Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

kvirkvelia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 195 posts

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#171

Post by Ansil849 »

mypalmike wrote: post #165
Ansil849 wrote: post #130

The responses here to this story defending the plugin author are appalling. They all seem to boil down to "you didn't read the fine print or the source code, so whatever the plugin does is defensible". What if instead of taking a percentage of the ad revenue, the plugin siphoned credentials or ran malware as a revenue generator, or did whatever else? And what if it openly explained in the fine print that it would be…

> What if... They plugin siphoned credentials or ran malware (etc.) If you hypothesize that the software did something illegal, I hypothesize that nobody would defend it.

I'm not sure it's legal to say that in certain use cases, you will siphon off an unspecified amount of money from your customer? Imagine if an app like Venmo stated that?

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#172

Post by Ansil849 »

withinboredom wrote: post #161
Ansil849 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I’ve gathered it was spelled out in the license? Just curious, is this your attitude towards other things as well? There used to be a very popular ebay scam, which had people sell large screen TVs and video game systems for very cheap. At the bottom of the auction description, in fine print, the auction also clearly stated that you were bidding/buying only a photo of the product, not the actual product. In othe…

LOL. That’s pretty funny, actually. Is it a scam when toys say batteries not included in small print too? IDK, maybe it’s my outlook on making sure I’m getting what I’m buying (or what I’m not getting as the case may be)! I don’t see anything shady here, but I couldn’t access the article earlier. I’ll try again here in a bit!

So this scenario I proposed in another comment, you are fine with?

If on line 37, page 409, of a car rental agreement that you sign, it states that if you are an hour late in returning your vehicle, the car rental company will take your firstborn, and you sign this agreement, then it's on you, right?

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#173

Post by ceejayoz »

simlevesque wrote: post #91
Kvirkvelia wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your comment! I don't think taking 2% is theft. Maybe it's a dark pattern, but it's definitely not theft. In the article, I say that I calmed down after explaining with 2%, which means my agreement with the situation. The way the increase to 30% is made and the number of users with such a percentage says that the author deliberately increases the percentage without warning the user, which is theft

You using the software without a paid license was theft.

That's entirely false. The plugin offers three license options.

https://github.com/floatinghotpot/cordova-admob-pro/wiki/Lic...

> 3. Win-win partnership

> And, if you don't have enough money yet to get a license, or don't have a PayPal account, here is another flexible option worth considering, no need to pay a cent. We may call it partnership.

> We maintain, support, and version update for any plugin issues, you don't worry about its update or bugfix, just use it for free, and focus on your app or game logic.

> Ship our code with yours to end-user, no need paying a cent at all, instead, share 2 percent ad traffic, so that we can both benefit and cover our cost to maintain and enhance this project.

The problem is the plugin author silently raised that "share 2 percent ad traffic" to 30%.

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#174

Post by belval »

Ansil849 wrote: post #167
belval wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Victim blaming? OP is bragging about his revenue in the very same blog post! He used open-source code without taking the time to understand what the code did and somehow we're victim blaming? > THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AU…

I really wonder if you have the same approach to all other situations with fine print, not just software contracts? Ebay scams, usury lending agreements, everything? If on line 37, page 409, of a car rental agreement that you sign, it states that if you are an hour late in returning your vehicle, the car rental company will take your firstborn, and you sign this agreement, then it's on you, right?

> I really wonder if you have the same approach to all other situations with fine print

This isn't a fine-print, it's literally in bold in the license file. I am not renting a car that says it might not run but they'll still charge me.

> If on line 37, page 409, of a car rental agreement that you sign, it states that if you are an hour late in returning your vehicle, the car rental company will kill your firstborn, and you sign this agreement, then it's on you, right?

This is a bad example because killing my firstborn is illegal. This is more akin to a car rental that charges and extreme late fee that is written on page 1.

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#175

Post by javajosh »

pdpi wrote: post #147
javajosh wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it also speaks highly of you that you engaged with him, signed your name, and made rational arguments. These are not the actions of a thief, but of someone who has thought about their business model and is willing to stand by it. That said, if you really wanted to impress, you'd improve the visibility of your practices for each individual developer, by providing a dashboard that fully discloses revenue-over-t…

FYI, you're responding to the author of the article, not the author of the plugin :)

Oh, ha. Well, maybe that's even better as I don't think the OP appreciates how unusual it is to have someone take actual responsibility for their decisions, whether or not you agree with them.

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#176

Post by shepherdjerred »

kevingadd wrote: post #95
Hasz wrote: post #82

Ha, caveat emptor. Oh, wait, OP isn’t even a buyer and paid nothing for the code and blindly built it into the app. No reading, no understanding, just copying. OG plug-in author has a problem with people abusing license key system, builds in code to detect it. Disclaims it vaguely, OP gets bitten and has the gall to call it stealing. Author offers to help OP out, OP puts him on blast. Zero sympathy, even at 30%.

What part of this license says they owe 30% and don't have the right to just use the software? https://github.com/floatinghotpot/cordova-admob-pro/blob/mas...

https://github.com/floatinghotpot/cordova-admob-pro#license

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#177

Post by colinmhayes »

scarface74 wrote: post #37

Alternate sort of off topic take: if you have a service that is valuable, charge people money for it instead of depending on ad revenue. I try my best to stay away from ad supported business models, if there is an app in the App Store for instance that has an in app purchase to turn off ads, I have no problem paying for it if it something I’m going to use.

Sounds like OP is in Russia. I'm not sure people are as willing to pay for services there.

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#178

Post by withinboredom »

MrWiffles wrote: post #152
ceejayoz wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I’ve gathered it was spelled out in the license? A 2% cut was spelled out in the license. A 30% cut was not, but the plugin author silently upped it to that over vague assertions of abuse of the plugin. > "After check, we find your app in the black list, and a random higher rate will be applied. Usually when a guy is using a fake license key, or send unusual attacking request..."

Further in that same paragraph, the plug-in author goes on to say that they removed the guy’s app from said blacklist and even upgraded him to a fully paid license for free. And on top of all that he even gave dude back $4000 bucks! I really don’t see either party as underhanded here, maybe lazy in respect to both communicating and with paying attention, but I can’t see either as being shady. It’s just a series of hu…

> It’s just a series of human errors.

This reminds me of a game I ported from iOS to Windows Phone, actually. It was free and ad supported. I told my contact like 50 times he needed to get me an API key for Microsoft Ads, so I just used my own while I waited. Fast forward six months and the game launched after still asking every week and informing them that they needed to get me the API key or all ad revenue would go to me.

I set up an auto email to go out once a week asking for the API key. That person would reply back for literally any other issue.

They emailed me like 2 years later asking where their money is. I replied with the entire situation, screen shots of the emails and would be happy to send them the 1¢ they earned.

I never heard back from them until their lawyer contacted me. Sent him the same stuff. Never heard back from them either. They did post a blog post about how they were going after their ex-developer for “stealing” their ad revenue though. I lol’d and went on with my life. People do weird shit for some publicity. I’m not saying that’s what’s going on here, but it sure smells like it.

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#179

Post by withinboredom »

Ansil849 wrote: post #172
withinboredom wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL. That’s pretty funny, actually. Is it a scam when toys say batteries not included in small print too? IDK, maybe it’s my outlook on making sure I’m getting what I’m buying (or what I’m not getting as the case may be)! I don’t see anything shady here, but I couldn’t access the article earlier. I’ll try again here in a bit!

So this scenario I proposed in another comment, you are fine with? If on line 37, page 409, of a car rental agreement that you sign, it states that if you are an hour late in returning your vehicle, the car rental company will take your firstborn, and you sign this agreement, then it's on you, right?

Well, it would be non-binding since you can’t sign away another adult’s rights (assuming your first born is over 18). If the first-born is under 18, I guess it would depend on adoption laws as to whether this is something you can give away via a contract.

Folklore is full of this kind of stuff. Always read what you sign. Always. No exceptions. Better yet, get a lawyer to read it too.

Re: An ad plugin was stealing revenue for a year and I didn't even notice

#180

Post by Aldo_MX »

Ansil849 wrote: post #166
Aldo_MX wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dismissing something as "victim blaming" is the best way to say "I am not mature enough to accept that I have responsibilities, and I will play the role of a victim for as long as I can stay unaccountable for my actions".

I asked this question in another comment, but same thing: Just curious, is this your attitude towards other things as well? There used to be a very popular ebay scam, which had people sell large screen TVs and video game systems for very cheap. At the bottom of the auction description, in fine print, the auction also clearly stated that you were bidding/buying only a photo of the product, not the actual product. In o…

Dark patterns are not illegal, but they fall in the reputation loss category.

Taking your example: Ebay decided that they couldn't afford the reputation loss to accept listings with dark patterns so they updated their T&C to reflect that, but that doesn't mean that the action that ebay took was the absolute truth.

To name a different example about dark patterns: There are websites which color the "Accept All Cookies" button with the primary action color and they place the button after the checkboxes where you choose your cookies, in the place that most of us expect a "Submit" button. As far as the GDPR is concerned they're complying.

As a consumer it is your choice to stop doing business with persons and companies that use dark patterns.

The same applies to open source. You are seeing that the number of maintainers who are disrupting projects is increasing. Would you really trust your business to a person that you don't even know? It is your reponsibility to audit the code that you're using.

Post reply on HN