4 ms·

Ok serious question... What do people feel about url shorteners doing this? Also, what about free twitter clients - as a mechanism for monetization?

by dotBen 17y ago

jrockway 17y ago
Shady. Shady.
pyre 17y ago
If you read the whole thing (links and all) you'll find this nugget of a comment: Ooh, wait, I can do one better: I'm telling Amazon. (Anybody with me? A plurality of e-mail speaks louder than one.) This is in strict violation of the Operation Agreement for the Associate program, which forbids attempts to hide links, links being processed through redirects, failure to disclose use of the Affiliate program, and tampering with other Affiliate links without disclosure. I'm sure there are plenty of similar clauses in the affliate programs from other e-commerce sites (and if there aren't it's an oversight for sure). Assuming that you're asking about stripping affilate ids and replacing them with your own, then that's a shady, shady business and I wouldn't touch any VC with a ten-foot pole that would fund you that idea. How would you even propose to grow such a business seeing as you're in clear violation of the terms of the programs you would be relying on for revenue? It would be like proposing a startup where you hire ex-cons to mug people nightly in parks nationwide for a cut of their 'earnings.' Would you really think that such an idea had any thought put towards the future of the business? If you're talking about pattern-matching URLs and redirecting to the wrong site (e.g. DownByTheBay.com -> eBay.com), then that kind of breaks the idea of a URL shortener. The shortened URL is supposed to take you to the location of the full URL.
- jrockway 17y ago
  What is Amazon going to do about a Russian company?
  - mbrubeck 17y ago
    Cancel their affiliate account and refuse to pay any earnings from their referrals?
    - jrockway 17y ago
      Ah, I didn't know they were redirecting anyone to Amazon. I thought the blogger's referral codes were being removed from links.
      - mbrubeck 17y ago
        Yeah, they were removing bloggers' referral codes from Amazon links and substituting their own.
  - pyre 17y ago
    It's unclear who that affiliate account is owned by. For all we know, that other company could just be providing the tools for LiveJournal to insert their own affiliate id.
- AgentConundrum 17y ago
  Isn't this what StackOverflow does? I remember reading some chatter about them replacing users amazon affiliate tags with their own. Amazon links on that site get changed to point to rads.stackoverflow.com which sounds like it violates the TOS. I only ask because I've been slowly puttering around the idea of creating a little website as a side project, and I was considering "borrowing" this idea from them (though I was going to preserve affiliate ids from users, if they were entered).
gyardley 17y ago
It's fine if you communicate it up front. I'd make sure this was somewhere in a nice big font on sign-up: "You're using a free service, and we need to make money, so we modify certain links to e-commerce sites. When people click on those links and then buy something, we get a small percentage. This doesn't affect the content of the linked sites at all - the experience will be identical. It does mean you'll be unable to make money on your own by linking to e-commerce sites and using an affiliate code. Sorry - but this is a free service." In fact, removing affiliate links almost certainly has a beneficial effect - your service is less likely to be seen as a tool for direct marketing lowlifes. A lot of things that seem shady when done on the sly and hidden from users are fine when explained up front and in clear and simple English.

Ok serious question... What do people feel about url shorteners doing this? Also, what about free twitter clients - as a mechanism for monetization?

by dotBen 17y ago

Ok serious question... What do people feel about url shorteners doing this? Also, what about free twitter clients - as a mechanism for monetization?

jrockway 17y ago

Shady. Shady.

pyre 17y ago

If you read the whole thing (links and all) you'll find this nugget of a comment: Ooh, wait, I can do one better: I'm telling Amazon. (Anybody with me? A plurality of e-mail speaks louder than one.) This is in strict violation of the Operation Agreement for the Associate program, which forbids attempts to hide links, links being processed through redirects, failure to disclose use of the Affiliate program, and tampering with other Affiliate links without disclosure. I'm sure there are plenty of similar clauses in the affliate programs from other e-commerce sites (and if there aren't it's an oversight for sure). Assuming that you're asking about stripping affilate ids and replacing them with your own, then that's a shady, shady business and I wouldn't touch any VC with a ten-foot pole that would fund you that idea. How would you even propose to grow such a business seeing as you're in clear violation of the terms of the programs you would be relying on for revenue? It would be like proposing a startup where you hire ex-cons to mug people nightly in parks nationwide for a cut of their 'earnings.' Would you really think that such an idea had any thought put towards the future of the business? If you're talking about pattern-matching URLs and redirecting to the wrong site (e.g. DownByTheBay.com -> eBay.com), then that kind of breaks the idea of a URL shortener. The shortened URL is supposed to take you to the location of the full URL.

jrockway 17y ago
What is Amazon going to do about a Russian company?
- mbrubeck 17y ago
  Cancel their affiliate account and refuse to pay any earnings from their referrals?
  - jrockway 17y ago
    Ah, I didn't know they were redirecting anyone to Amazon. I thought the blogger's referral codes were being removed from links.
    - mbrubeck 17y ago
      Yeah, they were removing bloggers' referral codes from Amazon links and substituting their own.
- pyre 17y ago
  It's unclear who that affiliate account is owned by. For all we know, that other company could just be providing the tools for LiveJournal to insert their own affiliate id.
AgentConundrum 17y ago
Isn't this what StackOverflow does? I remember reading some chatter about them replacing users amazon affiliate tags with their own. Amazon links on that site get changed to point to rads.stackoverflow.com which sounds like it violates the TOS. I only ask because I've been slowly puttering around the idea of creating a little website as a side project, and I was considering "borrowing" this idea from them (though I was going to preserve affiliate ids from users, if they were entered).

gyardley 17y ago

It's fine if you communicate it up front. I'd make sure this was somewhere in a nice big font on sign-up: "You're using a free service, and we need to make money, so we modify certain links to e-commerce sites. When people click on those links and then buy something, we get a small percentage. This doesn't affect the content of the linked sites at all - the experience will be identical. It does mean you'll be unable to make money on your own by linking to e-commerce sites and using an affiliate code. Sorry - but this is a free service." In fact, removing affiliate links almost certainly has a beneficial effect - your service is less likely to be seen as a tool for direct marketing lowlifes. A lot of things that seem shady when done on the sly and hidden from users are fine when explained up front and in clear and simple English.