As far is click fraud is concerned users are agreeing Googles records are the only thing that matters when it comes to charging ,refunds are solely at Googles discretion and then shall only be in the form of a credit to be used with Google.
Given the range of 3rd party click fraud offerings about and the reported level of fraud they claim to catch I doubt Google would defend the clauses in a UK Court.
Note these are only the new US terms. Google have a new set of UK terms and I guess new sets for each of their regional companies.
The bit I like best is the Intro to the new terms that claim they are part of their onngoing efforts to improve the AdWords program for advertisers and users.
Pigs of course fly!
https://adwords.google.com/select/tsandcsfinder [adwords.google.com]
On this link you are able to select your country for your specific geographic program terms.
each country's laws are different I guess, but doesn't the loser pay the legal bills of the winner in UK? Great deterrent to taking on Google or any company with billions in cash. Changes are they'll overwhelm you with lawyers you and you'll pay for it too.
Pigs of course fly!
Found proof on the Internet:
Great deals on Flying Pigs
patient2all
<ads removed>
[edited by: eWhisper at 8:45 pm (utc) on April 22, 2005]
[edit reason] Please don't copy other people's ads. [/edit]
In a "Small Claim" normally only a few hundred quid can be awarded: about the same a corporate lawyer charges for a hour!
sheesh.
so just as click fraud is heating up they come along and say "our records are the only things that count" and you only get adwords credit?
Well yes of course. It's a great way to create customers. Let a whole bunch of fraudulent clicks through, bang the credit card, and then say adwords credits only. Hell, Enron and MCI booked their sales this way. Why not Google?
So,
month 1, bang everything through.
month 2, customer squeals like a stuck pig
month 3, issue adwords credit
repeat cycle because customer has to keep account open to use adwords credits, so let more fraudulent clicks go through and bang the credit card again in exchange for even more adwords credits.
month 3028, customer still trying to use up paper credits
while Google tries to explain to the IRS why the prepaid services deduction is so high.
Essentially, the major change is adding impression fraud/spam into the terms as a prohibited use.
Under 2. The Program, the following was added:
Google may modify the Program or these Terms at any time without liability and your use of the Program after notice that Terms have changed indicates acceptance of the Terms.
This change mimics the same part of the AdSense terms.
Under 3. Prohibited Uses:
Changes in bold:
You shall not, and shall not authorize any party to: (a) generate automated, fraudulent or otherwise invalid impressions or clicks
It seems they are finally writing impression fraud into the actual terms. For those who don't know what this is, it means an advertiser will go and turn off campaigns related to a certain keyword area, then continuously query those same keywords in Google. This results in a lower CTR for those competitor's ads who are still displaying for those keyword terms. Then when the advertiser turns his/her ads back on, they will likely be above the competitor's listings, while not neccessarily paying more, because they now have a better CTR, since they did not receive any of the fraudulent impressions. Sometimes, competitor's ads can actually get disabled because they have fallen below the active CTR level threshold.
Under 4. Disclaimer and Limitation of Liability
This was reworded and changed into specific point form:
Google disclaims all guarantees regarding positioning or the levels or timing of: (i) costs per click, (ii) click through rates, (iii) delivery of any impressions on any Partner Property or Google Property or sections of such properties, (iv) clicks or (v) conversions for any ads or Targets.
That's all folks :)
what a joke.
LOL, yes! Maybe I should try this model on consulting ... nahh maybe not. I am afraid it will soon leave me with very few clients hehe
Besides the joke of it, I am surprised by the logic that goes behind this. It's outdight rude in my mind. I don't want to hear one more word about "ethics" from Google again!
Anyway, I will soon find out how we can handle it here in Denmark. I recomend you do the same in your country
From the google seo page:
"For your own safety, you should insist on a full and unconditional money-back guarantee."
[google.com...]
They also provide this info:
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) handles complaints about deceptive or unfair business practices. To file a complaint, visit: [ftc.gov...] and click on "File a Complaint Online", call 1-877-FTC-HELP
hmmmm
Maybe inadvertently facilitating, but that is most I could think of.
As for credit instead of actual $$$, this is a well known practice with most service offering organizations.
It is cheaper to provide a $10 credit then actually giving you $10, because the $10 is already marked up with the profit, so the cost is maybe $5. So in "store credit" scenarios, you always will get less then what you lost...
Absolutely NOT! Maybe in your jurisdiction but definately not here. In fact, I can't think of one single company here that enforce such a stupid poilicy and I suspect that it might even be covered by law (thats one of the things I am asking my lawyer)
As for credit instead of actual $$$, this is a well known practice with most service offering organizations.
Let's say I am an accomplice to a robbery. I am then caught red handed. I now say that I will not give you back the money, instead I will provide you with equivalent service. Can you please give some examples of where this happens? I would love to be in such a service offering organization :)
If your mechanic does repairs and overcharges you $1,000, does he say the next 50 oil changes are on him?
