Direct Revenue

Last updated
Direct Revenue
Industry Software
Founded2002
Founder Insight Venture Partners
Defunct2007
Headquarters
New York City

Direct Revenue was a New York City company which distributed software (a downloadable adware client) that displays pop-up advertising on web browsers. It was founded in 2002 and funded by Insight Venture Partners, [1] known for creating adware programs. Direct Revenue included Soho Digital and Soho Digital International. Its competitors included Claria, When-U, Ask.com and products created by eXact Advertising. The company's major clients included Priceline, Travelocity, American Express, and Ford Motors. Direct Revenue's largest distributors were Advertising.com (acquired by AOL) and 247 Media (acquired by WPP). In October 2007, Direct Revenue closed its doors.

Contents

New York State OAG lawsuit

On April 4, 2006, New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed suit against Direct Revenue in New York County Supreme Court, alleging that the company's software-distribution practices violated New York's General Business Law. [2] In March 2008, Direct Revenue was granted a motion to dismiss all the OAG's allegations and the case was dismissed. In People v. Direct Revenue LLC, No. 401325/06 (N.Y. Sup.Ct., N.Y. Cty., March 12, 2008), a New York trial court dismissed the attorney general's deceptive-and-illegal-business-practices case against Direct Revenue. The AG sought billions of dollars in penalties against Direct Revenue,[ citation needed ] seeking to assert the rights of millions of consumers across the country who installed the Direct Revenue adware client.

29 transactions with Direct Revenue (or its distributors) were alleged. In transactions where the attorney general's investigator dealt directly with Direct Revenue, the installation of the adware client was preceded by a license agreement explaining how the adware client operated and how to uninstall it; the agreement also explained the limitations on Direct Revenue's liability. In each case the investigator clicked "yes" on a button, indicating assent to the agreement. There were problems with some installations that were initiated by Direct Revenue's third-party distributors (for example, the license agreement and uninstall instructions were not always displayed prior to installation). However, the court held that Direct Revenue was protected by its Standard Distribution Agreement, a document that directed the third-party distributors to obtain legally valid affirmative consent and make all legally necessary disclosures prior to installation of the adware client. Turning back claims based on the 29 transactions completed by state investigators, the court said there was no basis to entertain the attorney general's claims on behalf of all other individuals who allegedly downloaded the Direct Revenue adware client. Finally, it held, disgorgement of profits would not be an appropriate remedy in this case; Direct Revenue distributed its adware client free of charge and took nothing of value from consumers who downloaded it. [3]

On February 16, 2007, DirectRevenue settled with the Federal Trade Commission without admitting to any wrongdoing and was barred from using affiliates who engage in "drive-by downloads" or what the FTC deems deceptive practices. They were also ordered to pay a settlement of $1.5 million. [4] [5] On June 26, 2007 the FTC issued final approval of the settlement: [6] "No portion of the payment shall be deemed a payment of any fine, penalty, or punitive assessment". Direct Revenue closed several months later, in part due to the settlement. [7]

Case analysis

In People v. Direct Revenue, the New York Attorney General in 2008 attempted to prevent Direct Revenue from distributing software that served pop-up advertising software on consumers’ computers. Direct Revenue did not charge fees to consumers; instead, it charges fees to the companies whose products it advertises. One line of attack by the New York Attorney General focused on Direct Revenue's “click-wrapped” (where the user clicks on “I accept”) end-user license agreement (EULA) and Direct Revenue's alleged deceptive and illegal practices. The court granted Direct Revenue's motion to dismiss the claims, noting that sufficient disclosure was given in the EULA and the required elements for an enforceable agreement were followed. New York then focused on the customer agreements of Direct Revenue's resellers, in an attempt to hold Direct Revenue liable. The result was the same as with the EULA—Direct Revenue was not held liable.

New York conceded that Direct Revenue's resellers were independent contractors, rather than agents. Generally, a principal is not liable for acts of an independent contractor due to the lack of control over how the contractor's work is performed. In addition, the court noted that Direct Revenue's software-distribution agreement required its distributors to obtain consumer consent consistent with the EULA and prohibited distributors from excluding themselves as agents of Direct Revenue. New York argued that Direct Revenue should be liable because its servers interacted with the consumers’ computers in the software-installation process. The court pointed out that participation in installation was insufficient liability, in the absence of participation in deceptive conduct which induced the installation. Finally, New York argued that Direct Revenue should be held liable for the actions of its resellers, on the ground that Direct Revenue ratified the conduct of its resellers. The court ruled that mere knowledge of consumer complaints was insufficient to impose liability on Direct Revenue, in light of the fact that when Direct Revenue had actual knowledge of reseller misconduct, it took steps to remedy the problem. [8]

Programs

Related Research Articles

Adware, often called advertising-supported software by its developers, is software that generates revenue for its developer by automatically generating online advertisements in the user interface of the software or on a screen presented to the user during the installation process. The software may generate two types of revenue: one is for the display of the advertisement and another on a "pay-per-click" basis, if the user clicks on the advertisement. Some advertisements also act as spyware, collecting and reporting data about the user, to be sold or used for targeted advertising or user profiling. The software may implement advertisements in a variety of ways, including a static box display, a banner display, a full screen, a video, a pop-up ad or in some other form. All forms of advertising carry health, ethical, privacy and security risks for users.

Spyware is any software with malicious behavior that aims to gather information about a person or organization and send it to another entity in a way that harms the user by violating their privacy, endangering their device's security, or other means. This behavior may be present in malware and in legitimate software. Websites may engage in spyware behaviors like web tracking. Hardware devices may also be affected.

An end-user license agreement or EULA is a legal contract between a software supplier and a customer or end-user, generally made available to the customer via a retailer acting as an intermediary. A EULA specifies in detail the rights and restrictions which apply to the use of the software.

Claria Corporation was a software company based in Redwood City, California that invented “Behavioral Marketing”, a new form of online advertising. It was founded in 1998 by Denis Coleman, Stanford MBA Sasha Zorovic, and engineer Mark Pennell, based on work Zorovic had done at Stanford. In March 1999 Jeff McFadden was hired as CEO and Zorovic was effectively forced out.

<i>Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology</i>

Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology was a case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primarily concerned with the enforceability of box-top licenses and end user license agreements (EULA) and their place in U.S. contract law. During the relevant period, Step-Saver Data Systems was a value-added reseller, combining hardware and software from different vendors to offer a fully functioning computer system to various end users. Step-Saver's products included software produced by Software Link, Inc (TSL), computer terminals produced by Wyse Technology, and main computers produced by IBM. The fundamental question raised in this case was whether the shrinkwrap licenses accompanying TSL's software were legally binding, given that different terms were negotiated over the phone with Step-Saver prior to receiving physical copies of the software. The case was first heard in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where the court ruled that the shrinkwrap licenses were legally binding. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit subsequently reversed this decision, ruling that the shrinkwrap licenses were not legally binding.

Domain name scams are types of Intellectual property scams or confidence scams in which unscrupulous domain name registrars attempt to generate revenue by tricking businesses into buying, selling, listing or converting a domain name. The Office of Fair Trading in the United Kingdom has outlined two types of domain name scams which are "Domain name registration scams" and "Domain name renewal scams".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fair Debt Collection Practices Act</span> U.S. consumer protection law

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), Pub. L. 95-109; 91 Stat. 874, codified as 15 U.S.C. § 1692 –1692p, approved on September 20, 1977, is a consumer protection amendment, establishing legal protection from abusive debt collection practices, to the Consumer Credit Protection Act, as Title VIII of that Act. The statute's stated purposes are: to eliminate abusive practices in the collection of consumer debts, to promote fair debt collection, and to provide consumers with an avenue for disputing and obtaining validation of debt information in order to ensure the information's accuracy. The Act creates guidelines under which debt collectors may conduct business, defines rights of consumers involved with debt collectors, and prescribes penalties and remedies for violations of the Act. It is sometimes used in conjunction with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nu Skin Enterprises</span> American multi-level marketing company

Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. is an American multilevel marketing company that develops and sells personal care products and dietary and nutritional supplements. Under the Nu Skin and Pharmanex brands, the company sells its products in 54 markets through a network of approximately 1.2 million independent distributors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sony BMG copy protection rootkit scandal</span> Sony BMGs implementation of copy protection measures

The Sony BMG CD copy protection scandal concerns the copy protection measures included by Sony BMG on compact discs in 2005. When inserted into a computer, the CDs installed one of two pieces of software that provided a form of digital rights management (DRM) by modifying the operating system to interfere with CD copying. Neither program could easily be uninstalled, and they created vulnerabilities that were exploited by unrelated malware. One of the programs would install and "phone home" with reports on the user's private listening habits, even if the user refused its end-user license agreement (EULA), while the other was not mentioned in the EULA at all. Both programs contained code from several pieces of copylefted free software in an apparent infringement of copyright, and configured the operating system to hide the software's existence, leading to both programs being classified as rootkits.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zango (company)</span>

Zango,, formerly ePIPO, 180solutions and Hotbar, was a software company that provided users access to its partners' videos, games, tools and utilities in exchange for viewing targeted advertising placed on their computers. Zango software is listed as adware by Symantec, and is also labeled as a potentially unwanted program by McAfee. Zango was co-founded by two brothers: Keith Smith, who served as the CEO; and Ken Smith, who served as the CTO.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1-800 Contacts</span> American contact lens retailer

1-800 Contacts Inc. is an American contact lens retailer based in Draper, Utah. The brands that 1-800 Contacts use includes Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Alcon, Bausch & Lomb and CooperVision. The company was founded as the industry's first way to buy contacts online and has since expanded to provide online prescription renewals, glasses, lens replacements, and the in-house AquaSoft Daily contact lenses brand. In 2006, its last year as a public company, the company reported net sales of US$247 million.

Rogue security software is a form of malicious software and internet fraud that misleads users into believing there is a virus on their computer and aims to convince them to pay for a fake malware removal tool that actually installs malware on their computer. It is a form of scareware that manipulates users through fear, and a form of ransomware. Rogue security software has been a serious security threat in desktop computing since 2008. An early example that gained infamy was SpySheriff and its clones, such as Nava Shield.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Movieland</span> Former subscription-based movie download service

Movieland, also known as Movieland.com, Moviepass.tv and Popcorn.net, was a subscription-based movie download service that has been the subject of thousands of complaints to the Federal Trade Commission, the Washington State Attorney General's Office, the Better Business Bureau, and other agencies by consumers who said they were held hostage by its repeated pop-up windows and demands for payment, triggered after a free 3-day trial period. Many said they had never even heard of Movieland until they saw their first pop-up. Movieland advertised that the service had "no spyware", and that no personal information would need to be filled out to begin the free trial.

An invention promotion firm or invention submission corporation provides services to inventors to help them in develop or market their inventions. These firms may offer to evaluate the patentability of inventions, file patent applications, build prototypes, license them to manufacturers, and otherwise market. They are distinguished from more conventional consulting firms and law firms offering the same or similar services in that they market their services primarily to amateur inventors through the mass media.

In the middle of 2009 the Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against Sears Holdings Management Corporation (SHMC) for unfair or deceptive acts or practices affecting commerce. SHMC operates the sears.com and kmart.com retail websites for Sears Holdings Corporation. As part of a marketing effort, some users of sears.com and kmart.com were invited to download an application developed for SHMC that ran in the background on users' computers collecting information on nearly all internet activity. The tracking aspects of the program were only disclosed in legalese in the middle of the End User License Agreement. The FTC found this was insufficient disclosure given consumers expectations and the detailed information being collected. On September 9, 2009 the FTC approved a consent decree with SHMC requiring full disclosure of its activities and destruction of previously obtained information.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David Vladeck</span>

David C. Vladeck is the former director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection of the Federal Trade Commission, an independent agency of the United States government. He was appointed by the chairman of the FTC, Jon Leibowitz, on April 14, 2009, shortly after Leibowitz became chairman.

In Milgram v. Orbitz Worldwide, LLC, the New Jersey Superior Court held that online ticket resellers qualified for immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), and that such immunity preempted a state law consumer fraud statute. The opinion clarified the court's test for determining whether a defendant is acting as a publisher, the applicability of the CDA to e-commerce sites, and the extent of control that an online intermediary may exercise over user content without becoming an "information content provider" under the CDA. The opinion was hailed by one observer as a "rare defeat for a consumer protection agency" and the "biggest defense win of the year" in CDA § 230 litigation.

VemmaNutrition Company was a privately held multi-level marketing company that sold dietary supplements. The company was shut down in 2015 by the FTC for engaging in deceptive practices and being a pyramid scheme.

Download Valley is a cluster of software companies in Israel, producing and delivering adware to be installed alongside downloads of other software. The primary purpose is to monetize shareware and downloads. These software items are commonly browser toolbars, adware, browser hijackers, spyware, and malware. Another group of products are download managers, possibly designed to induce or trick the user to install adware, when downloading a piece of desired software or mobile app from a certain source.

References

  1. ↑ "The Plot To Hijack Your Computer". Businessweek.com. 2006-07-17. Archived from the original on July 9, 2006. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  2. ↑ Archived April 8, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
  3. ↑ "TechLaw: Contracts". Pblog.bna.com. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  4. ↑ "FTC Asks Court to Order Permanent Halt to Telephone". Ftc.gov. 2007-06-25. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  5. ↑ "Got adware? Beware the FTC's teeth By David H. Press, Integrity Bankcard Consultants Inc". Greensheet.com. 2005-10-01. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  6. ↑ http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0523131/0523131do070629.pdf [ bare URL PDF ]
  7. ↑ "Spyware purveyor DirectRevenue closes down". Securityfocus.com. 2007-10-25. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  8. ↑ "Webmaster News & Resources » Blog Archive » Ecommerce Websites – 3 Tips To Avoid Liability For Actions of Your Online Resellers". SiteProNews. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  9. ↑ "direct-revenue.com". direct-revenue.com. Archived from the original on 2005-04-28. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  10. ↑ "Adware.Aurora | Symantec". Sarc.com. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  11. ↑ "ABetterInternet: The EULA, Removing Aurora". dslreports.com. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  12. ↑ "direct-revenue.com". direct-revenue.com. 2008-05-17. Archived from the original on 2005-10-26. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  13. ↑ "Adware-BestOffers". Vil.nai.com. Archived from the original on 2011-05-18. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  14. ↑ "parasite: database". doxdesk.com. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
  15. ↑ "ABetterInternet - CA Technologies". .ca.com. Archived from the original on 2007-10-15. Retrieved 2010-08-11.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.