Google "hidden" ad links

On 403 forbidden error pages

[menial]

I was looking for something on Google and found this error message below. Not for the first time. What intrigues me is the fact Google links to a site without using the nofollow tag. Then on that site you can clearly see Google ads. When you put the anchor text in google, both pages of the site are on the first page under these keywords. I'm not sure if my site would be fine if it was using similar advertising techniques..?

----------------

<h1>We're sorry...</h1>
<p>... but your query looks similar to automated requests from a computer virus or spyware application. To protect our users, we can't process your request right now.
</p>
<p>We'll restore your access as quickly as possible, so try again soon. In the meantime, if you suspect that your computer or network has been infected,
you might want to run a <a href="http://www.download.com/Antivirus/3150-2239-0.html"> virus checker</a> or <a href="http://www.download.com/sort/3150-8022-0-1-4.html">spyware remover</a> to make sure that your systems are free of viruses and other spurious software.
</p>
<p>We apologize for the inconvenience, and hope we'll see you again on Google.

[tedster]

Isn't your logic a bit thin here? On download.com, you don't see ads FOR Google, you see Adsense ads FROM Google. So why should Google use "nofollow" here? The links, freely given by Google as a help for Google's users don't fall into either reason that Google "requires" rel="nofollow"

1) Google does trust download.com and the link is not user-generated.
2) There's no evidence that download.com paid Google for those links.

[menial]

Maybe it's thin, but I feel it would make more sense and be more fair to put these links:

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=virus+checker">virus checker</a>

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=spyware+remover">spyware remover</a>

... unless Google don't trust their own search results. But it apparently does since it still keeps the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button.

I'm not looking for any conspiracies here, just stating my observations and [thin/clueless] opinions.

[tedster]

Ah, but download.com vets any software download that they offer - they perform a kind of editorial function. I would assume that Google is using that factor in their decision.

< By the way, I don't think you are clueless at
all - but I do think you are predisposed to find
fault with Google, and this clouds your analysis. >

[menial]

I believe download.com isn't the only reputable company that vets its software. Anyway, it looks to me like an example of a deal behind closed doors (whether money is involved there or not).

[Halfdeck]

"I believe download.com isn't the only reputable company that vets its software."

And Google isn't the only reputable search engine. Still, people often link to Google instead of Yahoo. That's a personal, editorial choice.

[Achernar]

Maybe it's thin, but I feel it would make more sense and be more fair to put these links:

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=virus+checker">virus checker</a>

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=spyware+remover">spyware remover</a>

And how would you search with these links when google is preventing you from searching anything at all (which is the point of the "error" message)? ;)

[menial]

And how would you search with these links when google is preventing you from searching anything at all (which is the point of the "error" message)? ;)

Google is preventing from searching only this particular term (something like www.domain.cn - this is when the "error" appeared), not blocking me from accessing google.com or the error page itself.

[Achernar]

I've seen the same message, and the user/ip was totally banned.
You can generate this type of error by making searches as fast as possible (5-10/sec). At one point google will think you're a bot, hence the "your query looks similar to automated requests from a computer virus or spyware application".