> The only way to effectively do this is to make the alternative, leaving control of the page to Squidoo, a bad idea for the brandholder.

If you assume evil, don't be surprised if that turn out to be the conclusion.

> this is a protection racket. You pay, or you lose something valuable

Well, any sale can be spun that way, with the something valuable being the good on sale.

What isn't demonstrated is the intent that not controlling your brands -in-focus page is damaging, rather than the neutral option.

The premise of this product is that the discussion is already happening, and than such a page can be somehow used to control it. That indicates that not buying would be neutral.

Granted, I can't see what I'd use such a page for, but then again, I'm not a brand manager.

> Just like GetSatisfaction

As I recall the GetSatisfaction debacle, they were essentially passing themselves of as agents of the brand. This is not an issue here.