Forum Moderators: not2easy
I visited that other website and checked the source code. The words were still in the meta description. The incredible thing is that those words simply do not tell the truth about that website. It does not at all give the visitors those kinds of services that are promised by the meta description!
I think I know what happened: A lazy webmaster created a very small website. He wanted to have more visitors than the website was able to attract with its own merits. So he copied the meta description from a much larger and already established website, hoping that this description might give him a better position in search engines.
I am not sure what to do about this. I don't think that it makes any real difference. If people are visiting that website because of that description they will find out that it simply isn't true. And my original text does not exist any more so the question of violation of my copyright is tricky.
But still: Do read the meta descriptions when you check source codes. Some webmasters may still be cheating there.
1. if your meta description is sufficiently non-trivial, you may be able to claim copyright in it, or if you'd registered it, trademark as well. in such a case, the other party is infringing, and you may be able to use DMCA take down to call the SE into action on the issue. you'd need to be sure that you have good grounds for this, otherwise the party may take civil action against you for false claim. does your previous text existed in the web archive, or in google/SE cache, or did you register a copy of your website with the copyright office, or notarise it in some way?
2. irrespective of copyright issues, if the meta description does not match the content of the site, the site could be subject to issues of passing off or misrepresentation. i'm not sure whether this line of argument has ever been tried, but it would not surprise me if it happens sometime soon, especially as SE's become important intermediates used by consumers looking for goods/etc - and such false description is used to unfairly obtain a higher/incorrect position in an SE. most of these issues may be easily covered by existing consumer legislation, though yet to be tested in a court of law.
my points are very simplistic, but illustrate some avenues that could be pursued subject to further research.
To my view the worst thing here is that surfers may be cheated to visit a website that simply does not at all give them what the description in the search engine promises.
I might write to the search engine. It ought to be in their interest that descriptions actually are true.
You can't make acusations and then back-out if things get out of hand. My advice is fight the battles worth winning and let the other stuff go. The only people who benefit from litigation are solicitors (attorneys for US folk).
