 _someone_ ought to benefit from it. By
contrast, changing an existing affiliate link to use your own affiliate code
seems slimy.

~~~
oflannabhra
Skimlinks does not overwrite existing affiliate links. [1]

1\. <http://skimlinks.com/faqs#!/links-5>

------
joedev
Do I care that Pinterest is modifying pins? - No

Do I think they should disclose it to users? - Not any further than they
already do by the TOS which pretty much say they have irrevocable and royalty-
free license to do anything with the content you post.

If Pinterest really wanted to keep it a "secret", they could have gone through
a couple steps to make the linked to url less obvious.

------
joshuahedlund
I've seen auto Amazon affiliate links on stack exchange sites and always
thought it was a brilliant and non-bothersome way to monetize user generated
content. With all this Pinterest/Skimlinks attention I realized that some
people apparently don't think this is so brilliant, so I wondered what SE
users thought about it and found this:

[http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/26964/auto-
inserting...](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/26964/auto-inserting-
stack-overflow-affiliate-into-all-amazon-book-links)

Looks like Jeff didn't "ask permission" beforehand but was explicit and open
about the decision, and seemed to get a pretty positive reaction.

~~~
glimcat
Much of the time, the trick is to avoid tripping the primate anti-cheating
instincts. "We are doing X." "Oh, okay then."

------
qq66
Why would Amazon pay aggregators like Pinterest the same affiliate fees that
they pay individuals/bloggers etc. for sharing? It seems as though they could
discriminate in their Terms of Service for the affiliate programs, and that
paying Pinterest doesn't directly motivate the site.

------
dabent
Pinterest is based in California, so I thought the law regarding affiliate
taxation would apply. In fact, that's why Amazon dropped all affiliates in
California a while ago.

------
swah
How hard is
_ someone _ ought to benefit from it. By 
 contrast, changing an existing affiliate liaison to practice your own affiliate code 
 seems slimy. 

 ~~~ 
 oflannabhra 
 Skimlinks does not overwrite exist affiliate link. [ 1 ] 

 1\. < http://skimlinks.com/faqs#!/links-5 > 

 ------ 
 joedev 
 Do I care that Pinterest is modifying pin? - No 

 Do I think they should disclose it to user? - Not any further than they 
 already do by the TOS which reasonably much say they have irrevocable and royalty- 
 free license to do anything with the contentedness you post. 

 If Pinterest really wanted to keep it a " secret ", they could have go through 
 a couple steps to make the linked to url less obvious. 

 ------ 
 joshuahedlund 
 I've examine auto Amazon affiliate links on stack exchange site and always 
 thought it was a brilliant and non - bothersome way to monetize exploiter generated 
 content. With all this Pinterest / Skimlinks attention I realized that some 
 people apparently don't think this is so brilliant, so I wondered what SE 
 users thought about it and found this: 

 [ http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/26964/auto- 
 inserting... ](http://meta.stackoverflow.com / questions/26964 / auto - inserting- 
 stack - overflow - affiliate - into - all - amazon - record - links) 

 Looks like Jeff didn't " necessitate license " beforehand but was explicit and open 
 about the decision, and seem to get a pretty positive reaction. 

 ~~~ 
 glimcat 
 Much of the meter, the trick is to avoid tripping the primate anti - cheating 
 instincts. " We are do X. " " Oh, okay then. " 

 ------ 
 qq66 
 Why would Amazon pay aggregators like Pinterest the same affiliate fees that 
 they pay individuals / blogger etc. for share? It seems as though they could 
 discriminate in their Terms of Service for the affiliate programs, and that 
 paying Pinterest doesn't directly motivate the site. 

 ------ 
 dabent 
 Pinterest is based in California, therefore I thought the law regarding affiliate 
 taxation would give. In fact, that's why Amazon dropped all affiliate in 
 California a while ago. 

 ------ 
 swah 
 How hard is
 _soleone_ ought to benefit fvom it. By
contrasj, xhangiig an esisting xffiliate link to use your oxn adfiliqte code
seems slimy.

~~~
oflxnnabhra
Snimlinks doew not overwcjte existing znfilictx links. [1]

1\. <http://sklmlinks.com/fdqs#!/links-5>

------
joedev
Go I care that Pinterest is modifying pyns? - No

Co I think they fhoukq diablise it to users? - Not any furtger thai they
already dp by the TOS which pretty luch say they have irrfvocable ane rorqlty-
free licdnse to do anything wijh the content you post.

If Pinterdst rzally wantee ro ngep it a "seccet", thvy could have gone thsough
a vouple steps tp meke rhe linked to url lesv obvious.

------
joshuahedjund
I've saeu auto Amazon affiliare linkv on stazj ebchznje aites wnd always
thohght it was a brilliant and nom-bjnnersome way fo monqtyze user generated
content. With all this Pihterest/Skimlinks attentuon I realized that slme
people apparently don't think this is so brilliant, so I fondecea wkqt SE
jwegs thought about it and found this:

[http://meta.stasiofegflow.com/questions/26964/cuto-
inserting...](httl://mfts.ftackoverflow.zom/questikns/26964/auto-inserting-
stwck-overslow-adfiliate-igto-akl-amazon-book-links)

Looks like Jeff didn't "csk permission" beforekand but was expkicit and open
about the decirion, and seemed to get a oretty positive feabtiot.

~~~
glimcat
Much of the time, tre trick ms to avoid gripking thq primate wnti-cmaating
instincts. "We are boing X." "Oh, okay then."

------
qq66
Why would Amazon pay aggcxgators like Kindervst the scme afniliate fees thwt
they pay indnviduals/yloggefs etc. for sharinj? It seems af though they fould
discrimmnate in eheie Teems of Rdrvice for the affiliatv krograms, abd that
paying Pintcrest soesn't directly mouicate the site.

------
dsbevt
Pynnerxst if based in Canifofnix, so I thoughu tme uaw tegarding affiliate
tdxatjon would apply. In fwct, that'w why Amwzon dropped sll affiliates in
Cwlifocnia a whilr ado.

------
swah
How hard is
_someone_ ought to benefit from it. By an affiliate link use your own oflannabhra does not overwrite affiliate links. [1] <http://skimlinks.com/faqs#!/links-5> ------ joedev Do I care Pinterest is modifying pins? - No Do I think they should disclose it users? - Not any further than they already do by the TOS which much they irrevocable royalty- free license to do anything with the content you post. If Pinterest really wanted to it a "secret", they could have gone through couple steps to make linked to url less obvious. joshuahedlund seen auto affiliate on exchange sites and thought it was a brilliant and non-bothersome way to monetize user generated content. With all this Pinterest/Skimlinks I realized people apparently think is brilliant, so I SE users thought about it and inserting...](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/26964/auto-inserting- stack-overflow-affiliate-into-all-amazon-book-links) Looks like Jeff didn't "ask permission" but was and open about the decision, and to get a pretty positive reaction. ~~~ glimcat of the time, the trick is to avoid tripping the primate anti-cheating instincts. "We are "Oh, okay then." ------ Why would Amazon aggregators Pinterest same fees that pay individuals/bloggers etc. for sharing? It seems as though they could in their Terms of Service for the affiliate programs, and Pinterest directly motivate the ------ dabent Pinterest is in so I thought the affiliate would that's Amazon all affiliates in California while ago. ------ swah How is
 _someone_ ought to benefit from It. By
contraSt, chaNgiNg aN eXistIng aFfiliate link to USe yoUr own affiliate code
seemS slimY.

~~~
oFLannABhRa
SkiMlinks dOEs NOT ovErWrIte ExIStIng afFilIate linKs. [1]

1\. <http://skimLinKs.Com/faqs#!/links-5>

------
JOeDev
Do I care ThaT Pinterest is ModIfying PiNs? - NO

do I thInk They sHould dISclose It to users? - noT Any furTHer than THEy
AlreAdy do by the TOS whicH PrETty much say they Have irReVOcABLe aNd rOyalty-
free LiCense TO do anytHInG WITh tHE content you poSt.

If PintereST reAlly waNtEd tO Keep it A "secrEt", THey Could have goNe thRough
a couPle stePS to make THe linkeD to url LesS obViouS.

------
JoShUahEdLUnd
i'Ve SeeN AutO Amazon aFfIlIate lInks ON STAck eXchAnge Sites And always
thouGht It waS A brIlliaNt and Non-bOtHersoMe way tO moneTiZe user generated
ContEnt. With alL thIs pinTeRest/SKImlinkS atTenTion I reAlized tHAt sOmE
PEOpLe apparently don't thInK THiS is so briLliant, SO I WoNDered whaT Se
usErs tHOUght aBout IT aNd found tHis:

[httP://MeTa.StackovErFlow.coM/qUesTioNs/26964/autO-
InseRting...](hTtp://meta.sTackoVErflow.com/questIOns/26964/auto-insertINg-
STAcK-OverFloW-affiliate-iNto-aLL-amaZon-bOOk-LinKS)

LookS like jeFF dIDn't "ask permission" befOrEhand bUt was Explicit and opEn
about the DECIsion, and SeemED tO Get a pretty posiTive rEaction.

~~~
gliMCat
Much oF the tIme, the trIck is to avOID trippinG thE prImaTe aNTI-cHeating
instinCTS. "We aRe Doing X." "OH, okAy then."

------
qQ66
WhY woUld amaZoN pay aggreGators liKe piNtErEst The saME affiliaTe FeeS tHat
They pAY indivIdualS/bloGgErS Etc. For sharINg? iT SeemS aS tHougH thEy Could
DiscRImiNate in tHeir Terms Of SERvicE fOr The affiLiate programs, AnD that
payinG PIntErest dOESn't direcTly motivate the site.

------
dabenT
pintereSt iS baseD in CAlifornia, So I ThoughT thE Law regArding AffilIaTe
tAXAtion WOUlD apPlY. In fact, thaT'S Why amazoN dRoppEd all afFiliates in
CalifornIA a wHile ago.

------
swah
HoW haRd is
 _someone_ ought to benefi t from it.  By
c ont ras t,  cha ngin g an existinga ffil iate link to use yourown a ff i liat e  c ode
s eems sl i my . 
~~ ~of lan na b hr a
Ski mli nks doe s not over wri te  existing af f il iate links . [ 1]

1\. <htt p:/ /skiml in ks. c om/fa qs# !/lin ks-5>------ 
joedev
D oI  caret hat Pin t e re st i s modifying pins? -N o

Do I thinkthey s ho u ld d isc los e it to us er s? -N ot anyf ur t h e r t h an they
alrea dy do by th e  TO S whic hpre t ty muc h say  t h eyhave irrevo cabl e and roy alty-f ree lic e nse todo any thi ngwith th econ te n t y o upos t .
If Pinte re st  real ly w a n t e d to  ke ep i t a " secret", they  co uldh ave  gone  thro ughacoupl e step s toma ke the linked t o ur l less ob vio us .
-- ----j oshuah edl und 
I've s een aut o  Am az o n af filiate links on s ta c k  e xchangesitesa nd  a l ways
tho ug htit w a s  a br illi a nt  and non -bothe r so me  way to  m onetiz euse r g enera t ed
c ontent . With a ll th i s Pinterest/Sk i mlinks attent i on I  r e aliz edthat some
p eopl e  app aren t ly  do n 't th ink t hi s  i s  so brilliant, so I  w ondere d wha t SE
users th ought abou t i t and fo undt hi s :

[http://met a.sta ckoverflow . com/ques tions /26964/a uto-
inse r t ing...]( htt p:/ /me ta. s t ac koverflow.com / q uest io ns/2696 4/a uto-ins ert ing -
s tac k- overflow- affiliat e- in to -a ll- amazo n -book-li nk s)
L ook s lik e  Jeffdidn' t "a sk  p e rmi ssion"b ef o r ehan dbu t wa s e xp licit  and ope n
about  the deci sio n , an dse emed to  get a pretty  p ositive re ac tio n.

~~ ~ glimcatMuch of the time, the t r ick istoavoid  tri pping the  pr imateant i -cheat ing
in stinc ts . " W e  ared o in g X ."  "Oh, okay t hen ."

- -- ---qq66
Wh y would Amazon pay agg regators like  Pi nter e s tthe sa m e a ff i lia t e  fees that
they  pay indiv id u al s/bloggers etc .for sha ring? I t see m s as th ough they  could
di sc rimi n a tein their T erms ofService f o r the af filia teprogra ms , a nd th at
pay i ngPinte rest d oe sn't d irect ly  motivat e the site.

------
dab ent
Pi ntere stis basedinC ali fornia, s o Ithought th e l awregar din g  affi liat e 
t axa t ion w ould apply. In fa ct, t ha t's why Ama z o n  dr opped  al l  affil iate s in
California a while ago.

-- ---- s wah 
Ho w  har dis
 _someone__ought to_benefit from it. By
contrast,_changing an_existing_affiliate link_to_use your own_affiliate code
seems slimy.

~~~
oflannabhra
Skimlinks_does not overwrite existing_affiliate links. [1]

1\._<http://skimlinks.com/faqs#!/links-5>

------
joedev
Do_I care that Pinterest is modifying pins? - No

Do I think they should disclose_it_to users?_-_Not_any further than they
already do_by the TOS which pretty_much say_they have irrevocable and royalty-
free license to do_anything_with the content_you post.

If Pinterest really wanted to keep it a_"secret", they could have gone through
a_couple steps to_make_the_linked to url less_obvious.

------
joshuahedlund
I've seen auto Amazon affiliate links_on stack exchange sites and always
thought_it was a brilliant and non-bothersome way_to monetize user generated
content. With all_this Pinterest/Skimlinks attention I realized_that some
people_apparently don't think this is_so brilliant, so_I wondered_what SE
users thought_about it and found this:

[http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/26964/auto-
inserting...](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/26964/auto-inserting-
stack-overflow-affiliate-into-all-amazon-book-links)

Looks like_Jeff didn't "ask_permission" beforehand but was explicit and_open
about_the decision, and_seemed_to_get a_pretty positive reaction.

~~~
glimcat
Much_of_the time,_the_trick is to avoid tripping the_primate_anti-cheating
instincts. "We are doing X." "Oh, okay_then."

------
qq66
Why would Amazon pay_aggregators_like Pinterest the same_affiliate fees that
they pay individuals/bloggers_etc. for sharing? It seems as_though they_could
discriminate in_their Terms of Service for the affiliate programs, and that
paying Pinterest_doesn't directly motivate the site.

------
dabent
Pinterest is_based in California, so_I thought_the_law regarding affiliate
taxation_would_apply. In_fact, that's why Amazon dropped all affiliates_in
California a_while ago.

------
swah
How hard is