Forum Moderators: martinibuster
When you bring up a cached page on Google it has the following disclaimer: Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
But aren't they both affiliated AND partially responsible for the content when AdSense is on the page? Seems to me to be clear that they are. Shouldn't the disclaimer go away or be a little more clear? Maybe at least say that they are affiliated with the authors and maybe they are responsible for the AdSense content being there on those pages?
JAG
I don't think even a very pedantic judge would agree with your point ;)
it's an editorial decision by the site owner
But the owner can only put the HTML code on their site. Google puts the content into the AdSense block...yes?
'Ads by Google'
Hmm. Perhaps it does but it is conflicting so which one is right? I know we know what the answer is supposed to be but what is it legally?
So maybe the content question is a coin toss but the 'not affiliated' can't be denied when Google sends the site a check.
And what about the MFA's? Maybe the disclaimer should be 'We are more than affiliated with this site because it would not have been created without us' :-)
JAG
Since these websites get their bread buttered by Google each month then isn't there an affiliation - no matter how much google denies there is one?
Isn't google's (previous) lack of attention or review of where their ads are being displayed no reason (or excuse) for denial of affiliation?
I think 'a reasonable person' would say there is.
Maybe not an internet savvy person but a reasonable lay-person.
they are giving away ownership of how and who displays their pages
True.
Since these websites get their bread buttered by Google each month then isn't there an affiliation - no matter how much google denies there is one?
That's what I think.
It's not so much that I even really care what they say or don't say. But someone cares or the disclaimer wouldn't be there in the first place.
My guess is the disclaimer was there to keep a clean unbiased image to the public. The average Joe may see 'ads by Google' on that cached 'controversial content' page but the disclaimer is clear that Google doesn't want to be seen as affiliated with the site and Joe wouldn't know that Google funds the site with the ads. The average Joe may be suprised to find out that Google pays (at least some amount of $) to keep that 'controversial content' out there.
Surely that wouldn't be good for the public Google image so maybe that's why the disclaimer is not exactly true?
JAG
Google SEARCH is not affiliated with the page; the page may be affiliated with Google adsense.
Small difference semantically - huge difference legally.
And the main point remains; the site owner is responsible for ALL on the page; if they chose adsense (knowing they do not control individual ads) that's their choice.
Just as a site showing news items from a third party is still responsible for publishing the items, even though the news hadn't happened when they installed the HTML.
Surely there must be easier ways to bash Google than the disclaimer?
;)
[edited by: Quadrille at 11:22 pm (utc) on May 23, 2007]
you have waaaaaay too much time on your hands :)
Indeed!
Google SEARCH is not affiliated with the page; the page may be affiliated with Google adsense.
That is true but the disclaimer just says 'Google' is not affiliated.
Surely there must be easier ways to bash Google than the disclaimer?
Sure there are...but my goal is clarification and it just is not clear...to me anyway. Actually I should give credit to a family member who asked me and I didn't know the answer so I posted it here. It confused her because she wondered how Google could cut a check and then say they were not affiliated with us? I still don't know how to answer the question exactly :-/
Oh well.
JAG
You can continue this forever; you'll still be wrong.
Notice that even the 'Google on the Grassy Knoll' brigade have not chipped in to support your untenable position.
Nice try, but best to leave it and come up with a better one next time. Pass on my apologies to the family member! :)
My disclaimer to her was - I told her she should ask one of the legal profs at her school since that is what we pay tuition for.
That led her to ask if we were affiliated to the school or was the school affiliated with us. My response...no comment!
JAG
A much better example is 'googleblog.blogspot.com' - the official google blog. Google is both affiliated with that site and responsible for its content... and yet they still show a disclaimer that states they aren't when you view their cached page.
Good one.
Maybe they should change the legend to Google is probably not affiliated with the authors of this page and would prefer not to be considered responsible for its content.
:)
