# Is There A ToS For The Ads Here? Many Are BS
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546
**Category:** About This Message Board
**Created:** [October 4, 2009, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546 "2009-10-04T14:30:09Z")
**Posts on this page:** 8
**Page:** 2
### Author:  [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)
#### Post date: [October 6, 2009, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/21 "2009-10-06T00:54:25Z")
Never mind. Bad idea.
---
### Author:  [@IAmNotSpartacus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IAmNotSpartacus)
#### Post date: [October 6, 2009, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/22 "2009-10-06T03:34:58Z")
Minor nitpick, the former owners of Enzyte got into legal trouble because of fraudulent billing, not because of false claims. Enzyte is pretty much free to make euphemisms for their product making your dick bigger, since having a small dick is not a medical condition. Or something.
---
### Author:  [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)
#### Post date: [October 6, 2009, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/23 "2009-10-06T04:14:39Z")
> [@IAmNotSpartacus](#):
>
> Minor nitpick, the former owners of Enzyte got into legal trouble because of fraudulent billing, not because of false claims. Enzyte is pretty much free to make euphemisms for their product making your dick bigger, since having a small dick is not a medical condition. Or something.
Not to be an ass – but is there a cite? I thought they also got in trouble for the Smilin’ Bob added three inches claims, which were medically insubstantiable . . . I agree the billing fraud is the easier claim, you’re dead on there . . .
---
### Author:  [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)
#### Post date: [October 6, 2009, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/24 "2009-10-06T12:23:22Z")
Here is a [summary of the original complaint](http://www.hagens-berman.com/frontend?command=Lawsuit&task=viewLawsuitDetail&iLawsuitId=662), filed by Hagens Berman on behalf of Enzyte consumers.
Here is the [complaint in full](http://www.hagens-berman.com/files/Enzyte%20Complaint%20FINAL%20(Web)1079561582221.pdf). **PDF File**
Here is [the result](http://www.jsonline.com/business/32585859.html):
A business owner behind the “Smiling Bob” ads that tout the sexual enhancement product Enzyte was sentenced Wednesday to 25 years in prison for defrauding customers. Steve Warshak, 42, founder of Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals, also was ordered to pay $93,000 in fines. He was convicted in February on 93 counts of conspiracy, fraud and money laundering. Federal prosecutors accused the company, which sells a variety of herbal supplements, of bilking customers out of more than $400 million with deceptive ads, manipulated credit card transactions and refusal to accept returns or cancel orders. In Cincinnati, U.S. District Judge S. Arthur Spiegel ordered Warshak, his mother, the company and another defendant to forfeit more than $500 million, including whatever was available from bank accounts, cars and homes, a grand piano and a membership in a California spa.
---
### Author:  [@TubaDiva](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TubaDiva)
#### Post date: [October 6, 2009, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/25 "2009-10-06T14:22:28Z")
The ads are still running – I saw new Enzyte ads last night.
---
### Author:  [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)
#### Post date: [October 6, 2009, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/26 "2009-10-06T14:52:42Z")
> [@TubaDiva](#):
>
> The ads are still running – I saw new Enzyte ads last night.
Yes. As noted, they have carefully calibrated them to disclaim (but still imply) “enlargement.” Their official story now, albeit shrouded behind lots of enlargement-implying innuendo, is that the “supplement” just helps increase blood flow to lead to more fully-erect erections, which would be “larger” than a semi-erection. As I am sure they have no peer-evaluated proof for that, either, I hope they get sued/prosecuted again. N.B. that the FDA safe harbor (“this product is not intended to diagnose, cure, or treat any disease”) is a fairly broad one, though, and they may be relying on that disclaimer.
---
### Author:  [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)
#### Post date: [October 7, 2009, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/27 "2009-10-07T04:08:32Z")
> [@Huerta88](#):
>
> This morning I navigate over to [straightdope.com](http://straightdope.com), and count five ads/sponsored links. I get that this is the current business model, no problem.
>
> What I don’t get is the apparent lack of any filtering. The ads I got ranged from misleading to deceptive to probably-illegal. Three were for the incredibly annoying “Podunkville Single Mom [Loses 47 lbs./whitens teeth/discovers Acai scam] With Free Offer.” That category of ad is really inappropriate because (1) gee, I live in Podunkville. It’s almost like they just fake up a fictitious mom for wherever your IP range originates! (2) the products are clearly snake oil and no one, clearly, has lost 47 lbs. with them, so that’s another false representation; and (3) these ads are notoriously deceptive for snaking people into registering their credit card for automatic negative-option billing of $90 a month after the “free trial.” And many consumers report that cancelling the “convenient renewal supply” is far from easy.
>
> I didn’t see it today, but many of the diet ads that pop up on SDMB compound these sins by (completely illegally) misappropriating the likeness and logos of various news organizations or celebrities (Oprah, Racheal Ray – you’ve seen it) to imply that they use or endorse whatever nostrum is being hawked.
>
> The fourth ad was for “Extagen male enhancement” pills, and the linked site wasn’t even as careful as the current-day Enzyte ads which (after criminal prosecution) have very gingerly refrained from making claims about actual lengthening of “manhoods.” This site was basically fraudulent, with clearly-faked testimonials and medical claims.
>
> The final link was to a site that would explain how to play poker, or rather, as I clicked through, steer you to a bunch of online poker sites where you can play for real money, which are illegal in the U.S.
>
> How is the SDMB cool with this? I’ll guarantee you that if I posted any of that garbage in the message board, I’d be ToS’d in a heartbeat, and rightfully so. I have **no doubt** that the response is going to be “we don’t have any control over that, X is the adserver and they populate automatically.” Well, I don’t buy that – if you have a commercial relationship of some sort with X, by definition, you at least have the right to complain/negotiate/request that problems be addressed. Has anyone even tried to prevent sleazy ads from being served? Or is the Pontius Pilate approach the official doctrine?
Most of the ads you complain about are sold by brokers who distribute them to websites like ours on a bulk basis. We have no contact with the advertiser, and do not have the ability to pick and choose ads. You can beef to the broker about a particular ad, but the likelihood of this having much impact is small.
Our policy on poker sites is that we accept ads from gateway sites, which offer links to gaming sites but do not offer for-pay gaming themselves. We don’t accept (and have turned down) ads from gaming sites. We are, I concede, taking a letter-of-the-law approach here: online for-pay gaming is illegal in the U.S.; promoting online for-pay gaming is not.
---
### Author:  [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)
#### Post date: [October 7, 2009, 11:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546/28 "2009-10-07T11:33:10Z")
> [@TubaDiva](#):
>
> The ads are still running – I saw new Enzyte ads last night.
Right. Since it’s a corporation, it is considered in the US to be a rights-bearing entity like any other — meaning, it is treated like a person. Even though the top officers paid huge fines and went to prison, the corporation carried on. The court ruling did not dissolve the corporation. The board would have elected new officers and hired a new president. And life goes on.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-tos-for-the-ads-here-many-are-bs/512546.md?page=1)