Is this a violation?

Discussion in 'Guidelines / Compliance' started by manores, May 1, 2006.

0
  1. #1
    http://www.sitemedya.com/xelle.asp

    Is this a violation? (Adsense on top, and site displays other web sites via an iframe below)

    I think it is, since it exploits other people's hard work and not having any content by itself.

    Thanks for any replies in advance.
     
    manores, May 1, 2006 IP
  2. Tyler Banfield

    Tyler Banfield Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,027
    Likes Received:
    173
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    160
    #2
    Do you mean the frame doesn't have any content of its own?
     
    Tyler Banfield, May 1, 2006 IP
  3. manores

    manores Peon

    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    Exactly. Part of page with adsense code has no content at all, what could be considered as "content" are some other web sites displayed in an iframe.
     
    manores, May 2, 2006 IP
  4. WebFreedom

    WebFreedom Peon

    Messages:
    807
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    I don't think this is probably a violation of the ToS. All the ToS stipulates is that AdSense must be displayed on a content-based page - it doesn't specify where the content has to come from. It may not be high up in the ethics department, but that doesn't mean it's a violation.

    Sam
     
    WebFreedom, May 2, 2006 IP
  5. toomuch72

    toomuch72 Peon

    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    6
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    While I'm not certain on the language of this site. For all I know they could have click the ads written somewhere and I would never notice. But if you follow the link structure from the home page it is obviously some type of "DIRECTORY." This practice of loading pages up in frames has been in use for years. I personally find it annoying because once you start visiting that site you never leave the orignal ad.

    Now does it bring undue attention because it stays PUT after visiting a new link in the lower frame? This may be where it violates some type of "RULE" but I'm unsure.
     
    toomuch72, May 2, 2006 IP
  6. WebFreedom

    WebFreedom Peon

    Messages:
    807
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    I don't think this would be considered "drawing undue attention to the ads". I think this rule probably covers anything which either:

    1. Draws the viewer's eyes to the ads (i.e. arrow, blinking, etc.)

    OR

    2. Compels the viewer to click on the ads (i.e. "Please support our sponsors")

    In my opinion, the tactic used on this site does neither.

    Sam
     
    WebFreedom, May 5, 2006 IP