002, 05:17 PM	#126
ChrisH Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: New York Posts: 1,355	Apics a fucking joke! I am seeing more, and more of these screwups. It's becoming an epidemic!

06-20-2002, 05:19 PM	#127
Allison Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: http://www.topbucks.com Posts: 2,068	Ok Guys... GOOD NEWS... TopBucks has made a compromise and would like to announce our <b>new policy towards APIC situations.</b> We will be contacting the webmaster first asking the webmaster to remove the pictures or provide license info to APIC within 2 days. If we do not get a response within 2 days the account may be temporarily deactivated from log in (again all sales/click stats continue to be logged). I think this is a very fair compromise and I apologize to anyone who felt our previous policy was too harsh. Thank you for all the webmaster suggestions. ~Alli __________________ Allison President TopBucks.com\| PinkVisual.com\| [email protected] Follow Me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/PV_Alli ICQ: 120353154 Check out PVLocker.com

06-20-2002, 05:20 PM	#128
jimmy3way Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Top Secret Hideout Posts: 2,508	BY FAR the funniest thing about this post is how many cease and desists TopBucks used to get back in the day for swiping content. __________________ One thing, I forgot this last detail: the Biz Markie will always prevail.

06-20-2002, 05:21 PM	#129
ChrisH Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: New York Posts: 1,355	Alli, Good move. I know that if I was falsely accused and had to prove myself first to get my account reactivated, I'd move all my traffic that day!!

06-20-2002, 05:22 PM	#130
jimmy3way Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Top Secret Hideout Posts: 2,508	Bad idea Alli, you should have stuck to your guns, the damage is done and your policy was fair as hell. To change it now means you are admitting that it wasn't fair, when it was and by doing it spur of the moment after one complaint you're really telling webmasters that despite what you said the policy wasn't very well thought out at all. __________________ One thing, I forgot this last detail: the Biz Markie will always prevail.

06-20-2002, 05:22 PM	#131
kenny Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 7,245	I am under the impression that APIC took action agaisnt me because I didn't have a link to the license on the page. Should I put a link on every site and gallery I make going to a copy of the license agreement? __________________ 7

06-20-2002, 05:38 PM	#139
Choker Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Orlando Posts: 9,024	Ally, I don't know you and very rarely post here about anything that does not directly effect me. But I hate schoolyard bullies. And APIC is the biggest bully on the playground. Just the fact that after this debacle, you are still using APIC says a lot about you. Do a search on this board about APIC. They are a joke. And you just made yourself a joke by aligning yourself with them. You think the service APIC provides your company is worth the respect and revenues you just lost??? Webmasters have memories like elephants. Well, some of them do anyway. I for one will make it a point not to promote any sponsor that uses APIC. __________________ ICQ me lets make a deal 116894466 Need dating, cam, or tube traffic? I got it.http://http://www.chokertraffic.com The Original http://www.chokertraffic.com/ Premium country pop-unders from $1.50 per k. I challenge you to compare this traffic to any other brokers. http://www.chokertraffic.com/public/tabs.php?t=o

06-20-2002, 05:44 PM	#142
kenny Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 7,245	If the email from Topbucks was more detailed and included a phone number of some other means of contact information rather then being so blunt and harsh, this thread would have never been posted. Topbucks did however resolve this matter for me. I still think APIC should have a different means of action besides involving outside parties such as a sponsor. I am sure that that sponsors would rather not worry about where webmasters get their content from as well. __________________ 7 Last edited by kenny; 06-20-2002 at 05:45 PM..

06-20-2002, 05:53 PM	#144
chodadog Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 9,736	I think it's great that Topbucks still track your clicks and sales during this deactivation period. That's certainly a step up from the way i thought it was. But the lack of good faith for their webmasters is still an issue i feel.

06-20-2002, 06:29 PM	#148
Rich J. Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: California Posts: 589	I don't think Allison caved at all. The webmasters spoke and she made a compromise on the policy. Also... it seams some people are confused and think Top Bucks is "using" APIC. From what I understand (with the new policy) they are just taking a tip from someone that they might be dealing with a cheater, checking it out, and then deciding what, if anything should be done about it. Sounds fair to me. What if someone were to tell you that your sponsor was shaving 50% of your signups? Chances are you wouldn't even give them the chance to explain themselves or prove themselves in the right. You would most likely just cut off their traffic. Top Bucks new policy on this seams about as fair as anyone could ask for in my opinion. P.S. I don't personally know Allison or anyone else at Top Bucks. Just calling it as I see. __________________ Adult Web Marketing Specialist with 10 years of Industry Experience - CONTACT ME

06-21-2002, 02:48 AM	#150
phogirl69 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,330	Choker, Ummm...it's TOPBUCKS, not PORNCASH... Just thought I'd point that out