While that line might be vague, are you arguing that this example _isn't_ fraud? I'm sure they violated the affiliate network terms of service — which is one thing if you're an individual user, but when it's a business contract, terms become much more important. Moreover, these guys had to know they were in violation of the spirit of these programs — affiliate marketing is _marketing_, which they were doing none of.
Heh. Nope, not _arguing_ that, because arguing what constitutes fraud and what does not belongs ONLY to the administrators of said governing laws.
If I were presiding over this specific case, and had a breadth of understanding that confirmed they were cookie-stuffing beyond a doubt, I would move to convict them.
I do think the line that separates a civil matter and a criminal matter is unclear at times.
Further edit: Oh, were you asking if I thought the Airbnb behavior an example of fraud? Well, now I guess I do... based on what I read today. I still think its a civil issue, but it doesn't matter what I think. Prosecutors be prosecutin'.
Nope. Was't referring to Airbnb. You say you think fraud is vaguely defined. Which might be true (I don't know enough). But this seems like it crosses a pretty bright line.
By my reading they used iframes (or maybe img) to literally send traffic to eBay, and it was eBay's servers that set the cookie. As far as I understand it you can't set a cookie on a domain you don't control. But I admit I might be wrong, the article is confusing on the technical details.
