Found this blog post with court documents and background: http://www.skepticalabyss.com/?p=291
EDIT: Found this old blog post by Brian Dunning: http://skeptoid.com/blog/2011/10/05/a-partial-explanation/
"Cookie stuffing refers to a web site writing a cookie to your browser without your knowledge or permission. ... It’s a scary-sounding term, but it’s fundamental to the way Internet advertising works. ... Cookie stuffing is more than just a standard practice; it’s an essential component of the mechanics of serving ads effectively."
As I understand it, they would do something like this: on every 1 of 10,000 page views (to Digital Point's forums, or other sites), they would embed a page from eBay (as the source of an image), which had their affiliate code in it. The visitor was none the wiser.
Keep in mind digital point gets a ton of traffic. Though only a small percentage had a cookie dropped, it added up to many.
Purely through coincidence, some of these people would later buy something on eBay in the next 30 days, earning them a commission. Its hard to argue they earned the commission, TOS or otherwise.
The articles mentions the guy who made the cooking stuffing software. He was pretty active on a private part of a forum I'm still part of.
Anyway eBay went after the forum as well, and promptly deleted his account and all the threads mentioning eBay. They also moved their servers offshore and deleted pretty much every thread that mentioned eBay in it.
I do remember he wrote a massive long thread about how the FBI raided his house and seized all his computers. He said the FBI agents weren't even told why they were conducting a raid on him and actually felt kind of sorry for him. He charged a pretty hefty price for the software ($500/month for the basic plan), but it was pretty advanced. They figured out that they could spoof referrers in flash, so rather then have a 1x1px image file, it was a tiny .swf file.
People were banking on that though, eBay first, then Amazon. You could buy shitty porn traffic and parked domain traffic for literally $1-2/1000 uniques visitors and stuff them all with cookies.
It was also round the same time Craigslist cracked down on affiliate marketers. People were literally getting hundreds of conversions a day on rebill offers like credit ratings and dating verification offers. One guy fled to South America so Craiglist and the FBI couldn't find him as he was literally making 6 figures a day.
I probably have said too much, but now everyone is pretty smart now. Facebook were the last ones to smarten their act up since their whole system/backend had so many loopholes in there it wasn't funny. Plus their security team only worked Monday-Friday, so if you noticed up until 2012, there would be a bunch of spam on your feed during the weekends.
Very interesting stuff. That must have been a fun forum at the time, when easy money was to be made like this. Thanks for the insight.
Cookie-stuffing results in a significant cost to eBay and no additional revenue. No sane company would sanction it (beyond maybe turning a blind eye to someone doing the odd bit of cookie-stuffing if they earned most of their commission on driving real sales). Of course, plenty of sane companies that have departments that don't talk to each other about ongoing investigations and sales guys focused on next month's commission...
The program managers' role was to encourage an apparently very effective affiliate marketer to drive more real traffic to eBay, whether that was because they believed most of his referrals were genuine, thought they could persuade him to switch strategy to actually doing real marketing for eBay or simply adopting a business-as-usual approach whilst waiting for the fraud investigation to conclude. Either way, by his own admission Hogan wasn't remotely interested in investing in actually driving traffic to eBay even if they provided additional cash to support it...
Why? It provided absolutely no value to them. Actually worse, it cost them affiliate fees on sales that rightfully would have been affiliate fee free.
There is no scenario where it makes sense that eBay (edit: wow originally wrote Amazon) would endorse this.
they invite one of the guys to a private dinner where he is the only non-eBay employee in attendance, and treat him like a king.
Have you considered that maybe his sense of truth is a little skewed?
That must have been some very advanced and dangerous looking screens and keyboards.
Why do we still accept this kind of confiscation of unrelated goods, while throwing big objections if the police had confiscated jewelery, clothes, or anything other non-connected but expensive items? By now, for all the tons of electronic items confiscated during raids, has any single screen or keyboard ever been part of the evidence provided to a court?
(And yeah, I'm totally ok with it)
A better statement would be: "The problem with the eBay affiliate program is that there isn't much money in it."
This is not a problem with affiliate marketing in general.
In verticals like e-commerce, it is indeed dominated by about 100-200 players. These guys range from RetailMeNot which is owned by Whale Shark Media to companies like FatWallet and Ebates. There is actually a big variety of major players in the space, but still most commissions are concentrated with them.
If you get into CPA, there's many, many more players out there. I know a few personally that make ~$100k+/month and one that does $500k. However, the commissions aren't concentrated with them. There are thousands of players making $5k-$15k/month with campaign churn. They tend to be 1-person shops working on the latest hot offer.
CPA is very crowded but is easy (sort of) to break into. There's a lot of money to be made, but you also deal with a huge amount of fraud and competition.
I was able to make a very comfortable living as an affiliate in high-end lead generation and B2B, both places where it was extremely difficult to compete with me. There are many segments like this where time and being willing to pick up the phone are often all the competitive advantage you need.
However, what happens is you can build a business or a site or do the campaign churn. People that build sites make some money for a while but are often crushed by more dedicated competitors. People doing the campaign churn (they don't own sites, just advertise stuff and make money off the difference) can keep going for a while, but have to constantly seek out new advantages.
Last, the ones that build businesses make the big bucks. And they often become more than affiliates, seeking to sell the products themselves or vertically integrating in their chosen space. One I know was dealing with travel and eventually became the booking agency for his vertical. No one can compete because he has exclusive direct relationships - the same advantage I sought in my own verticals.
There is a ton of money to be made, but it is a field fraught with risk, fraud, deception and hyper-competitive people with far fewer scruples than you.
I chose to leave the field after making my pile and build the tools I always wanted when I was in it - a much better business overall.
The dirty secret is that 90% of affiliate revenue is generated by coupon sites. For the most part retailers are giving away money that they probably would've generated any way w/o the affiliate.
Should the Airbnb founders be sent to prison for spoofing interest in Craigslist ads and breaking their TOS? If the consensus shifts to yes, then our industry will become a very scary place to invest time and energy.
Also, the US legal system takes very seriously it role in setting precedents and has a strong commitment to following precedents -- specifically to make the law more predictable to folks like us. There're probably a lot of preceding criminal cases around affiliate-marketing fraud, and none for the kind of shenanigans attributed in these comments to AirBnB.
A lot of things fall under wire fraud rules. A lot of very common and routine business practices qualify as wire fraud. The fact that that is the only charge is very telling.
Finding out how many IP's were legit vs bogus was then a simple matter of going through the http logs making sure all gets of the cookie had matching gets of the gif. Cookie gets without gif gets were fraud.
So say eBay notices they are serving 1 million cookies a month to users, but only have 50,000 visitors relating to those people on their homepage. That's how they know this was cookie stuffing and not legitimate traffic.
Lets imagine I publish an eBay widget (I don't) to promote products I think people should buy. Lets say the widget just renders products in my sidebar. Lets say thousands of blogs then install this. Would I be then bound for prison?
I'm struggling to understand this murky situation based on how you described it.
Around that time I worked on finding ways to do untraceable cookie stuffing. Bouncing people through SSL to kill the referer, using Flash, etc. I even found a security hole in IE that gave me access to cross domain iframes. That was killer because you could load another site in an iframe then use JS to click an affiliate link or manipulate the page, making it appear completely legit.
Luckily it never went past research. I registered a domain and planned on creating a cookie stuffing service but never finished it and never did any actual cookie stuffing.