
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Sphinn / jmaulson / Commented News</title>
<link>http://sphinn.com</link>
<description>Sphinn</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:52:01 -0700</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Commission Junction - Settlement Website - CJ Lawsuit]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/63132</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/63132</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:52:01 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Affiliate Marketing</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/63132</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The plaintiffs in this lawsuit are two current and former members of the Commission Junction (&quot;CJ&quot;) Network who entered into either a publisher service agreement (&quot;Publishers&quot;) or an advertiser service agreement (&quot;Advertisers&quot;) with the defendants. They contend that the defendants did not do enough to monitor the CJ Network for the use by third-parties of software programs that do not comply with CJ's Publisher Code of Conduct and are intended to steal or divert commissions from Publishers and Advertisers on CJ's Network (&quot;Non-Compliant Software&quot;) or to monitor for or prevent third parties from engaging in the theft or &quot;hijacking&quot; of commissions from Advertisers and Publishers on CJ's Network. They further contend that the Defendants failed to make sufficient disclosures regarding the existence of such Non-Compliant Software and commission theft, resulting in losses to both Advertisers and Publishers on CJ's Network. As a result, the plaintiffs believe both Advertisers and Publishers suffered losses on the CJ Network.<br/><br/>2 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
