Slashdot Mirror
Domain: kpmg.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to kpmg.com.
Comments · 286
-
Re:Don't feed the search engines
Looks like you need a little help...
goat fuckers
child porn
dumbass
corporate fraud
money laundering
tax evasion
-
Re:I wonder...Their robots.txt file says:
# everyone go away
User-agent: *
Disallow:
-
Re:Big deal..its a requestHere's a link to their actual disclaimer page. By posting this, I'm violating both their "no linking without permission" policy and their "no links that bypass the homepage" policy.
If they really cared, couldn't they just block all pages but their index for all browsers who don't send a referer header indicating they came from another page on their site? If you're going to make up stupid rules, you might as well enforce them when it's that easy to do.
-
Hmm... They must have an agreement with MS and NS
I saw links on kpmg under "help" to www.microsoft.com and www.netscape.com... you suppose they made agreements with them before linking to their sites?
-
It's my turn now...I think I might drop them an e-mail, saying that they don't have the permission to put cookies on my machine unless they have signed a verbal agreement with me. Whaddya think?
-
They aren't very friendly
Here's their stance on web visitors.
-
what?
-
KPMG Webmaster: Open your Mind!After seeing this story here on
(NOTE: Others not using Netscape 6.1 might not see the error message I saw when they click on the above link. I haven't tested it, and am not sure how they have their site setup.)
I tend to be a bit technological-oriented when I look at a company, and how well their website is done gives me a good impression of:
- How much they care about their website
- How web-saavy their tech people are
- The ability of the people in charge to think critically
- Whether or not I would want to do business with them
It's bad enough they won't want people linking to their site. God forbid it should get them some new business! Watch out, nobody better send them a letter in the mail, or they might come and getcha! - How much they care about their website
-
KPMG Webmaster: Open your Mind!After seeing this story here on
(NOTE: Others not using Netscape 6.1 might not see the error message I saw when they click on the above link. I haven't tested it, and am not sure how they have their site setup.)
I tend to be a bit technological-oriented when I look at a company, and how well their website is done gives me a good impression of:
- How much they care about their website
- How web-saavy their tech people are
- The ability of the people in charge to think critically
- Whether or not I would want to do business with them
It's bad enough they won't want people linking to their site. God forbid it should get them some new business! Watch out, nobody better send them a letter in the mail, or they might come and getcha! - How much they care about their website
-
Welcome to Lawyerville...Asked if he was aware of the weblog backlash, he answered: "What we are aware of is that individuals and others link to our site without an agreement, and we have a Web policy clearly outlined."
These clowns' rectums are two sizes too small -- even as far as slimy-green lawyers go.
WARNING: Bored Lawyers on Premises!
-- -
Let's all hold hands and violate the DMCA
-
Re:A clever ploy, KPMG
Wooohooo! You guys are morons! The only thing I CAN view on this stupid website is all these fields for comments. Haha! Don't MAKE me accept your damn cookies, and maybe I would care what you had to say on this stupid website. Ha-ha-ha-ha! Anyways, I saw your site mentioned on a couple of websites, and just wanted to alert you that a whole bunch of websites are linking to this site against your wishes. I'm sure you would like to pursue the hundreds, if not thousands of annoying people linking to your website. Here's a few examples: www.fuckedcompany.com, www.slashdot.org, www.wired.com (hint: they gots money, go after them first), many user posts on all three of those websites as well contain links to this page. P.S. Did I tell you that your policy on cookies on this website absolutely suck the big one. Maybe when my gf graduates law school she can send you some really lame notices about how I have this policy that you're not allowed to try to set cookies on my computer per my own EULA that I wrote for my computer, and how we're going to sue your a$$ off for being stupid. Yes, I am only 7 yeers old. --Please post my above rant if you have cookies turned on and can post this on their main page: here's yet another link to it. Thanks!
-
Re:Taco: a little courtesy won't kill you
what conclusion will they draw from this episode?
With any luck, that their "rules" are stupid and unenforcable. Either that, or they will try to sue him. Oops - and me, too. -
Re:Ooops
Strangely, I can't contact kpmg.com right now. I wonder what could have happened to their site that would have caused it to go down?
I wish I could read their policy page to see whether they allow themselves to be slammed simultaneously by thousands of Slashdot users, but their site doesn't seem to be working right now.
I'll just keep trying and encourage everyone else to do the same. -
Re:Ooops
Strangely, I can't contact kpmg.com right now. I wonder what could have happened to their site that would have caused it to go down?
I wish I could read their policy page to see whether they allow themselves to be slammed simultaneously by thousands of Slashdot users, but their site doesn't seem to be working right now.
I'll just keep trying and encourage everyone else to do the same. -
Re:Ooops
Strangely, I can't contact kpmg.com right now. I wonder what could have happened to their site that would have caused it to go down?
I wish I could read their policy page to see whether they allow themselves to be slammed simultaneously by thousands of Slashdot users, but their site doesn't seem to be working right now.
I'll just keep trying and encourage everyone else to do the same. -
Re:Ooops
Strangely, I can't contact kpmg.com right now. I wonder what could have happened to their site that would have caused it to go down?
I wish I could read their policy page to see whether they allow themselves to be slammed simultaneously by thousands of Slashdot users, but their site doesn't seem to be working right now.
I'll just keep trying and encourage everyone else to do the same. -
Re:Ooops
Strangely, I can't contact kpmg.com right now. I wonder what could have happened to their site that would have caused it to go down?
I wish I could read their policy page to see whether they allow themselves to be slammed simultaneously by thousands of Slashdot users, but their site doesn't seem to be working right now.
I'll just keep trying and encourage everyone else to do the same. -
Re:Ooops
Strangely, I can't contact kpmg.com right now. I wonder what could have happened to their site that would have caused it to go down?
I wish I could read their policy page to see whether they allow themselves to be slammed simultaneously by thousands of Slashdot users, but their site doesn't seem to be working right now.
I'll just keep trying and encourage everyone else to do the same. -
Here's one site that won't link to itTheir site is so bad that it looks like they've told the w3c validator that they aren't allowed to test it. Here's what I get as a result:
I got the following unexpected response when trying to retrieve http://www.kpmg.com:
It won't render for me on Mozilla, Galeon or Netscape 4. Maybe it uses CaptiveX or something. I wouldn't be suprised if these corporate drones don't even know that there are alternatives to IE.302 Object moved
Please make sure you have entered the URI correctly. -
Policy listed in their disclaimer
Here is the policy section from their disclaimer page.
The following web link activities are explicitly prohibited by KPMG and may present trademark and copyright infringement issues:
Links that involve unauthorized use of our logo
Framing, inline links or metatags
Hyperlinks or a form of link that disguises the URL and bypass the homepage
... -
Re:A clever ploy, KPMG
Why would anybody link to KPMG? They're overly litigious fuckwits.
-
Great, Now My Mail's Slashdotted :)
Chris, the guy who got the email from KPMG and who owns the raettig.org domain, also rather graciously hosts my mail and webserver. From the end of his bed, of course, sitting on the end of a t1 line. Now, when this story broke on Tuesday on FuckedCompany, Metafilter and a few of the more well-known weblogs, we all thought it was rather amusing (and still do, really). On the other hand, it meant that the t1 got saturated pretty quickly.
This morning, when the Wired article appeared, I bet him it wasn't going to be more than 24 hours before his box got slashdotted. Needless to say, five minutes ago I tried checking my mail and was surprised that nothing at all was happening. Quick brainwave: check slashdot. And there the box is. Excellent explanation!
Oh, and anyway, one of these links is obligatory... -
Re:Nah
Well, at least no one is subjected to read the useless drivel of a website that they have as long as you reject their cookies they try to set on your computer. So I guess, not only do they not want people linking to their site, but they also don't want semi-intelligent, privacy loving individuals even looking at their website. Hehe!
-
Re:Reverse Psychology?
"How many companies would not like to have their website linked everywhere?"
Well, looks like KPMG is number 1! -
Re:A clever ploy, KPMG
-
Re:A clever ploy, KPMG
-
Re:so /. links to it?As did the WIRED story.
My question is search engines. Does KPMG expect every search engine to "execute an agreement" in order to include: results in their database and subsequently provide the results to their users?
It seems that if, is actually intent on enforcing this policy, then they should require a userid and password to access every page, and then only provide the passwords to websites that have "executed" agreements. Personally, it looks to me like () is doing a good job of executing themeselves.
BTW, if you would like to know more aboutRite Aid shareholders alleged that consulting fees figured in KPMG's relationship with the drugstore chain, according to their class-action lawsuit against the accounting firm.
Rite Aid acknowledged last year that it had overstated earnings by more than $1 billion over two years. Audit fees were less than 20 percent of what Rite Aid paid KPMG over a 2 1/2-year period in the late 1990s, the suit alleged.
At one point, the suit alleged, Rite Aid's then-chairman, Martin L. Grass, awarded KPMG consulting engagements worth more than $1.5 million "as a sweetener and to ensure the accounting firm's continued cooperation."
An attorney for Grass said the allegations were "wrong" and "grossly unfair." KPMG was given a contract to address weaknesses in Rite Aid's inventory-tracking system, not to ensure cooperation, lawyer Andrew Weissman said.
KPMG said that it was "victimized by company management" and that the consulting it did for Rite Aid was "insignificant to the overall professional relationship." -
Re:so /. links to it?As did the WIRED story.
My question is search engines. Does KPMG expect every search engine to "execute an agreement" in order to include: results in their database and subsequently provide the results to their users?
It seems that if, is actually intent on enforcing this policy, then they should require a userid and password to access every page, and then only provide the passwords to websites that have "executed" agreements. Personally, it looks to me like () is doing a good job of executing themeselves.
BTW, if you would like to know more aboutRite Aid shareholders alleged that consulting fees figured in KPMG's relationship with the drugstore chain, according to their class-action lawsuit against the accounting firm.
Rite Aid acknowledged last year that it had overstated earnings by more than $1 billion over two years. Audit fees were less than 20 percent of what Rite Aid paid KPMG over a 2 1/2-year period in the late 1990s, the suit alleged.
At one point, the suit alleged, Rite Aid's then-chairman, Martin L. Grass, awarded KPMG consulting engagements worth more than $1.5 million "as a sweetener and to ensure the accounting firm's continued cooperation."
An attorney for Grass said the allegations were "wrong" and "grossly unfair." KPMG was given a contract to address weaknesses in Rite Aid's inventory-tracking system, not to ensure cooperation, lawyer Andrew Weissman said.
KPMG said that it was "victimized by company management" and that the consulting it did for Rite Aid was "insignificant to the overall professional relationship." -
Re:so /. links to it?As did the WIRED story.
My question is search engines. Does KPMG expect every search engine to "execute an agreement" in order to include: results in their database and subsequently provide the results to their users?
It seems that if, is actually intent on enforcing this policy, then they should require a userid and password to access every page, and then only provide the passwords to websites that have "executed" agreements. Personally, it looks to me like () is doing a good job of executing themeselves.
BTW, if you would like to know more aboutRite Aid shareholders alleged that consulting fees figured in KPMG's relationship with the drugstore chain, according to their class-action lawsuit against the accounting firm.
Rite Aid acknowledged last year that it had overstated earnings by more than $1 billion over two years. Audit fees were less than 20 percent of what Rite Aid paid KPMG over a 2 1/2-year period in the late 1990s, the suit alleged.
At one point, the suit alleged, Rite Aid's then-chairman, Martin L. Grass, awarded KPMG consulting engagements worth more than $1.5 million "as a sweetener and to ensure the accounting firm's continued cooperation."
An attorney for Grass said the allegations were "wrong" and "grossly unfair." KPMG was given a contract to address weaknesses in Rite Aid's inventory-tracking system, not to ensure cooperation, lawyer Andrew Weissman said.
KPMG said that it was "victimized by company management" and that the consulting it did for Rite Aid was "insignificant to the overall professional relationship." -
Re:so /. links to it?As did the WIRED story.
My question is search engines. Does KPMG expect every search engine to "execute an agreement" in order to include: results in their database and subsequently provide the results to their users?
It seems that if, is actually intent on enforcing this policy, then they should require a userid and password to access every page, and then only provide the passwords to websites that have "executed" agreements. Personally, it looks to me like () is doing a good job of executing themeselves.
BTW, if you would like to know more aboutRite Aid shareholders alleged that consulting fees figured in KPMG's relationship with the drugstore chain, according to their class-action lawsuit against the accounting firm.
Rite Aid acknowledged last year that it had overstated earnings by more than $1 billion over two years. Audit fees were less than 20 percent of what Rite Aid paid KPMG over a 2 1/2-year period in the late 1990s, the suit alleged.
At one point, the suit alleged, Rite Aid's then-chairman, Martin L. Grass, awarded KPMG consulting engagements worth more than $1.5 million "as a sweetener and to ensure the accounting firm's continued cooperation."
An attorney for Grass said the allegations were "wrong" and "grossly unfair." KPMG was given a contract to address weaknesses in Rite Aid's inventory-tracking system, not to ensure cooperation, lawyer Andrew Weissman said.
KPMG said that it was "victimized by company management" and that the consulting it did for Rite Aid was "insignificant to the overall professional relationship." -
Re:Suprise, suprise
That's right. All these firms are filtering out people who have proven, from their track record, that they just can't get simple things right. Isn't that a sensible decision, given the number of applicants they get annually?
It's not as if they'll accept anyone just for having the right SAT scores, GPA average, etc. Those are what you need to get through the door. After that, it's up to you.
Trust me, I used to run graduate recruitment for a Big Five consultancy firm's IT arm. I had to sit through interviews with a load of no-hopers who had fine school grades, adequate degrees, etc. They just weren't well-rounded human beings, and nobody would want to trust them or work with them.
Not even KPMG. (Whoops!) -
ok, so this would be a bad thing:
-
Some PHB's need a CLUE
"We easily sent hundreds of these letters over the past year," he said. Indeed, he wondered why this was considered newsworthy at all, as "many organizations do this."
And many organizations are freaking retarded too.
<cluestick>
Hello! When people link to you its like free advertising... hmmm maybe if we allow people to link to our site they might actually find it.
</cluestick>
What are they going to do now? Sue Google? Or
(That was very therapetic) -
Some PHB's need a CLUE
"We easily sent hundreds of these letters over the past year," he said. Indeed, he wondered why this was considered newsworthy at all, as "many organizations do this."
And many organizations are freaking retarded too.
<cluestick>
Hello! When people link to you its like free advertising... hmmm maybe if we allow people to link to our site they might actually find it.
</cluestick>
What are they going to do now? Sue Google? Or
(That was very therapetic) -
Some PHB's need a CLUE
"We easily sent hundreds of these letters over the past year," he said. Indeed, he wondered why this was considered newsworthy at all, as "many organizations do this."
And many organizations are freaking retarded too.
<cluestick>
Hello! When people link to you its like free advertising... hmmm maybe if we allow people to link to our site they might actually find it.
</cluestick>
What are they going to do now? Sue Google? Or
(That was very therapetic) -
Some PHB's need a CLUE
"We easily sent hundreds of these letters over the past year," he said. Indeed, he wondered why this was considered newsworthy at all, as "many organizations do this."
And many organizations are freaking retarded too.
<cluestick>
Hello! When people link to you its like free advertising... hmmm maybe if we allow people to link to our site they might actually find it.
</cluestick>
What are they going to do now? Sue Google? Or
(That was very therapetic) -
They don't like it? Watch this!
-
Re:Obligatory "old news" post
-
What an ugly site...I find it remarkable that anyone would want to link to the front page of KPMG , given an opportunity not to.
The site renders extremely badly on Galeon... (And it's about as bad with Netscape 4.7 and Konqueror, albeit in different ways...)
Maybe they want nobody to link to it so that nobody knows that it's there?
-
Thought experiments
Thought experiments for my web hypothetical kpmgsucks.com web site (someone owns it already):
- A link to KPMG that displays only if you're coming in from a kpmg.com (oops!) address. (I'd love to hear the conversation between KPMG and its outside corporate counsel on that one.)
- A link to KPMG that shows up on 0.1% of all page views, randomly.
- A GIF that looks like a blue, underlined link to kpmg.com (oops!) -
Thought experiments
Thought experiments for my web hypothetical kpmgsucks.com web site (someone owns it already):
- A link to KPMG that displays only if you're coming in from a kpmg.com (oops!) address. (I'd love to hear the conversation between KPMG and its outside corporate counsel on that one.)
- A link to KPMG that shows up on 0.1% of all page views, randomly.
- A GIF that looks like a blue, underlined link to kpmg.com (oops!) -
Obligatory "old news" post
-
Obligatory "old news" post
-
Obligatory "old news" post
-
Obligatory "old news" post
-
Obligatory "old news" post
-
Obligatory "old news" post
-
Obligatory "old news" post
-
Obligatory "old news" post