The onslaught of disgusting naked men that seemingly destroyed interest in Chatroulette is now earning the site $100,000 a month. After being flagged by other users a certain number of times, the masturbators — there are about 50,000 on the site every day — are automatically redirected to adult pay sites with which Chatroulette has made agreements. The site's founder, Andrey Ternovskiy, claims that you'll run into a penis only once an hour now — still more surprise penises than you typically experience in an hour outside of Chatroulette, but a vast improvement nonetheless. [Fast Company via Newser]
Subscription Porn Site SLAPPed Down After Suing RedTube For Undermining Its Business Model
from the competing-isn't-undermining dept
We've joked in the past about how many of the complaints we see from companies about new, more innovative competitors, is that they somehow represent "felony interference of a business model." Some companies, it seems, like to believe that if they have a successful business model, any new competitor that changes the market around must be doing so illegally. Eric Goldman points us to just such a lawsuit in California, where the proprietor of a subscription based porn website sued RedTube, one of many, many porn-focused free streaming video sites, and many of RedTube's advertisers, arguing unfair competition. Basically, the argument was that by setting up a website and offering these porn videos for free, while making money on the advertising, RedTube was effectively "dumping" its product on the market below cost in order to harm the market and make money elsewhere.
RedTube, in response, filed an anti-SLAPP claim, saying that the lawsuit sought to silence RedTube exercising its First Amendment rights of speech. While a lower court mostly agreed, it did leave open one small piece of the unfair competition claim, related to the issue of the claim that someone at RedTube's parent company signed up for the plaintiff's subscription website, downloaded the videos, and posted them on RedTube. However, the California state appeals court rejects the lower court's argument, and agrees that even this claim should be tossed out, because it's only unfair competition if the plaintiff can show that he has, in fact, lost money or property as a result of the unfair competition. Since the plaintiff was unable to do so, the court ruled that this claim got tossed out too (though, if true, you do wonder if there might be a copyright issue -- which does not appear to have been raised here).
On the overall point of underpricing the market unfairly, the court points out how silly this is, noting that giving away free content in exchange for advertising is a business model that's been around for ages, and is hardly a form of unfair competition:
If Bright's business model sounds familiar it's because it's the business model
typical of broadcast radio and television stations in the United States not to mention
thousands of local newspapers and, more recently, tens of thousands of Internet websites
including Youtube, CNN and Video.Yahoo.
The court also points out, in its opening, that business models change, and companies need to keep up -- and they shouldn't expect the law to keep their old business models in place:
In the 21st century, businesses of all kinds are having to adapt to a constantly
changing commercial landscape. The business that the parties describe as the "adult
entertainment" industry is no exception. Websites that originally made their money by
offering such material on a subscription or pay-per-view basis are being replaced by
"tube" websites which offer their content for free and make their money through
advertising.
There's also an interesting discussion over whether or not RedTube qualifies for SLAPP protections, as the site's content must involve the "furtherance of their right of free speech on a public issue." The plaintiff said that his complaint had nothing to do with stopping speech, but from the "anti-competitive conduct." The court notes that even publishing videos of porn online is conduct in the furtherance of speech and, in fact, that there is a "substantial public interest in the kind of sexually explicit videos shown on tube-sites such as Redtube." That's one way to put it.
The final point that seemed worth discussing on this is just how silly some "anti-competitive" behavior laws and rulings can be. Part of the plaintiff's argument here was to bring up a bit of caselaw involving two competing San Fransisco tourist cruises, where one firm got in trouble for selling tickets below cost, even though the firm made it up elsewhere. The court rejects this, by claiming that the earlier ruling doesn't apply here because RedTube "does not sell two separate products." That seems silly to me, and if anything really just highlights the problem with the original court ruling about using the tickets as a loss leader. If you read the ruling this way, you get a nonsensical result: giving away the videos for free would be legal, but charging a penny for them could suddenly be seen as unfair competition, because now it would be "selling" two separate products. Bundling multiple products, such that some are given away free or cheaply in the interest of a larger business model should never be seen as anti-competitive on its own. While I agree with the outcome, it seemed like this was the most confused part of the court's ruling, in that it tapdanced around what was, basically, a really bad ruling. The real issue should be to get rid of any rule that says such kinds of bundles are against the law in the first place.
12 Comments | Leave a Comment..
bench craft company
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company
The onslaught of disgusting naked men that seemingly destroyed interest in Chatroulette is now earning the site $100,000 a month. After being flagged by other users a certain number of times, the masturbators — there are about 50,000 on the site every day — are automatically redirected to adult pay sites with which Chatroulette has made agreements. The site's founder, Andrey Ternovskiy, claims that you'll run into a penis only once an hour now — still more surprise penises than you typically experience in an hour outside of Chatroulette, but a vast improvement nonetheless. [Fast Company via Newser]
Subscription Porn Site SLAPPed Down After Suing RedTube For Undermining Its Business Model
from the competing-isn't-undermining dept
We've joked in the past about how many of the complaints we see from companies about new, more innovative competitors, is that they somehow represent "felony interference of a business model." Some companies, it seems, like to believe that if they have a successful business model, any new competitor that changes the market around must be doing so illegally. Eric Goldman points us to just such a lawsuit in California, where the proprietor of a subscription based porn website sued RedTube, one of many, many porn-focused free streaming video sites, and many of RedTube's advertisers, arguing unfair competition. Basically, the argument was that by setting up a website and offering these porn videos for free, while making money on the advertising, RedTube was effectively "dumping" its product on the market below cost in order to harm the market and make money elsewhere.
RedTube, in response, filed an anti-SLAPP claim, saying that the lawsuit sought to silence RedTube exercising its First Amendment rights of speech. While a lower court mostly agreed, it did leave open one small piece of the unfair competition claim, related to the issue of the claim that someone at RedTube's parent company signed up for the plaintiff's subscription website, downloaded the videos, and posted them on RedTube. However, the California state appeals court rejects the lower court's argument, and agrees that even this claim should be tossed out, because it's only unfair competition if the plaintiff can show that he has, in fact, lost money or property as a result of the unfair competition. Since the plaintiff was unable to do so, the court ruled that this claim got tossed out too (though, if true, you do wonder if there might be a copyright issue -- which does not appear to have been raised here).
On the overall point of underpricing the market unfairly, the court points out how silly this is, noting that giving away free content in exchange for advertising is a business model that's been around for ages, and is hardly a form of unfair competition:
If Bright's business model sounds familiar it's because it's the business model
typical of broadcast radio and television stations in the United States not to mention
thousands of local newspapers and, more recently, tens of thousands of Internet websites
including Youtube, CNN and Video.Yahoo.
The court also points out, in its opening, that business models change, and companies need to keep up -- and they shouldn't expect the law to keep their old business models in place:
In the 21st century, businesses of all kinds are having to adapt to a constantly
changing commercial landscape. The business that the parties describe as the "adult
entertainment" industry is no exception. Websites that originally made their money by
offering such material on a subscription or pay-per-view basis are being replaced by
"tube" websites which offer their content for free and make their money through
advertising.
There's also an interesting discussion over whether or not RedTube qualifies for SLAPP protections, as the site's content must involve the "furtherance of their right of free speech on a public issue." The plaintiff said that his complaint had nothing to do with stopping speech, but from the "anti-competitive conduct." The court notes that even publishing videos of porn online is conduct in the furtherance of speech and, in fact, that there is a "substantial public interest in the kind of sexually explicit videos shown on tube-sites such as Redtube." That's one way to put it.
The final point that seemed worth discussing on this is just how silly some "anti-competitive" behavior laws and rulings can be. Part of the plaintiff's argument here was to bring up a bit of caselaw involving two competing San Fransisco tourist cruises, where one firm got in trouble for selling tickets below cost, even though the firm made it up elsewhere. The court rejects this, by claiming that the earlier ruling doesn't apply here because RedTube "does not sell two separate products." That seems silly to me, and if anything really just highlights the problem with the original court ruling about using the tickets as a loss leader. If you read the ruling this way, you get a nonsensical result: giving away the videos for free would be legal, but charging a penny for them could suddenly be seen as unfair competition, because now it would be "selling" two separate products. Bundling multiple products, such that some are given away free or cheaply in the interest of a larger business model should never be seen as anti-competitive on its own. While I agree with the outcome, it seemed like this was the most confused part of the court's ruling, in that it tapdanced around what was, basically, a really bad ruling. The real issue should be to get rid of any rule that says such kinds of bundles are against the law in the first place.
12 Comments | Leave a Comment..
bench craft company>
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company
[reefeed]
bench craft company
bench craft company
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company
The onslaught of disgusting naked men that seemingly destroyed interest in Chatroulette is now earning the site $100,000 a month. After being flagged by other users a certain number of times, the masturbators — there are about 50,000 on the site every day — are automatically redirected to adult pay sites with which Chatroulette has made agreements. The site's founder, Andrey Ternovskiy, claims that you'll run into a penis only once an hour now — still more surprise penises than you typically experience in an hour outside of Chatroulette, but a vast improvement nonetheless. [Fast Company via Newser]
Subscription Porn Site SLAPPed Down After Suing RedTube For Undermining Its Business Model
from the competing-isn't-undermining dept
We've joked in the past about how many of the complaints we see from companies about new, more innovative competitors, is that they somehow represent "felony interference of a business model." Some companies, it seems, like to believe that if they have a successful business model, any new competitor that changes the market around must be doing so illegally. Eric Goldman points us to just such a lawsuit in California, where the proprietor of a subscription based porn website sued RedTube, one of many, many porn-focused free streaming video sites, and many of RedTube's advertisers, arguing unfair competition. Basically, the argument was that by setting up a website and offering these porn videos for free, while making money on the advertising, RedTube was effectively "dumping" its product on the market below cost in order to harm the market and make money elsewhere.
RedTube, in response, filed an anti-SLAPP claim, saying that the lawsuit sought to silence RedTube exercising its First Amendment rights of speech. While a lower court mostly agreed, it did leave open one small piece of the unfair competition claim, related to the issue of the claim that someone at RedTube's parent company signed up for the plaintiff's subscription website, downloaded the videos, and posted them on RedTube. However, the California state appeals court rejects the lower court's argument, and agrees that even this claim should be tossed out, because it's only unfair competition if the plaintiff can show that he has, in fact, lost money or property as a result of the unfair competition. Since the plaintiff was unable to do so, the court ruled that this claim got tossed out too (though, if true, you do wonder if there might be a copyright issue -- which does not appear to have been raised here).
On the overall point of underpricing the market unfairly, the court points out how silly this is, noting that giving away free content in exchange for advertising is a business model that's been around for ages, and is hardly a form of unfair competition:
If Bright's business model sounds familiar it's because it's the business model
typical of broadcast radio and television stations in the United States not to mention
thousands of local newspapers and, more recently, tens of thousands of Internet websites
including Youtube, CNN and Video.Yahoo.
The court also points out, in its opening, that business models change, and companies need to keep up -- and they shouldn't expect the law to keep their old business models in place:
In the 21st century, businesses of all kinds are having to adapt to a constantly
changing commercial landscape. The business that the parties describe as the "adult
entertainment" industry is no exception. Websites that originally made their money by
offering such material on a subscription or pay-per-view basis are being replaced by
"tube" websites which offer their content for free and make their money through
advertising.
There's also an interesting discussion over whether or not RedTube qualifies for SLAPP protections, as the site's content must involve the "furtherance of their right of free speech on a public issue." The plaintiff said that his complaint had nothing to do with stopping speech, but from the "anti-competitive conduct." The court notes that even publishing videos of porn online is conduct in the furtherance of speech and, in fact, that there is a "substantial public interest in the kind of sexually explicit videos shown on tube-sites such as Redtube." That's one way to put it.
The final point that seemed worth discussing on this is just how silly some "anti-competitive" behavior laws and rulings can be. Part of the plaintiff's argument here was to bring up a bit of caselaw involving two competing San Fransisco tourist cruises, where one firm got in trouble for selling tickets below cost, even though the firm made it up elsewhere. The court rejects this, by claiming that the earlier ruling doesn't apply here because RedTube "does not sell two separate products." That seems silly to me, and if anything really just highlights the problem with the original court ruling about using the tickets as a loss leader. If you read the ruling this way, you get a nonsensical result: giving away the videos for free would be legal, but charging a penny for them could suddenly be seen as unfair competition, because now it would be "selling" two separate products. Bundling multiple products, such that some are given away free or cheaply in the interest of a larger business model should never be seen as anti-competitive on its own. While I agree with the outcome, it seemed like this was the most confused part of the court's ruling, in that it tapdanced around what was, basically, a really bad ruling. The real issue should be to get rid of any rule that says such kinds of bundles are against the law in the first place.
12 Comments | Leave a Comment..
bench craft company
bench craft company
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company
bench craft company
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company bench craft company
bench craft company
bench craft company
bench craft company
Fox <b>News</b> Suggests Bulletstorm Is “Worst Video Game In The World”
The ever-incisive Fox News has decided today to try to squeeze a little more blood from the violence in games stone. The issue ...
Obama to Push for Less Restrictive Trade with Russia; Expedited <b>...</b>
Fox News has learned that President Obama will call on Congress to support a permanent normal trade relations status with Russia and that his U.S. trade ambassador will tell Congress Wednesday the White House will intensify efforts this ...
Fox <b>News</b> Calls Bulletstorm the Worst Videogame in the World
Fox News pundit claims that "increase in rapes" is due largely to videogames.
bench craft company
There are very few people left in the money making industry online that are honest and can be trusted. Some of the big shots and gurus advertise their own products and make wild promises of making money with their stuff, and more often than not, they fail. The money making world needed a break, And The Light In The Darkness provides it.
The Light In The Darkness is the first system/book/manual that I've come across that actually tells you what it takes to make money online, and what you can achieve if you're diligent. Unlike most other programs today that claim that you can make over a billion dollars in 23.86 seconds by just shelling out the money these people are demanding, The Light In The Darkness tells it as it really is. The promise of the author is simple, and most of what I've learnt and writing about is actually from the book. This is what the author says :
If you are willing to WORK HARD in the first few months, you can easily make over $40,000 at the end of the sixth month. You will have to work and learn in the first few months. None of this will cost you anything, and we'll use the money from your earnings to take you over $40,000 a month.
This is a breath of fresh air on the internet where every other guru is selling another system that will make you a billionaire if you give him the money and click on his link! The program covers a variety of areas of working online, starting with writing for money to generate some captial for you, and going on to everything you can think of! The Light In The Darkness covers:
- Writing online to generate an income without spending any money. The Light In The Darkness helps you put some money in your pocket before you start with the other stuff.
- Building a website, and marketing affiliate programs with it. This is one of The Light In The Darkness program's strenghts – helping you advertise in a very effective manner.
- Advertising your programs using articles (that you're being paid for!).
- Adsense optimization/Adbrite or any PPC contextual ad service optimization.
- PPC campaigns, Adwords, other PPC engines and how to run them.
- Selecting affiliate programs for PPC engines. This is one of the sections of The Light In The Darkness that I thoroughly enjoyed, as it helped me understand why some of my affiliate programs were doing better than others.
- How to write good ads for PPC programs.
- How to advertise using programs such as Trafficwave, Leadsomatic and so on. The Light In The Darkness gives you the exact step by step details to help you build a very cost-effective advertising program.
- The top online money making systems and how to use various services to make incredible amounts of money with them (that takes you to over $40,000 a month – I learnt a whole lot from here!).
- How to build an opt-in list and use it effectively. You are shown how to make a page with a sign-up form on it, and how to link it to an autoresponder and how to follow-up with prospects and so on. Very detailed and helpful. The best part that I liked about this was that he even gave me some templates to use to help me get started.
My experience with The Light In The Darkness has been nothing short of delightful! I've used it more than any other program, and I've seen the incredible earnings already starting to happen. The updates keep on coming at a rate of at least 1-2 per week, which means that the author of The Light In The Darkness is keeping up with the task and is pouring out all he can into this.
All in all, if I was to recommend any single program today, I would recommend The Light In The Darkness manual. You know the best part? It each and every aspect that any other $97 course by the “gurus” like Mike Filesame, Cody Moya or any other would, but costs nothing close to them. On an average, a decent fluffy e-book that covers any of the ten topics about costs $47. As such, a fair price of The Light In The Darkness should be $470, right? Well, it costs only $19.95. Yup, it blew me away too! The explanation for this low price was that the point of this book is to help people make money, not to have them get a personal loan to give making money a shot! The Light In The Darkness is easily the best manual I've ever come across on the net. Check it out here.
No comments:
Post a Comment