Brian Dunning lawsuit

[d4m10n]

Still no real contrition for what he did.

What exactly should he feel contrition about, if he truly believes the following?

Every penny eBay ever paid was a commission off their profit from a sale made after someone viewed one of our ads.

Of course, if that's a lie, he should feel awful about both the cookie-stuffing and the lie. But if it's true, well, I'm not seeing what remains as a serious moral problem.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

What exactly should he feel contrition about, if he truly believes the following?



Of course, if that's a lie, he should feel awful about both the cookie-stuffing and the lie. But if it's true, well, I'm not seeing what remains as a serious moral problem.

Read the court documents. Either he's incredibly dense or he's a liar.

 

[DuvalHMFIC]

As I understand it, wasn't he getting the commissions due to other marketers? No mention of that by Dunning, but those are his real victims. People that rightfully should have gotten a commission from ebay, but that money went to KFC via some computer workaround that prioritized his ad over theirs?

At least, I'm pretty darn sure I read that at some point.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

As I understand it, wasn't he getting the commissions due to other marketers? No mention of that by Dunning, but those are his real victims. People that rightfully should have gotten a commission from ebay, but that money went to KFC via some computer workaround that prioritized his ad over theirs?

At least, I'm pretty darn sure I read that at some point.

Correct.

eBay wasn't out $5 million. They were going to pay the $5 million to someone (or more accurately, many, many someones). It's just that Dunning schemed to have it diverted to himself.

His argument is basically that "everyone was doing it", but somehow the FBI only went after him. Sorry Bri, not buying it.

 

[DuvalHMFIC]

Everyone was doing it, so we need to discuss where this will leave Dunning's legacy in 20 years. Anyone defending Dunning will be called a "Dunning and/or Skeptoid fanboy" and any whom oppose him will be called "haters."

I eagerly await James Gosling piping in and stating that Dunning definitely cheated (the system), but that back in the day Gosling's Java team routinely used to....um...darn my little ploy here won't work because I can't think of a computer equivalent to using stickum. Darn it!

 

[Ernie M]

Hmmm....

OS X, can't copy in either Chrome or Safari.

But you're right, it does copy on my iPad.

So the difference is the way javascript (presumably) runs on OS X vs iOS?

If you're using Mac OS and Safari:
File > Export as PDF (you can select and copy certain text from the PDF)

or press the "Command" and "P" key as if to Print, but instead of printing, select pull-down menu from PDF item and select "Save as PDF."

 

[d4m10n]

They were going to pay the $5 million to someone (or more accurately, many, many someones). It's just that Dunning schemed to have it diverted to himself.

According to the superseding information document, at paragraph 12, "If there was no qualifying cookie on the user's computer at the time of the revenue action, then no affiliate was credited." So it is unclear whether that entire sum of money was bound to be paid out.

(Unless we can safely assume background cookie stuffing was incredibly widespread.)

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

According to the superseding information document, at paragraph 12, "If there was no qualifying cookie on the user's computer at the time of the revenue action, then no affiliate was credited." So it is unclear whether that entire sum of money was bound to be paid out.

(Unless we can safely assume background cookie stuffing was incredibly widespread.)

I don't have time right now to read back through all of the docs, but IIRC, Dunning was also overwriting other people's cookies.

 

[DuvalHMFIC]

I don't have time right now to read back through all of the docs, but IIRC, Dunning was also overwriting other people's cookies.

This is what I remember being an issue as well. I think ebay's system was set up to reward whichever ad sent traffic their way first, but Dunning's company set it up so that they got the credit no matter what, or something along those lines. I know there is much more to it than Dunning is admitting to, despite his attempts at claiming "the judge didn't understand the issue."

 

[arthwollipot]

Still no real contrition for what he did.

I'd like to know what you think "real" contrition would look like.

 

[d4m10n]

I don't have time right now to read back through all of the docs, but IIRC, Dunning was also overwriting other people's cookies.

The only source I can find for that claim was someone who calls herself Skepchick:

Dunning didn’t “just” steal money from eBay (note: not liking the victim doesn’t make the crime better). He took money that was meant for others. Cookie-stuffing overwrites any previous cookies from affiliates who may have succeeded in getting users to visit eBay, meaning that Dunning would collect commissions that were rightfully owed to honest individuals.

Her working theory seems to be that, at least some significant fraction of the time when Dunning got paid, the sequence of events looked like this:

1. One of Dunning's competitors would generate a legit click-thru to eBay

2. The would-be customer who clicked on eBay would hold off on their purchases for some time

3. In that intervening time period, the customer would view a Dunning ad and get stuffed

4. Finally, they would make a purchase at eBay, after receiving the new cookie

Sounds plausible, but unlikely, and more than a bit speculative to me.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Her working theory seems to be that, at least some significant fraction of the time when Dunning got paid, the sequence of events looked like this:

1. One of Dunning's competitors would generate a legit click-thru to eBay

2. The would-be customer who clicked on eBay would hold off on their purchases for some time

3. In that intervening time period, the customer would view a Dunning ad and get stuffed

4. Finally, they would make a purchase at eBay, after receiving the new cookie

Sounds plausible, but unlikely, and more than a bit speculative to me.

I believe that is roughly how it was spelled out in the court docs. If I can find some time in the next week or two I'll look for it. It's been over a year since I read all of them.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I'd like to know what you think "real" contrition would look like.

"Given the financial nature of my crimes, I have come to the conclusion that it is no longer ethical for me to ask others to contribute money to Skeptoid. Therefore, I will only spend my own money to produce content, which, to be honest, is pretty much free anyhow."

 

[icerat]

The only source I can find for that claim was someone who calls herself Skepchick:

wasn't just Skepchick, I pointed this out quite early.

Her working theory seems to be that, at least some significant fraction of the time when Dunning got paid, the sequence of events looked like this:

1. One of Dunning's competitors would generate a legit click-thru to eBay

2. The would-be customer who clicked on eBay would hold off on their purchases for some time

3. In that intervening time period, the customer would view a Dunning ad and get stuffed

4. Finally, they would make a purchase at eBay, after receiving the new cookie

Sounds plausible, but unlikely, and more than a bit speculative to me.

Not unlikely at all, particularly at the time of the offences and the widespread use of Dunning's widgets. Note: not "a Dunning ad", he put code in a website widget which he gave away, and anyone visiting a site with this widget would get any existing ebay affiliate info replaced.

 

[zooterkin]

The only source I can find for that claim was someone who calls herself Skepchick:

You mean Rebecca Watson. As far as I know, she doesn't use "Skepchick" as an alias.

 

[d4m10n]

Note: not "a Dunning ad", he put code in a website widget which he gave away, and anyone visiting a site with this widget would get any existing ebay affiliate info replaced.

So you'd say Dunning was definitely lying when he wrote "Every penny eBay ever paid was a commission off their profit from a sale made after someone viewed one of our ads."

I dug up an example of an old screencap of one of the widgets in action:

It may be a bit much to call the word "eBay" with a hyperlink a full-on advertisement, but it was plain enough to see.

 

[d4m10n]

You mean Rebecca Watson. As far as I know, she doesn't use "Skepchick" as an alias.

My bad.

Correction: Calls herself *A* Skepchick

 

[d4m10n]

I ask you all, the closest community I've ever had the privilege to be a part of, to give me the benefit of the doubt and suspend your judgement and speculation until a meaningful percentage of the facts are made public.

Now would be a good time to make all the facts available. It is fair to say that several questions remain unresolved within the community.

For example, there is some dispute about whether your widgets served ads or not, prior to placing cookies on client browsers.

 

[quadraginta]

Hmmm....

OS X, can't copy in either Chrome or Safari.

But you're right, it does copy on my iPad.

So the difference is the way javascript (presumably) runs on OS X vs iOS?

No problem copying with Win 10 and Firefox.

For the last 8 years I have not been able to publicly tell my story, or make any public response to the many false charges that have been thrown about. Now I can. This is what happened.

 

[arthwollipot]

"Given the financial nature of my crimes, I have come to the conclusion that it is no longer ethical for me to ask others to contribute money to Skeptoid. Therefore, I will only spend my own money to produce content, which, to be honest, is pretty much free anyhow."

What... Huh? Are you serious?

Since I was convicted for shooting someone, I have come to the conclusion that it is no longer ethical for me to use anything that contains lead. Therefore, I will be writing in pen from now on, and will no longer use plumbing.