11–20 of 56 posts
Back in 2008, the owners of digital point forums got sued by ebay for something similar, dropping cookies on people visiting their forums for amazon. I wonder if bit.ly will be sued for this. Shameless plug: Check out http://www.tracker.ly , where you can create every type of redirect link in one place.
The real issue here is that bitly is doing these affiliate conversions without the FTC mandated disclosure¹. If I create a non-affliated link for a amazon product for a blog post and use bitly to shorten it and dont disclose it as a affiliated link (after all, I shortened a unaffiliated link), Someone is liable to be sued by the FTC. IMO, Bitly may be putting every publisher at risk for legal action. Even though such…
> Let’s assume that you’re endorsing a product or service on your site and you have links to a company that pays you commissions on sales. If you disclose the relationship clearly and conspicuously on your site, readers can decide how much weight to give your endorsement. In some instances, where the link is embedded in the product review, a single disclosure may be adequate. When the product review has a clear and conspicuous disclosure of your relationship – and the reader can see both the product review and the link at the same time – readers have the information they need. If the product review and the link are separated, the reader may lose the connection.
> As for where to place a disclosure, the guiding principle is that it has to be clear and conspicuous. Putting disclosures in obscure places – for example, buried on an ABOUT US or GENERAL INFO page, behind a poorly labeled hyperlink or in a terms of service agreement – isn’t good enough. The average person who visits your site must be able to notice your disclosure, read it and understand it.
As seen in the text above, this doesn't quite apply. The person placing the link is presumably _not_ actively promoting the product for a commission. Bit.ly is the one converting it into a monetized link, and Bit.ly receives the commission split with VigLink.
This is a very important distinction here. The FTC is basing their guidelines on a person that is compensated for actively endorsing a product/service on their web site. This wouldn't qualify and as such looks to be a use case not considered previously. It is also no t that different than Pinterest doing the same with links on their site.
The real issue here is that bitly is doing these affiliate conversions without the FTC mandated disclosure¹. If I create a non-affliated link for a amazon product for a blog post and use bitly to shorten it and dont disclose it as a affiliated link (after all, I shortened a unaffiliated link), Someone is liable to be sued by the FTC. IMO, Bitly may be putting every publisher at risk for legal action. Even though such…
Did bit.ly partner with merchants who are aware of this practice?
The real issue here is that bitly is doing these affiliate conversions without the FTC mandated disclosure¹. If I create a non-affliated link for a amazon product for a blog post and use bitly to shorten it and dont disclose it as a affiliated link (after all, I shortened a unaffiliated link), Someone is liable to be sued by the FTC. IMO, Bitly may be putting every publisher at risk for legal action. Even though such…
[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/ebay-the-fbi-shawn-hogan-and-...
[2] http://marketingland.com/top-ebay-affiliate-sentenced-5-mont...
This is right in the same vein as cookie stuffing, which Shawn Hogan went to prison for [1] [2]. Keep in mind that there is no "cookie stuffing" statute - he was charged with Wire Fraud - and using your position in the link chain to steal revenue from other affiliates seems to definitely fall under the definition of wire fraud. I can't imagine what lawyer told Bitly that this was a good idea given this precedent, but…
Also, Bitly and Pinterest probably got approval from Amazon for this scheme. Shawn Hogan misled eBay about what he was doing.
This is right in the same vein as cookie stuffing, which Shawn Hogan went to prison for [1] [2]. Keep in mind that there is no "cookie stuffing" statute - he was charged with Wire Fraud - and using your position in the link chain to steal revenue from other affiliates seems to definitely fall under the definition of wire fraud. I can't imagine what lawyer told Bitly that this was a good idea given this precedent, but…
I don't think it's really the same. The cookie stuffing case was about generating affiliate revenue from people who never actually clicked on a link to eBay. This is just about making non-affiliate Amazon links into affiliate links. Also, Bitly and Pinterest probably got approval from Amazon for this scheme. Shawn Hogan misled eBay about what he was doing.
One does not anger one's users in a market where one is replaceable with zero effort. So long, bit.ly
URL shorteners are a terrible idea.