"Court Order Curbs Site's Ranking In Search Results"

[rubble88]

From the article,
"A federal judge has told a California business to mention one of its competitors less often on its own Web site - an order intended to lower the site's profile in some Web searches...In a lawsuit packing such allegations as unfair competition and false advertising, J.K. Harris argued that some 75 references to the Charleston company on Kassel's Taxes.com Web site was the reason those pages topped results in Web searches for "J.K. Harris."

Full-Text of article at:
[newsbytes.com...]

[wasmith]

What is going to happen when clambake is number one for its targeted keyword?

[Marshall]

Gotta love taxes.com's response that it was free speach and protected by the first amendment. Give me a break.

[ericwinter]

The ruling might generate more PR than the search results did. The company had nothing to lose (except a bunch of lawyers fees).

Interesting, albeit questionable, technique.

[wangdy]

Interesting... I wonder if the use of gateway pages had anything to do with the ranking court order?

[WebGuerrilla]

You got to wonder who told J.K. Harris it would be a smart thing to go after taxes.com.

They could of spent much less hiring someone to simply build them a new site that didn't use frames, and that did include page titles.

Now, many more people will be out searching for his name, which will lead them right to all the articles about their recent troubles with the IRS.

[Laisha]

We should probably avoid using the name J.K. Harris here as well. :)