Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Surely if your company had been defrauded the sum of $200k, you wouldn't want to co-operate with them anymore? What makes matter more interesting is, over the last 5 months Google have paid out $386k to me, which means over 50% of all my clicks have been invalid. Assuming this has been going on for months and months, why was I never told this during any of the recent and frequent conversations I have with my member of the google optimization staff, especially when the converstaions were about increasing my revenue and optimizing my site?
I hope for certain that this is a decimal point error, but if they intend to deduct over $200,000 from my account over the next few months, I'll be left with little choice but to pull the google ads and replace them with adverts that will actually generate me some income.
Anyone have any thoughts on this matter?
yeah, assumed that he doesnt't join in the suggestion, the only way to get the money back for google is to sue. does anyone really think they would do it? and that they would succeed? bring it on, google!
If it does go to trial, I'd like to see how G proves that "invalid" clicks actually happened, and why the clicks weren't originally considered "invalid".
If you can get them to say that they don't consider the invalid clicks were your fault and that they won't ban you once the money is recovered, that's your best-case scenario.
Seeing as G can ban anyone at any time based on their assessment of TOS violations, I don't see how he's any worse off hiring a lawyer.
Don't get a Lawyer
Don't get a lawyer yet. However, do take lawyer's advice on the TOS and its legality in your country. I would be very careful as what to tell lawyer and what not to. Do NOT get lawyer involved in the case yet. A flying over for a face-to-face meeting, but being PREPARED is the best advice.
@MyGen, if you decide to hire a lawyer, find someone who has vast experience in cyberlaw. If the lawyer does not know much about click fraud, sit down and explain the situation as it currently stands, providing background such as the Tuzhilin report.
Then he can argue with the lawyer about their bill he doesn't want to pay because they didn't tell him what he wants to hear.
This whole thread is like arguing to a cop you get to keep a bike you paid $20 for which turned out to be stolen. I'm sorry if that concept turns out to be shocking.
By the way, does anyone else see the ads with the header stating they are tutorials? You can argue that they don't break some rules but to me they clearly violate the rules about what you can put as a header over ads.
Google states "Publishers may not label the ads with text other than "sponsored links" or "advertisements." This includes any text directly above our ads that could be confused with, or attempt to be associated with Google ads." This is blatantly and clearly violated and I think the only reason he isn't banned is they want the stolen money back.
This whole thread is like arguing to a cop you get to keep a bike you paid $20 for which turned out to be stolen. I'm sorry if that concept turns out to be shocking.
Fine, let G prove that there was a crime committed.
Google states "Publishers may not label the ads with text other than "sponsored links" or "advertisements." This includes any text directly above our ads that could be confused with, or attempt to be associated with Google ads." This is blatantly and clearly violated and I think the only reason he isn't banned is they want the stolen money back.
If this is the alleged TOS violation, let G prove that it somehow resulted in US $200K of "invalid" clicks. In the past, this type of situation has merely prompted an email asking that the adblock be properly labeled.
Fine, let G prove that there was a crime committed.
Google doesn't have to prove that a crime was committed. It doesn't even have to suspect that a crime was committed. If clicks are "invalid" (which may or may not mean "fraudulent"), Google simply wants to refund the invalid click payments to advertisers and recoup the portion of the revenue that it's shared with the publisher.
Fine, let G prove that there was a crime committed.
But if you want to consider it a crime then G can simply show where he violated the rules and used those violations to steal about a half million dollars. G is simply asking for the stolen money back and not pressing criminal charges, not something to really feel victimized over. All this guff about the OP losing "his" money is ridiculous, he never earned it, he stole it.
But I already got away with it is not a good legal defense.
IMHO of course ;)
[edited by: martinibuster at 2:46 am (utc) on Nov. 26, 2006]
[edit reason] See my previous post. [/edit]
