class action lawsuit against bonzi buddy because of the warning ads

[jkcity]

http://www.lukins.com/bonzi/index.php?pid=home

they claim the ads where misleading

http://www.lukins.com/bonzi/index.php?pid=banners
example ads at link above.

if they win this could be bad news for publishers who use cpm, while I know alot of cpm ads are not warning type ads a great many of us use them, and if they win with it being misleading advertising which I think they probably will, then no company will dare run them anymore.

edit: in topic I said bonzi buddy, but this is against there company for other products as well not just the bonzi buddy ads.

[firstmark]

Certainly not good.

[shareasale]

Just my two cents, I am glad to see this. Those ads, in my opinion were misleading to the end user, as are a number of other ads of that type that are running out there.

I don't wish litigation on anyone, but if this can help clean up the ad world online, possibly by pointing out to companies that there should be integrity even in advertising...with possible legal ramifications to back it up, I am pleased to see it.

[hammer]

Funny thing, all those ads just happen to be offered to us as CPM campaigns. They have a fairly high click-thru rate...which we don't see a penny for. And yes, as a CPM campaign, we do see some revenue, but not near as much if these were CPC ads.

Just my rant for the day.

[jnestor]

Personally I don't think they stand a chance and if there were any penalty for bringing a lawsuit without merit it would never have been filed. How about Steve's ads here which say "Geek Village is for sale"? How about the TV commercal which implies that if you use their deodorant you'll have *** with beautiful women in the elevator? The vast majority of advertising is deceptive if you take their claims literally.

[firstmark]

This can only make it harder to get cpm campaigns. How can this be good?

[Robert from SI]

>>>>>>>>>
How about the TV commercal which implies that if you use their deodorant you'll have *** with beautiful women in the elevator?
>>>>>>>>>

That one actually worked for me.

[shareasale]

I do see a very big difference between ads, as you mentioned specifically the one that said "GV for sale", and the ads that are included in this lawsuit...

Putting aside all of my personal feelings about ads and ethics, etc....the main "physical" difference is that the ads in the lawsuit contained elements, such as the "X button" in the top right hand corner, that I am sure many users clicked on with the intention of closing/ignoring the ad...and instead ended up at the advertisers site.

That above however, is not the main reason that I am not a fan of the ads...

There is also, back to my opinion, a huge line crossed when the ad implies that if you do NOT click on it, something bad will happen to your computer.... When you put that together with the "physical" elements of the ad mentioned above.....

If that same ad that was mentioned about Deodorant and Elevator women (does this ad really exist? ) was instead telling you that your current deodorant "may" cause sudden death, thus you should purchase a new deodorant....I don't think it would be considered anything BUT misleading.

[jkcity]

Originally posted by hammer
Funny thing, all those ads just happen to be offered to us as CPM campaigns. They have a fairly high click-thru rate...which we don't see a penny for. And yes, as a CPM campaign, we do see some revenue, but not near as much if these were CPC ads.

Just my rant for the day.

back in 1999 I got payed 15 cents a click on a warning banner, it was great , they never seemed to mind my site content had zero to do with there's either, although not suprising this company is bust now.

[njpete]

Well let's look at the reality of this.


Why not go into whoever your Ad Network is and look at your currently running ad creatives. Ok now see who is running warning type ads, then subtract the percent of your inventory they fill. Still think this is not a problem?

[PaulT]

If we were all making $1.00 CPM or more, then yes, we could afford to be picky about the type of ads we show.

However, we're not - and without these types of ads, annoying as they are, many sites would go bust.

[Robert from SI]

This is a shot at a money grab by a law firm. Nothing more.

[sdarken]

Originally posted by Robert from SI
>>>>>>>>>
How about the TV commercal which implies that if you use their deodorant you'll have *** with beautiful women in the elevator?
>>>>>>>>>

That one actually worked for me.

You're lucky Robert. I tried that deodorant and rode up and down elevators for three hours. All I got was a biker guy and a couple of interested FedEx delivery men.

[qball0213]

Well, those lawyers should have all of this parasiteware and spyware programs brought to their attention, maybe they can do something with it.

[njpete]

Originally posted by qball0213
Well, those lawyers should have all of this parasiteware and spyware programs brought to their attention, maybe they can do something with it.

Those lawyers didn't do this suit to help the downtrodden. I mean they're looking at the share of the $500 per person that will be multiplied by thousands of people.