Topbucks injunction and settlement, what to do???

[sortie]

Did any of you get the email from Topbucks about the court injunction?

I got one and wow....I'm kind of lost about it.

I mean, I don't know about signing an injunction that had nothing to do with me.
That seems like I'm volunteering to include myself in a case that has nothing to
do with me.

I think I will need a lawyer just to figure out if signing it somehow makes me liable
if another affiliate does something stupid.

I wasn't aware that I was a "party" in any action and I never heard of a
"non-party" signing an injucntion.

I can see signing a contract with Topbucks agreeing not to spam, but I need more input
about signing anything else.

[notoldschool]

i feel ya. Im curios to hear what some of the legal minds have to say.

[Furious_Male]

I just receive it as well. I haven't had a chance to look into it yet. It appears that we have to agree to specific terms in regards to Can Spam however the way its worded is a bit confusing for those of us that don't speak legal talk.

As you know, the TopBucks Webmaster Program was recently the subject of a settlement agreement between Cyberheat, Inc. and the Federal Trade Commission. Pursuant to the Injunction which resulted from the settlement agreement, TopBucks is required to obtain certain information from you, serve you with a copy of the injunction Order, and obtain your signed Acknowledgment of the Order. In shorter terms, your signature on the Acknowledgment verifies that you have read the Order and you agree to comply with the Order,
the Adult Labeling Rule, and the CAN-SPAM Act.

[sortie]

Originally Posted by Furious_Male

I just receive it as well. I haven't had a chance to look into it yet. It appears that we have to agree to specific terms in regards to Can Spam however the way its worded is a bit confusing for those of us that don't speak legal talk.

I have no problem obeying the Can Spam but signing the injunction seems wierd.

It only takes one webmaster to commit an act and violate the injuction and the
"major party" then becomes liable. I don't want to make myself part of the
"major party".

[Sly]

I was thinking it's more like an agreement stating that you will not violate those terms as an affiliate... my take was the FTC wanted every affiliate making that statement.

[sortie]

Originally Posted by Sly

I was thinking it's more like an agreement stating that you will not violate those terms as an affiliate... my take was the FTC wanted every affiliate making that statement.

Every affiliate already made a statement not to spam when they agreed to TB's terms
of service. An injunction implies that someone spammed and is now agreeing to a court
order to stop. I never spammed so the court order is not directed at me so why should
I sign it like I spammed and agree to quit?

Seems to me that the affiliates who spammed should be getting the court order and
signing it and not me.

[halfpint]

Yep i got one to

I think its all about agreeing to this

"In shorter terms, your signature on the Acknowledgment verifies that you have read the Order and you agree to comply with the Order,
the Adult Labeling Rule, and the CAN-SPAM Act. Because TopBucks prohibits solicited or unsolicited email campaigns, compliance with the Order should be basically a non-issue to you."

So I guess if you dont use spam email you should be ok. Im not to sure what the adult labeling rule means though, unless it means having a warning page.

[spacedog]

25 page injunction
http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/05230...forperminj.pdf

[spacedog]

Originally Posted by halfpint

Yep i got one to

I think its all about agreeing to this

"In shorter terms, your signature on the Acknowledgment verifies that you have read the Order and you agree to comply with the Order,
the Adult Labeling Rule, and the CAN-SPAM Act. Because TopBucks prohibits solicited or unsolicited email campaigns, compliance with the Order should be basically a non-issue to you."

So I guess if you dont use spam email you should be ok. Im not to sure what the adult labeling rule means though, unless it means having a warning page.

16 CFR 316.4 is the adult labelling law which states all emails containing adult content must be labelled "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" in the subject heading


Info on that
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...16cfr316.4.pdf

[halfpint]

Originally Posted by spacedog

16 CFR 316.4 is the adult labelling law which states all emails containing adult content must be labelled "Sexually Explicit"

Thanks, I dont use email campaigns thats why I wasent sure what it meant

[sortie]

Originally Posted by halfpint

Yep i got one to

I think its all about agreeing to this

"In shorter terms, your signature on the Acknowledgment verifies that you have read the Order and you agree to comply with the Order,
the Adult Labeling Rule, and the CAN-SPAM Act. Because TopBucks prohibits solicited or unsolicited email campaigns, compliance with the Order should be basically a non-issue to you."

So I guess if you dont use spam email you should be ok. Im not to sure what the adult labeling rule means though, unless it means having a warning page.

I'm not eager to sign something that I have to "guess" about.

[Rochard]

Our government really is clueless, isn't it?

Seems to me like they want a list of ponographers....

[halfpint]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Our government really is clueless, isn't it?

Seems to me like they want a list of ponographers....

You want to see what the uk goverment wants to do with lap dancing clubs over here as they are classed as exploiting women

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/7362673.stm

[halfpint]

Originally Posted by sortie

I'm not eager to sign something that I have to "guess" about.

Yep I understand where you are coming from. I havent signed it yet either even though I dont use email as a promotion tool

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Our government really is clueless, isn't it?

Seems to me like they want a list of ponographers....

No, it sounds like the government doesn't want any excuses that someone "did not know" that they could not mail.

[dennisthemenace]

Isn't part of the signing up process already agreeing not to spam as covered by the TOS?

[sandman!]

good luck getting people to sign.

i dont mail never have but i wont be signing shit.

does not matter tho i dont remember when the last time i sent them any sales was

LOL

[JFK]

Originally Posted by dennisthemenace

Isn't part of the signing up process already agreeing not to spam as covered by the TOS?

yup, but I guess the gov wants to make sure , you fully understand about spamming . So they can come down hard, if you violate the terms

[DigitalPimp]

I seem to remember something about payment delays if one did not sign it.

[polish_aristocrat]

I didnt get any email about it probably because my email that I used for TopBucks is no longer working, but... when I want to check stats it asks me to agree with that....

[Fabien]

I got it also.

After 11 years online all i have to say is
FUCK IT !!!!

If it can't work it out without signing up this thingo,
Chow baby
Same goes for web hosts asking to signup something and fax it back.

[cherrylula]

holy shit

sign my ass

[Fletch XXX]

me no like this type of stuff and i do not like my name and signature being "sent to the government" via a xxx corp injunction

[cherrylula]

what the hell is the Adult Labeling Rule????

[Pics Traffic]

Got it too, but Im not signing shit.

[Fletch XXX]

Originally Posted by baddog

No, it sounds like the government doesn't want any excuses that someone "did not know" that they could not mail.

the "i didnt know" excuse never works in court, and I doubt that is why they are doing this.

Once a law is passed (spam laws have been for awhile now) you cannot get off by using "i didnt know."

Signing something to prove you are aware of something is somewhat reaching when it comes to being made aware of laws or legislation...

[james_clickmemedia]

Don't sign anything with seeking legal advice first. That's what I will do & if advised not to sign I won't...

[Linkster]

The only part that bothers me aside from being automatically included in an injunction without prior knowledge or notification - is the fact that one of the requirements is for Topbucks to provide all of your personal info and a record of all payments (including all bank details) sent to you - and that you agree to provide that info as part of signing this - but then the US Govt has always been good about protecting those databases of combined info like that - NOT!

I guess Ill just chalk up the outstanding payments as a loss and move on to another sponsor

[RTP]

Really this seems very straight forward and they address it in the letter even...

"Because TopBucks prohibits solicited or unsolicited email campaigns, compliance with the Order should be basically a non-issue to you."

It doesn't seem they are requesting anything additional or changing any terms in any way. If I am reading correctly, they settled and as part of the agreement were forced to send this out.

[CDSmith]

Aside from the dreaded "objectionable signing requirement" thing, I'd like to take this moment to point out what pieces of shit the spammers themselves are. Those affiliates who flout the rules and break laws and piss off the world and the adult industry for their own short-term gain are a cancer in life and on the internet.

Those of you spamming assholes out there who caused this I give you a hail and hearty

[RTP]

also....

"Cyberheat, Inc. fought hard to protect your privacy; therefore, the only information that will be forwarded to the government will be your signed Acknowledgment of the Order. All other personal information provided in the TB admin, will not be forwarded to the government, unless you violate the terms of the Injunction as they apply to you."

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Our government really is clueless, isn't it?

Seems to me like they want a list of ponographers....

Sounds about right. But im sure someone like Ma - - - X will pop up and give it to them.

[cranki]

aren't online signatures worthless anyway?

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by cranki

aren't online signatures worthless anyway?

Ever heard of the digital signature act.

I dont think that it has ever been enforced, but by typing your name to the contract, it is digitally signed, and accepted as real.

[fatbaby]

If you 'provide' the Government with "the only information that will be forwarded to the government will be your signed Acknowledgment of the Order".... ie: my name.. I'm pretty sure those fuckers could figure out who I am, and where I am.... um... no thanks!

[tranza]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Seems to me like they want a list of ponographers....

That's EXACTLY the same feeling I got.

I wonder if I have to sign that injunction too, even though I'm not in the US.

[Trax]

Why should I sign that? Seems very wrong...

[sortie]

Originally Posted by RTP

Really this seems very straight forward and they address it in the letter even...

"Because TopBucks prohibits solicited or unsolicited email campaigns, compliance with the Order should be basically a non-issue to you."

It doesn't seem they are requesting anything additional or changing any terms in any way. If I am reading correctly, they settled and as part of the agreement were forced to send this out.

Oh, I'm pretty sure that 99% of all webmasters are in compliance without doing anything.
It's the whole thing about signing something that looks like a court procedure that I
had nothing to do with. I didn't agree to shit.

I don't know the fine print, I might have to blow Dick Chenney if another affiliate spams.

[Allison]

Originally Posted by Sly

I was thinking it's more like an agreement stating that you will not violate those terms as an affiliate... my take was the FTC wanted every affiliate making that statement.

Yes, thank you. It's very simple. We are required to inform you that if there is a violation of CAN-SPAM (sending bulk email to promote our sites) by you, that there are specific measures we would take which include reporting your information to the FTC.

TopBucks does not allow the use of e-mail marketing to promote our sites and we have not for several years so this is really a non-issue since none of our webmasters use e-mail marketing to promote our sites.

~Alli

[CDSmith]

Reads to me like you are merely acknowledging the rules and agreeing to follow them, like a re-affirmation of their TOS.

No biggie, I signed it.

[BradM]

I won't be signing shit. I've never sent them a hit with my account - never got around to it. I don't have any part in this and want nothing to do with it. Not going to include myself in some government DB somewhere and when coming back from intl travel have my name come up as a smut peddler or something.

[Why]

and soulcash won the same fucking lawsuit... hahaha. topbucks shouldnt have dropped their council.

[Allison]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Reads to me like you are merely acknowledging the rules and agreeing to follow them, like a re-affirmation of their TOS.

No biggie, I signed it.

Yes and accourding to our records, the majority of webmasters are signing it as they realize the same thing.

~Alli

[Allison]

Originally Posted by Why

and soulcash won the same fucking lawsuit... hahaha. topbucks shouldnt have dropped their council.

Umm, isn't soulcash out of business? http://www.soulcash.com The website declined to show this webpage

Like the 4 other companies before us (Bangbros, Pimproll, adultpaymaster, adultplayersclub), we made the business decision to settle as it was in best interest for our webmasters, our company, and our employees. Additionally, we negotiated even more privacy protection.

~Alli

[boneprone]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Our government really is clueless, isn't it?

Seems to me like they want a list of ponographers....

Im glad im not the only one who thought this the moment I heard of it.

[Anal Hobbit]

Hey, if I dont sign it can I still spam?

Originally Posted by Why

and soulcash won the same fucking lawsuit... hahaha. topbucks shouldnt have dropped their council.

Won the lawsuit at what cost?

Basically he lost his whole program and left tons of people unpaid.

[Allison]

Originally Posted by boneprone

Im glad im not the only one who thought this the moment I heard of it.

Well, they are not getting that from us. They may already have that from the 4 other companies who allow for all their records to be reviewed and copied.

~Alli

[V_RocKs]

I don't see anywhere that I am supposed to sign something and send it back.

I see nothing in my admin about this Injunction.

You stated in your Email that you made it really easy and yet none of us have a fucking clue what you are talking about.

So how about spelling it out here. What fucking buttons do I click to get to this fucking thing?

[V_RocKs]

OK... now it shows in my admin.. I received this Email yesterday and it didn't then.