4 ms·

I also received a very similar letter in an email. I had an article on my site from several years ago about how to block referral spam, and Semalt was one of th

I also received a very similar letter in an email. I had an article on my site from several years ago about how to block referral spam, and Semalt was one of the sites I listed. I've deleted the article but did not reply to the email. I feel a bit bad that I deleted the article as everything in it was truthful and helpful to people looking for that info. However, I don't want to get into a legal fight (although that's probably unlikely). The only thing I can think of that I could possibly be in trouble for legally is that I called these sites referrer spam and ghost spam. However, so have a thousand other sites and what they did really seems to fit the definition of that exactly. I read online that these sort of letters are supposed to be delivered by mail, not electronically. Additionally, I wonder about the statute of limitations is on this. Anybody have any free, anonymous legal advice?

bhartzer 8y ago
Calling the sites referrer spam and ghost spam is correct. It's spam, which is illegal in some countries, and visitors did NOT come from Semalt.com to your website. It's fake, and I'd continue to call it what it is: referral spam and ghost spam. Some even tracked down the Semalt botnet that was doing this referral spam and ghost spam. So you're absolutely in the right by calling it what it is. What semalt did was absolutely referral spam. They claim it wasn't them, but they certainly profited from it.