General News

Here are the Canadian eHarmony coupon codes for two of their more popular promotions. Both of these coupon codes expire on December 31, 2012.

eHarmony Coupon #1

eHarmony Coupon #2

These coupon codes listed above are valid on eHarmony in Canada (eHarmony.ca).

For US singles, go here for our eHarmony USA (eHarmony.com) coupons.

Read our review of eHarmony for more information about this online matchmaking service.

FriendFinder Networks (FFN) released their second quarter 2012 financial results earlier this month. For the months April, May and June FriendFinder earned $81.1 million in revenue. Gross profit for this period was $53 million which makes income from operations just shy of $13 million. Unfortunately when you take interest expense into account and the closure of JigoCity (cost of $3 million) the net loss for quarter 2 is $10.5 million.

FFN adult websites had a total of just 8.7 million members and their general audience websites had 1.1 million members during the second quarter of 2012. Conversion of members to subscribers was 4.5% for adult sites and 2.1% for general sites. Total subscribers for adult sites was 794,680 and 38,611 for general sites.

For further details on the quarter 2 2012 financial report please read the news release. For more information on some of FFN dating sites you can read our review of Asia FriendFinder and our review of Passion.com.

Related Story: FriendFinder Networks First Quarter 2012 Financials

Singles in the United Kingdom have a free communication weekend coming up with eHarmony UK. It starts Friday August 24th and runs for 4 days until Monday August 27th, 2012.

No credit card is required for this promotion. All you need to do is create a user account and fill out the personality profile. After you have finished you will recieve your first batch of matches. Then during the free weekend you can communicate with your matches for no cost. The only thing not included are the viewing of photos and secure call.

To find out more about this popular UK dating site, please read our review of eHarmony.co.uk.

Our updated OkCupid review is now online. The last major overhaul for this review was back in September of 2010. Since then a few things has change with OkCupid. Let’s find out what:

• The price of being an A-List member has gone from $9.95 to $14.95 per month
• Account changes for A-List users now last forever. They use to only last as long as the user pays a subscription fee
• Sending of Woos is now gone (similar to Winks or Interests)
• Statistics and Member Journals have been removed
• Member reviews have been removed but you still can rate members up to 5 starts and write notes about the member (rating and notes are private)
• Match questions have been added
• Members who viewed your profile use to be called Stalkers, they now are called Visitors
• Some changes to profile questions and searching

To find out more about this popular free dating site and the changes please read our updated OkCupid.com review now.

Heads up, Internet privacy advocates: a new report released in June warns the 7+ million members of OkCupid that the site is "a privacy heartbreak waiting to happen."

Since being acquired by Match.com last year, OkCupid's service terms allow the site to share user data with more than 50 websites owned by Match's parent company, IAC/InterActive Corp., and with IAC partners. The site may even archive data after users have closed their accounts or deleted information from their profiles.

Sarah Downey gives a detailed rundown of OkCupid's privacy weaknesses in the report:

• OkCupid does not support HTTPS, a standard web encryption that ensures secure browsing by sending and receiving information in an encrypted form. Without HTTPS, information appears as plain text. With HTTPS, information looks like random characters. The lack of HTTPS on OkCupid means that anyone on your wireless network could potentially read things like emails, profile info, and the answers to your hidden questions on the site.
• OkCupid uses nine different tracking companies and ad networks to obtain information about its visitors. None are part of OkCupid - all are independent third parties mining user data, like pages visited and time spent viewing a specific profile. The FTC requires dating sites to inform members about how their data will be used, but that information is often hidden deep within confusing terms of use or privacy policies.
• OkCupid can keep your data forever. The site's privacy policy states that it collects OkCupid users' "personal interests, gender, age, education, occupation and certain relationship preferences. . . name, email and photo," along with their browser and IP address. It also says that OkCupid "may keep such information archived indefinitely." But on the bright side, you can email OkCupid at privacy@okcupid.com to request that your information not be shared with others.
• Match's takeover of OkCupid means even more data sharing. Match's parent company owns sites like CitySearch.com, CollegeHumor.com, and Vimeo.com, and IAC's privacy policy allows it to share information freely between the companies it owns. "In other words," Downey writes, "your OkCupid data can be shared freely among the 6th largest online network in the world. Not very private."

So what can you do to protect your data online? "Think twice before posting any content on OkCupid or any other dating website," Downey says. "Even if you delete it later, it may be archived permanently." Use a browser add-on to block trackers and ad networks. Use an alias and an anonymous email addresses. And only provide information that is absolutely necessary - if it's optional, don't fill it in.

For more information on this dating site you can check out our OkCupid review.

Remember that class action lawsuit brought against Match.com? It's back. But before I get into the details, here's a little refresher course, for those whose memories could use a jog:

• Dissatisfied Match members sued the company in December 2010 for failing to meet its obligations to its users.
• The members felt that Match had misled them into believing that the site had millions of subscribers, when in fact more than half of the profiles were fake, scammers, or inactive.
• A class action lawsuit was filed in U.S. District court in Dallas, Texas, claiming that Match.com is guilty of breach of contract.
• A second part of the lawsuit says that Match uses "deceptive trade practices" as described under Texas law.
• The complaint alleges that Match encourages members to renew their subscriptions by sending them messages expressing interest from inactive or fake profiles.
• Full accusations include breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and negligent misrepresentation.
• The plaintiffs sought unspecified damages and repayment of subscription fees

Match.com is not the first dating site to face such a fate. Yahoo found themselves battling a similar lawsuit in 2007, accused of allowing users who had no interest in dating to maintain profiles. Yahoo agreed to pay $4 million to settle the suit. Match has also been the subject of previous lawsuits, one in 2005 when the company was sued in California over allegations that it hires employees to create fake profiles and another in 2009. Both cases were dropped.

The latest update on the Match.com lawsuit came earlier this month, when a federal judge dismissed a major part of the suit. U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay ruled that Match is not in violation of its user agreements, and that the agreements do not require Match to remove profiles that are dormant or inaccurate. Judge Lindsay wrote that the Match.com agreement "in no way requires Match.com to police, vet, update the website content," or verify the accuracy of user profiles.

Regarding the other part of the lawsuit, alleging that Match is guilty of deceptive trade practices, Judge Lindsay has given the plaintiffs until August 27 to prove that this part of the lawsuit should not be dismissed as well.

A spokesman for Match.com announced that the company is pleased with the ruling, adding that Match has always considered the allegations "unfounded." Jeffrey Norton, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, says his team is currently reviewing the decision and considering the options for proceeding.

Looks like these Match members are finding no love online or at the courthouse.