homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.227.215.140
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdSense
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL & jatar k & martinibuster

Google AdSense Forum

This 99 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 99 ( 1 2 3 [4]     
Integrate with Facebook & Twitter to increase you Adsense earnings!
born2run

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 1:09 am on Sep 15, 2010 (gmt 0)

Hi folks,

If you have a popular site with popular topics, I'd highly advise you to integrate with Facebook & Twitter to increase your adsense earnings and site traffic.

With facebook you create a group for your site. With twitter you create an account with them using your site name. Use bit.ly to create an account and post your latest articles with shortened urls in Twitter and facebook.

Increasing the facebook and twitter followers is another ballgame but it's worth the time spent as now Facebook has surpassed Google in time spent with users on the net. Same with Twitter. The traffic is enormous!

So there's my two cents worth. Happy facebookin' and twitterin'

Regards!

 

true_INFP

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 6:04 pm on Oct 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

How is the TS any different from most forums TS?

Even if there were forums with such ToS, I don't see any point in your question.

netmeg

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 7:56 pm on Oct 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

In the grand scheme of things that I have to worry about, that one is pretty far down the list.

andyll

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 9:54 pm on Oct 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

<<Even if there were forums with such ToS, I don't see any point in your question. >>

Just about every forum including this one has a TOS allowing them to use the content you post on it.

Facebook is a platform created to share users content... then the users complain that the content is shared?

true_INFP

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 5:13 pm on Oct 12, 2010 (gmt 0)

Facebook is a platform created to share users content... then the users complain that the content is shared?

When Google uploads its logo to Facebook, do you really think it reasonably expects to give Facebook and any of its sub-licensees the right to use the logo for anything they want and in any way they want? If you do, you might need a reality check.

There is a world of a difference between the limited right to distribute the uploaded image on their site and reuse elsewhere and by other entities (such as modification and creation of derivative works). You obviously do not own any valuable intellectual property assets (like my company does).

Just about every forum including this one has a TOS allowing them to use the content you post on it.

I've never seen a forum with ToS like that. But even if there was a forum with such ToS, I don't see any point in even mentioning it here.

In the grand scheme of things that I have to worry about, that one is pretty far down the list.

If your logo and product name are worth less than $100,000, then I can say I understand that.

alika

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 5:59 pm on Oct 12, 2010 (gmt 0)

In the grand scheme of things that I have to worry about, that one is pretty far down the list.


Ditto.

Well, even Louis Vuitton now has a Facebook page, and they certainly are very protective of their intellectual property assets.

Many of the top brands are there. You name it, most of them are on Facebook. And I'm sure their legal eagles are all protective of their intellectual assets. Yet the clause you cited did not prevent them from creating a presence on Facebook.

For me, if there's conflict of intellectual properties, I'm sure the big boys will all be drawing out their legal guns to protect their more than $100,000 worth of logo and product name. So a small fish like me is not at all bothered.

true_INFP

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 2:26 pm on Oct 15, 2010 (gmt 0)

Many of the top brands are there. You name it, most of them are on Facebook. And I'm sure their legal eagles are all protective of their intellectual assets. Yet the clause you cited did not prevent them from creating a presence on Facebook.


I know many similar cases where people just assumed, like you do, that if everyone is doing something somewhere, then it must be safe/legal/etc. They were naive, and wrong.

Besides, those big entities (Google, Microsoft, etc.) can have special private agreements with Facebook. So again relying on their presence on Facebook as an indicator of it being legally safe is naive and dangerous.

So, instead of relying on others, you should read the ToS yourself and indicate if you find my analysis wrong and in what respects. Nobody here has shown it to be wrong so far. We will continue to ignore Facebook until it changes its ToS or disappears like any other fad.

alika

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 3:11 pm on Oct 15, 2010 (gmt 0)

We will continue to ignore Facebook until it changes its ToS or disappears like any other fad.


And we will continue to use Facebook unless the risks outweigh the benefits. Right now, the benefits outweigh any risks you've stated.

For me, it's like saying don't ever go out the street because you can get hit by a car. The risks are there. But heck, everyone's still out there!

true_INFP

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 4:11 pm on Oct 18, 2010 (gmt 0)

For me, it's like saying don't ever go out the street because you can get hit by a car. The risks are there. But heck, everyone's still out there!

In this case, it's not a mere "risk", but a fact based on a legal agreement. So if I were to use your street analogy, it would sound like this:

"By going out to the street, you agree that the owner of the street has the right to use any property you take with you in any way he or she wants and to authorize third parties (the street owner's sub-licensees) to do the same."

Sounds fair? Well, I think any sane US/EU judge would declare such an agreement invalid without any hesitation. ;-)

anand84

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 4201908 posted 4:13 am on Oct 19, 2010 (gmt 0)

I think that already holds true..

"By going out to the street, you agree that the owner of the street has the right to use any property you take with you in any way he or she wants"

Student's Car Secretly Tracked For More Than 3 Months

[huffingtonpost.com...]

"and to authorize third parties (the street owner's sub-licensees) to do the same."
And that is what police officials do when they stop your car to snoop for alcohol or drugs, etc.

Point is, risks and legal agreements are there in all walks of life. It is eventually up to the individual self to weigh in the benefits and risks to take a decision. And both sides of the argument are valid.

This 99 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 99 ( 1 2 3 [4]
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google AdSense
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved