Jump to content


Guests: Please register to get rid of these annoying ads! Registered members enjoy an ad-free forum.


Photo

CNN story about WM BF ad


  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#31 Guest_mack222_*  OFFLINE  

Guest_mack222_*
  • Member since --

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:12 am

Because "Freedom of the Press" does not apply to privately-owned deal sites.

The press isn't free to post copyrighted materials anymore that this site. Posting scans of the ads may be infringement but there is no way just posting a list of items and prices is in anyway illegal. The difference is that CNN isn't afraid of Walmarts lawyers and CNN doesn't profit off of any relationship with Walmart.

#32 kfinto65  OFFLINE  

kfinto65

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 258 Posts
  • Member since 2005
  • Location: Texas

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:25 am

I have never gone to Wal-Mart on BF and it ain't going to change this year.....

#33 Aaron  OFFLINE  

Aaron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,343 Posts
  • Member since 2004

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:27 am

The press isn't free to post copyrighted materials anymore that this site. Posting scans of the ads may be infringement but there is no way just posting a list of items and prices is in anyway illegal. The difference is that CNN isn't afraid of Walmarts lawyers and CNN doesn't profit off of any relationship with Walmart.


You would think, right? The only problem with your theory is that Wal-Mart is calling the shots. If they feel that GD or any site for that matter posting a list of items is infringement, then it's infringement and they may not send a letter asking GD to take the list down but I can promise you they would not flinch as they disabled GD's affiliate account.

It's not worth risking relations with Wal-Mart just to post a list. :smart:

#34 Guest_mack222_*  OFFLINE  

Guest_mack222_*
  • Member since --

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:37 am

You would think, right? The only problem with your theory is that Wal-Mart is calling the shots. If they feel that GD or any site for that matter posting a list of items is infringement, then it's infringement and they may not send a letter asking GD to take the list down but I can promise you they would not flinch as they disabled GD's affiliate account.

It's not worth risking relations with Wal-Mart just to post a list. :smart:

Walmart doesn't get to decide what is and isn't copyright infringement, they do get to decide who they have affiliate agreements with. This site is just protecting their revenues.

#35 Brad  OFFLINE  

Brad

    Administrator

  • 22,217 Posts
  • Member since 2004
  • Location: WI

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:39 am

Walmart doesn't get to decide what is and isn't copyright infringement, they do get to decide who they have affiliate agreements with. This site is just protecting their revenues.


If we are protecting our revenues, why are we also removing ads from stores that we have no affiliate agreement with?

#36 Gporter34  OFFLINE  

Gporter34

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:42 am

I wouldn't want Brad to risk his business relationship with WussyMart just to post it. They outdid themselves this year in the suck department. JMO, but they should be ashamed for making such a big fuss about, literally, NOTHING!

#37 Guest_mack222_*  OFFLINE  

Guest_mack222_*
  • Member since --

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:50 am

If we are protecting our revenues, why are we also removing ads from stores that we have no affiliate agreement with?

That's a good question. You may be removing the actual ad scans because that could be copyright infringement. I can see absolutely no reason why you are removing the list of items and prices seeing as that it is perfectly legal. Unless you are paranoid and think that one of these companies would risk the bad PR by launching a frivolous lawsuit.

#38 crazymommy17801  OFFLINE  

crazymommy17801

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 123 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 9:54 am

well even if you post a list of items with the "wrong prices". You can say the barbie is $1.00 when really it is $1.99. And there is nothing anyone can do about this. It's not copyright if the prices are not the correct prices. So you could list them and just add a dollar to the actual price.

#39 sandy2000  OFFLINE  

sandy2000

    Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9 Posts
  • Member since 2007

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 10:00 am

or just set up an email account so people can send you the ads-LOL.

#40 Guest_mack222_*  OFFLINE  

Guest_mack222_*
  • Member since --

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 10:02 am

well even if you post a list of items with the "wrong prices". You can say the barbie is $1.00 when really it is $1.99. And there is nothing anyone can do about this. It's not copyright if the prices are not the correct prices. So you could list them and just add a dollar to the actual price.


It's not copyright infringement or anything else illegal either way. Walmart can't dictate whether or not people talk about or display their prices as long as they don't post any copyrighted material such as the actual ad scans. I have no problem with this site trying to protect their revenue if that is the case, and I have no problem with them being afraid of Walmart lawyers if that is the case.

#41 bayhaysay  OFFLINE  

bayhaysay

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,997 Posts
  • Member since 2004

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 10:03 am

well even if you post a list of items with the "wrong prices". You can say the barbie is $1.00 when really it is $1.99. And there is nothing anyone can do about this. It's not copyright if the prices are not the correct prices. So you could list them and just add a dollar to the actual price.


What would be the point of listing the items without the correct prices?
Jaime :juggle:

#42 Gporter34  OFFLINE  

Gporter34

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 10:08 am

It's not copyright infringement or anything else illegal either way. Walmart can't dictate whether or not people talk about or display their prices as long as they don't post any copyrighted material such as the actual ad scans. I have no problem with this site trying to protect their revenue if that is the case, and I have no problem with them being afraid of Walmart lawyers if that is the case.


I'm sure that the ad would be posted if Brad felt that it was worth risking it. :yup: I think that he probably knows what's best and I'm sure that's what is being done here.JMO

#43 Gporter34  OFFLINE  

Gporter34

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 10:10 am

What would be the point of listing the items without the correct prices?

ITA:yup:

#44 amyaj  OFFLINE  

amyaj

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 279 Posts
  • Member since 2004

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 10:32 am

Having worked for the Disney catalog (when it still existed) I can tell you that they would pull people off their usual jobs to moniter sites just like this one to find out what was being posted, what people were saying, etc. We would take the names that kept recurring to see if there was a trend or if it was the same people griping about the same stuff. To their credit, they would respond to trends. Big Brother Is Watching!


And that's why they listened to people last year who said their ad sucked and why they had to release the secret specials because BB and CC's had better deals. No one wanted the ESPN basketball thingy, the Garth Brooks cds and the robes last year. It doesn't sound like they listened to what people wanted good deals on.

#45 emptynest-2  OFFLINE  

emptynest-2

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 211 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 10:57 am

Well, I just came from a WM in Arkadelphia, AR and saw one Duracell box marked for BF. When I spoke w/ one of the AM she said that they only had on 2 pallets for BF. Something is wrong here with a week away. If this keeps up they will have to rename BF to Red Friday. Retailers won't get out of the red this year.

#46 Holly32  OFFLINE  

Holly32

    Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5 Posts
  • Member since 2006

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 11:08 am

How disappointing! Dh has to work that morning so I was only going to be able to hit Walmart (only store close) before he leaves. I might as well stay home if this is how it's going to be. I'm so let down.

#47 elena_398  OFFLINE  

elena_398

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,745 Posts
  • Member since 2004

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 11:49 am

Im so disappointed. This is when I thank god that this site is here year around. I bought 95% of my kids christmas through sales and clearances posted here. If I had to depend on these ads coming out, I'd be in trouble.

#48 Spotted1  OFFLINE  

Spotted1

    Queen of a pink castle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 409 Posts
  • Member since 2005
  • Location: Kentucky

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 11:57 am

I'm a die hard walmart fan, in all honesty, but this years ad really blows. There's always been at least one thing I get all antsy about but this year? Meh.

#49 mojaxs34  OFFLINE  

mojaxs34

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 12:08 pm

the prices they listed for their plasma tv's are horrible. nothing to get me to come to the store early to buy. i hope their brother company sam's club has a better offer on plasma tv's. i had posted earlier on this site in another thread, that they didnt want anybod to see their ad because it was going to be horrible.

#50 vern28  OFFLINE  

vern28

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 141 Posts
  • Member since 2007

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 1:04 pm

Tis the forbidden. What are they trying to keep us from seeing. Basically its crap lol. They don't want us to see their crap because they know we won't wait in hope that is is good crap. Basically they are worried we will buy better crap somewhere else if we see how lousy the ad is lol. Now I just need the TRU ad I wish that would leak already lol


i just seen TRU's ad and i am sssooo dissapointed.:>(

#51 staviles  OFFLINE  

staviles

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 183 Posts
  • Member since 2006
  • Location: South Texas

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 1:29 pm

I actually got a better deal on a Sharp AQUOS 46"Diag. Widescreen High-DefinitionLCD TV from QVC on 11.10.07 as their Today's Special Value. I ended up paying about $1,200 for it with an extended warranty for free and it was available for those who wanted it on six easy pays (which is six equal monthly payments on your credit/debit card). I am glad I didn't wait on the TV for BF as I wouldn't have been saving much and I wasn't gauranteed one anyways. My family will be so happy on Christmas when they see this t.v., especially hubby...yeah!!

#52 Marcster  OFFLINE  

Marcster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,906 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 1:34 pm

I actually got a better deal on a Sharp AQUOS 46"Diag. Widescreen High-DefinitionLCD TV from QVC on 11.10.07 as their Today's Special Value. I ended up paying about $1,200 for it with an extended warranty for free and it was available for those who wanted it on six easy pays (which is six equal monthly payments on your credit/debit card). I am glad I didn't wait on the TV for BF as I wouldn't have been saving much and I wasn't gauranteed one anyways. My family will be so happy on Christmas when they see this t.v., especially hubby...yeah!!


Plus, you don't have to deal with getting the huge TV back home...

I'm Gottadeal's Fix-It/D-I-Y guy. ~ Since 8/2/07, the Ban Hammer has fallen on 233 spammers! Hammer.gif


#53 lisamag  OFFLINE  

lisamag

    Friends help each other

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,116 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 2:49 pm

AOL also posted this story. for a store that didn't want it getting out it's spreading pretty quickly. the best kept secret isn't a secret at all lol.

#54 RaineeDay1  OFFLINE  

RaineeDay1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 Posts
  • Member since 2007

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 3:31 pm

I personally shop at wm all the time. Its the corner store for me. This years BF I will be at meijer and target I think. Lowes will be on that list too.. still waiting one Homedepot ad

#55 noehlp  OFFLINE  

noehlp

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,735 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 4:25 pm

********************EVERYONE READ THIS POST***********************

Folks, please pay attention.

Regardless of if you see the WM BF ad (or "rumors" about it) on other sites, please DO NOT:

- post links to other sites that have information about the WM BF ad
- post information about the actual WM BF ad, even if it's falsely disguised as "rumors"
- offer to e-mail or PM others with information about the WM BF ad
- request others e-mail or PM you with information about the WM BF ad
- post that you have seen the WM BF ad or that it has been leaked post links to those sites or post the contents of the ad until 11/19.

You can get banned, the moderators have already had to do so. If you cherish your membership here on GottaDeal, then follow the rules, please.

I suggest that EVERYONE reads the following thread! Refer to this post from Brad for more information:
http://forums.gottad...ead.php?t=88194

#56 Guest_Mom1979_*  OFFLINE  

Guest_Mom1979_*
  • Member since --

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 5:01 pm

The only people that will like it are ones looking for cheap clothing for their little ones.


Oh hey that's me :)
It may be a must hit for me after all. I don't think they're going to beat the other ad's I've saw, not for what I need anyway.


#57 sandy2000  OFFLINE  

sandy2000

    Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9 Posts
  • Member since 2007

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 5:03 pm

We are not allowed to even say if we've "seen" the ad? I don't understand how that would jeopardize anything. My question is out of curiousity as to the strictness of the guidelines. If you can't even say you've seen the ad then the only discussion about Walmart would be limited to whether A) you're shopping there or not B) the sales they have now. C)whether you hate them or not

#58 Brad  OFFLINE  

Brad

    Administrator

  • 22,217 Posts
  • Member since 2004
  • Location: WI

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 5:28 pm

We are not allowed to even say if we've "seen" the ad? I don't understand how that would jeopardize anything. My question is out of curiousity as to the strictness of the guidelines. If you can't even say you've seen the ad then the only discussion about Walmart would be limited to whether A) you're shopping there or not B) the sales they have now. C)whether you hate them or not


Saying you've seen the ad leads to people begging you to send them the ad, which is what we are tying to avoid.

#59 sandy2000  OFFLINE  

sandy2000

    Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9 Posts
  • Member since 2007

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 5:38 pm

Okay- so sending them the ad would hurt you? Because if that's the case then of course that would be the last thing I would ever want to do. If it's because it would be an overwhelming request for the ad-- I get that too. I'm just trying to navigate through this issue. I can only speak for myself, but with the way the economy has taken a dive, everyone I know has taken a serious financial blow. This holiday season has us in knots. Every dollar we can save only means we can spend it for something else. So for our family, it makes a big difference knowing if we have an extra $20 bucks to put towards that Mp3 player for our kid. You're running a business too--so please understand, I just want to get a clear picture of what we can do to make everything easier for all.

#60 keri  OFFLINE  

keri

    Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9 Posts
  • Member since 2005

Posted Nov 13, 2007 - 6:14 pm

I think Walmart is just playing with this whole "ad posting" thing to drum up some business for themselves. They are trying to draw attention to themselves in hope that it delivers bigger sales. Good luck. . right?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users