AdSense Bannings - Class Action Suit Filed

Partly Based on Pastebin Leaker Allegations

[martinibuster]

cNet is reporting [cnet.com] that a class action suit was filed alleging widespread fraud, basing some of it's allegations on the anonymous and widely dismissed accusations posted on pastebin. (previous discussion here [webmasterworld.com])

A lawsuit filed Tuesday against Google accuses the tech titan of engaging in widespread fraud by canceling AdSense accounts just before they were due to pay out.

The suit relies in part on recent anonymous accusations that Google developed an AdSense fraud scheme in 2009 to prevent publishers from collecting money that Google owed them...

...The lawsuit is seeking class action status so that it can represent all US-based AdSense users whose accounts were disabled or terminated with their Google refusing to pay them their final payment.

The case was filed by Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro on behalf of Free Range Content, the California-based owner of Repost.us, which had been using AdSense to display ads. Free Range Content alleges that it first noticed an unusual jump of $40,000 in its AdSense earnings this past February. The company says that it reported the anomaly to Google, and was scheduled to speak with an AdSense representative on March 6 when Google disabled their account two days before the call. Google, the suit alleges, refused further contact with Free Range Content.

[bwnbwn]

It's supposed to be given back to the advertisers.

This might be why there is a lawsuit no one really knows were the refund is coming from.
Several types of invalid click activity. But is this really invalid click activity?

[Sgt_Kickaxe]

Google's Achilles heal in any lawsuit is their interest in keeping proprietary information private. I doubt they will want to reveal specific details about the accounts in question. I also doubt the lawsuit provides enough information about specific instances that could be used to depict a widespread problem so the odds of winning are small, they must have other motives imo.

Google really should provide more information to people who's accounts are closed before summarily keeping 100% of accumulated earnings. If Google suspects but cannot prove their suspicions then they should pay the outstanding balance immediately and close the account. Keeping money from people without providing them a very specific and detailed reason why, in writing, is begging for a lawsuit... this lawsuit?

[wa desert rat]

Google's Achilles heal in any lawsuit is their interest in keeping proprietary information private. I doubt they will want to reveal specific details about the accounts in question. I also doubt the lawsuit provides enough information about specific instances that could be used to depict a widespread problem so the odds of winning are small, they must have other motives imo.

There is that little thing called "Discovery". The plaintiffs do not need every little detail up front to win. At some point, if the suit is not dismissed or suffers from summary judgment, the litigants get to go look at Google's data. The first thing they'll want to see is Google's own records of how many "members" have been terminated with monies never paid out to them. I suspect those will be very interesting.

WDR

[heisje]

how many "members" have been terminated with monies never paid out to them

vs how many advertisers have been awarded refunds. In particular, total amount confiscated from terminated publishers vs total amount refunded to advertisers specifically as a refund of monies originating from terminated accounts (and not refunded for any other reasons).

If the figures don't match, that will become very interesting.


.

[BillyS]

I read that post and believe it was clearly posted by someone that was kicked out of AdSense. Anyone that works for a large company knows policies like that described in the post don't exist. I also think this group of lawyers believe Google keeps the money when they kick an account. I'm thinking they return the money to Adwords advertisers...

[wa desert rat]

I'm thinking they return the money to Adwords advertisers...

I'm thinking that if they terminated my account with no notice, no information and $40,000 on the table... I might want to find out.

WDR

[heisje]

I'm thinking that if they terminated my account with no notice, no information and $40,000 on the table... I might want to find out.

LOL!

[blairsp]

how do you delete a post here?

[not2easy]

@blairsp - You can edit your own post for a while after first posting, but to remove a post, click report msg there under your User Name and it will be taken care of soon (not right away, soon).

[diberry]

I'll be interested to see how the judge/media reacts to the fact that Google terminates without telling people why or giving them chances to rectify the problem. I have worked with a LOT of ad providers over the years, and no one else terminates you without (a) telling you what you're doing wrong and (b) working with you to fix it. You have to be determined to hurt their business model before they'll dump you.

Of course, other networks screen each and every site you want to run ads on. Hmm, maybe that's where Adsense gets it wrong.

[EditorialGuy]

On the other hand, Google doesn't require the publisher to contract for a given period of time or give notice to end the relationship. With AdSense, either party can terminate the contract at any time.

[IanKelley]

Hmm, maybe that's where Adsense gets it wrong.

This word wrong... I don't think it means what you think it means :-)

[diberry]

EditorialGuy, you can terminate without notice from most of the other companies, too. And in every case where they specify a notice period, I have asked them what happens if I suddenly remove the ads or get rid of the domain or whatever without notice. In every case, they tell me they would still pay me what they owed at that point and I could come back at any time.

IanKelley, yes, the definitions of words change depending who's got the better lawyers. :D

[wa desert rat]

On the other hand, Google doesn't require the publisher to contract for a given period of time or give notice to end the relationship. With AdSense, either party can terminate the contract at any time.

Quite a few of you read into this more than it means. It does not mean that Google can terminate the contract and confiscate money due to the contractual party (or parties). At least not and expect to get away with it.

Since Google has done this to more than just one party, I would also expect that the suit will be changed to a class action.

In short, just because the contract says that it can be terminated at any time that does not mean that one party can take the money and run without consequences.

WDR