How To Crush Zango - Anal Hobbit Style - GoFuckYourself.com

marketsmart · 11-09-2006, 02:46 PM

100 people get together in different city states. You sue for $5k at the same time. Of course Zango must be responsible for hurting your business. You take screen caps and bring a laptop to court showing how the sponsors are stealing your traffic.

100 small claims cases. That means that the sponsor has to defend 100 cases. That equals big legal money. Or, they dont show up and you win default judgement.

Now 1 $5k default judgement wont get people begging to help you recover, but 100 cases (default judgement) equals $500k and that will get people out of the woodwork trying to help you collect for their 30-40% cut.

Now, if the sponsor chooses to defend, they are looking at a minimum of $2-3k per case to hire legal, or send legal to defend, or expenses to defend in person...

In either case, its a losing proposition for them (the sponsor).

I have 5-6 people willing to do this, so i need 95 more...

If you want to stop zango from stealing your sales, this is a smart strategy...

marketsmart · 11-09-2006, 02:47 PM

btw.. this thread is not Anal Hobbit Approved....

WiredGuy · 11-09-2006, 02:49 PM

You realize you actually have to go through the process of proving sales were lost and in a malicious manner. The fact that a surfer has their toolbar installed isn't malicious, it was a concentual install.
WG

marketsmart · 11-09-2006, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

You realize you actually have to go through the process of proving sales were lost and in a malicious manner. The fact that a surfer has their toolbar installed isn't malicious, it was a concentual install.
WG

yes, unless the defendant is a no show....

SmokeyTheBear · 11-09-2006, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

You realize you actually have to go through the process of proving sales were lost and in a malicious manner. The fact that a surfer has their toolbar installed isn't malicious, it was a concentual install.
WG

actually thats not entirely true

----------------
The Restatement (Second) of Torts § 217 defines trespass to chattels as ?intentionally? dispossessing another of the chattel, or using or intermeddling with a chattel in the possession of another.? Harm to personal property or diminution of its quality, condition or value as a result of a defendant?s use can also result in liability under § 218(b) of the Restatement. In other words, any action that intentionally interferes with a plaintiff?s possessory interest in his personal property may be subject to a trespass to chattels claim.

The trespass to chattels cause of action, frequently asserted in recent years against Internet advertisers and email spammers, is often included in complaints against spyware companies.

To summarize, the basic elements of a claim of trespass to chattels are: 1) the lack of the plaintiff?s consent to the trespass, 2) interference or intermeddling with possessory interest, and 3) the intentionality of the defendant?s actions. Actual damage is not necessarily a required element of a trespass to chattels claim. See, e.g., Hawkins v. Hawkins, 101 N.C. App. 529, 532, 400 S.E.2d 472, 475 (1999).

SmokeyTheBear · 11-09-2006, 03:14 PM

this part is especially telling

A vendor can attempt to dispute a trespass claim on the grounds that the user consented to the terms of the contract. Even if consent was given for certain access, a user may still have a valid trespass to chattels complaint if the vendor has exceeded the contractual terms, if the contract is found to misrepresent the actual functioning of the product, or if the consent has been withdrawn. A vendor can be held liable for “any use exceeding the consent” given.” (Restatement (Second) of Torts § 256)

SmokeyTheBear · 11-09-2006, 03:16 PM

key words there are " if the product is found to misrepresent the contract " , now obviously this still has to be proven ..

crockett · 11-09-2006, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

You realize you actually have to go through the process of proving sales were lost and in a malicious manner. The fact that a surfer has their toolbar installed isn't malicious, it was a concentual install.
WG

There are already cases on the book against Gator.. I dunno if they ever went to court or if they settled. But gator was being sued for popping competitors ads on other peoples websites.

Pretty much the exact same thing zango does.

btw to the topic starter.. 100x5k = 500k that's not going to break zango's bank..

_Richard_ · 11-09-2006, 03:18 PM

thats actually not a bad idea.. There's no way they would show up for all of it. I wonder what it costs to take a claim to court?

R

squishypimp · 11-09-2006, 03:19 PM

good luck

marketsmart · 11-09-2006, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

btw to the topic starter.. 100x5k = 500k that's not going to break zango's bank..

this would be against advertisers... not zango... if zango can pay a 3.2 mill ftc settlement, 500k wont mean much...

but how many sponsors want to go to court 5-6 times a week? even small claims court?

and of course, court decisions (even small claims) can be used i other courts in the same state as precedence if argued....

marketsmart · 11-09-2006, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Sexbankroll

thats actually not a bad idea.. There's no way they would show up for all of it. I wonder what it costs to take a claim to court?

R

this is what counsel has advised me as the best alternative to either a class action or independent suit....

and it makes a lot of sense...

marketsmart · 11-09-2006, 03:33 PM

btw, small claims costs are relatively low, however, the defendant does have the ability to counter sue... so, the max liability for either side is 5k..

but the logistics of a company defending 100 small claims cases that fall within a week or two would create havoc with the defendant....

and thats the point, make the burden more than the benefit...

Major (Tom) · 11-09-2006, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

You realize you actually have to go through the process of proving sales were lost and in a malicious manner. The fact that a surfer has their toolbar installed isn't malicious, it was a concentual install.
WG

I got hit with it and i didnt consent to anything.

duke

Major (Tom) · 11-09-2006, 03:38 PM

what will happen is in time they will be found liable, and affiliates can be considered ascessories.
Thats my guess... But it wont happen anytime soon.
duke

Major (Tom) · 11-09-2006, 03:39 PM

what will happen is in time they will be found liable, and affiliates can be considered ascessories.
Thats my guess... But it wont happen anytime soon.
duke

marketsmart · 11-09-2006, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

what will happen is in time they will be found liable, and affiliates can be considered ascessories.
Thats my guess... But it wont happen anytime soon.
duke

well yes... there is a way to circumvent zango tos. i know cause i used to push them until i realized what they were doing.

zango's defense is it's the affiliates fault....

ajrocks · 11-09-2006, 04:18 PM

Someone is trying to work against Zango I saw a few posts about zangoblacklist.com but no one seems to care LOL.

ajrocks · 11-09-2006, 04:18 PM

I do love the anal hobbit though wish he would put his two cents in.

will76 · 11-09-2006, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

You realize you actually have to go through the process of proving sales were lost and in a malicious manner. The fact that a surfer has their toolbar installed isn't malicious, it was a concentual install.
WG

What percentage do you believe were concentual ? Just curious how delusional you are or either extremely biased, or both.

11-09-2006, 02:46 PM	#1
marketsmart HOMICIDAL TROLL KILLER Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sunnybrook Institution for the Criminally Insane Posts: 20,419	How To Crush Zango - Anal Hobbit Style 100 people get together in different city states. You sue for $5k at the same time. Of course Zango must be responsible for hurting your business. You take screen caps and bring a laptop to court showing how the sponsors are stealing your traffic. 100 small claims cases. That means that the sponsor has to defend 100 cases. That equals big legal money. Or, they dont show up and you win default judgement. Now 1 $5k default judgement wont get people begging to help you recover, but 100 cases (default judgement) equals $500k and that will get people out of the woodwork trying to help you collect for their 30-40% cut. Now, if the sponsor chooses to defend, they are looking at a minimum of $2-3k per case to hire legal, or send legal to defend, or expenses to defend in person... In either case, its a losing proposition for them (the sponsor). I have 5-6 people willing to do this, so i need 95 more... If you want to stop zango from stealing your sales, this is a smart strategy... Last edited by marketsmart; 11-09-2006 at 02:48 PM..

11-09-2006, 02:49 PM	#3
WiredGuy Pounding Googlebot Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 34,496	You realize you actually have to go through the process of proving sales were lost and in a malicious manner. The fact that a surfer has their toolbar installed isn't malicious, it was a concentual install. WG __________________ I play with Google.

11-09-2006, 03:14 PM	#6
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	this part is especially telling A vendor can attempt to dispute a trespass claim on the grounds that the user consented to the terms of the contract. Even if consent was given for certain access, a user may still have a valid trespass to chattels complaint if the vendor has exceeded the contractual terms, if the contract is found to misrepresent the actual functioning of the product, or if the consent has been withdrawn. A vendor can be held liable for “any use exceeding the consent” given.” (Restatement (Second) of Torts § 256) __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

11-09-2006, 03:16 PM	#7
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	key words there are " if the product is found to misrepresent the contract " , now obviously this still has to be proven .. __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

11-09-2006, 03:19 PM	#10
squishypimp PostMaster General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 10,781	good luck __________________ Signature For Sale

11-09-2006, 02:47 PM	#2
marketsmart HOMICIDAL TROLL KILLER Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sunnybrook Institution for the Criminally Insane Posts: 20,419	btw.. this thread is not Anal Hobbit Approved....

11-09-2006, 03:18 PM	#9
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,990	thats actually not a bad idea.. There's no way they would show up for all of it. I wonder what it costs to take a claim to court? R

11-09-2006, 03:33 PM	#13
marketsmart HOMICIDAL TROLL KILLER Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sunnybrook Institution for the Criminally Insane Posts: 20,419	btw, small claims costs are relatively low, however, the defendant does have the ability to counter sue... so, the max liability for either side is 5k.. but the logistics of a company defending 100 small claims cases that fall within a week or two would create havoc with the defendant.... and thats the point, make the burden more than the benefit...

11-09-2006, 03:38 PM	#15
Major (Tom) White Pride Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Null Posts: 31,203	what will happen is in time they will be found liable, and affiliates can be considered ascessories. Thats my guess... But it wont happen anytime soon. duke __________________ WHITE LIVES MATTER

11-09-2006, 03:39 PM	#16
Major (Tom) White Pride Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Null Posts: 31,203	what will happen is in time they will be found liable, and affiliates can be considered ascessories. Thats my guess... But it wont happen anytime soon. duke __________________ WHITE LIVES MATTER

11-09-2006, 04:18 PM	#18
ajrocks Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: On Uranus Posts: 4,526	Someone is trying to work against Zango I saw a few posts about zangoblacklist.com but no one seems to care LOL. __________________ SEO Strategy - Digital Strategy - Cannabis Lead Generation Skype aj.durden1