turbocharged - 3:49 am on Apr 30, 2013 (gmt 0)
Thanks for your kind words and suggestion. As a designer, the intricacies of SEO and content theft are not my expertise. But I'm being paid to learn about the dark side of scrapers and how easily Google's services are abused, so I can't complain too much.
I'm not sure why the homepage is susceptible to harm from proxy hijacking, but it may have something to do with the combined 140 Appspot proxies targeted onto this client's homepage. It also may have something to do with the homepage text that the client had before we changed it. The text was keyword heavy, but within norms for his industry, and not structured well. We fixed that, but numerous Appspot proxies were cached first with the new page info while our client's site is still cached under the old content. Thankfully more of these Appspot proxies are losing their caches and hopefully will be dropped from the index entirely in the near future. Once they drop, we can rule that out. Otherwise, the site is healthy and gets xx,xxx visitors daily from good content/updates from other pages within his site.
Injecting code is far different than securing a service with a noindex tag that protects the greater good of the internet community. I see no legal issues with Google restricting their services for lawful acts by preventing their proxies from being indexed and cached. That is the responsible thing to do. I would think that Google would be more liable for damages when their apps, which some are named "vulgarity-business", are copying and damaging the good name of some businesses as in my client's case. Seriously, some of these Appspot proxies were made to intentionally harm my client's site. Some of the appid names are quite telling.