Google Faces Another Click Fraud Suit

[WhoNet]

Google Faces Another Click Fraud Suit

Wendy Davis, Jul 21, 2008

Google has been hit with a second lawsuit for fraud stemming from its parked domains program, which serves ads on otherwise empty Web pages.


This latest suit, brought in federal district court in San Jose, Calif., comes less than one week after attorney Hal Levitte filed a similar case.

In the new lawsuit, online retailer RK West, which operates the online store Malibu Wholesale, alleges it purchased ads Google without realizing they would appear on parked domains. Parked domains typically have no content other than ads. RK West alleges that many of the clicks generated by parked domains are "invalid."

The company said in its lawsuit that it had been charged for clicks from parked domains "that had little relation to its business."

"Despite indication that some of the clicks from parked domains were invalid, Google failed to disclose to the plaintiff specific domain names in which these ads were clicked on, making detection of invalid clicks difficult and even worse concealing any evidence of invalid clicks," the lawsuit alleges. RK West eventually went through its server logs and discovered the source of the clicks, said Alfredo Torrijos, one of the company's attorneys.

RK West does not define "invalid" in the complaint, but Torrijos said the company took the position that clicks made by users who don't have a genuine interest in making a purchase are invalid.

The company has alleged fraudulent concealment, unjust enrichment and a violation of California's business code, and is seeking class-action status.

RK West's lead lawyer, Brian Kabateck of Kabateck Brown Kellner, has a history of bringing click fraud lawsuits, having sued Google, Yahoo and IAC. His law firm settled with Yahoo and joined in a $90 million settlement with Google.

In April he sued Google on behalf of David Almeida, who alleged that Google tricked him into paying for AdSense ads on the company's publisher network, when he only wanted his ads to appear on search results pages.

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticleHomePage&art_aid=86914

 

[Dean]

Google are getting sued left, right and center. Everyone wants a piece of them lol.

 

[-REECE-]

Can't say Google doesn't deserve this...

I find it quite misleading that they automatically opt-in new advertisers to their Search Partners + Content Network... Someone thinks they're advertising on Google and all of the sudden their ads are appearing on other sites.

I like their Content Network myself and have had good results on it but only a fool or someone obviously not aware they're being opted into the Content Network is going to pay $10+/click there...

 

[nstalk]

This is a very serious potential problem for all of us who benefit from ppc income. If google (and yahoo) is unable to defend against these kinds of suits its the domain owner who will be hurt the most imho.

I hope this doesn't turn into a world wide class-action status.

 

[dax44]

Google pulls out of domain parking

well maybe they are about to pull the plug ..

http://isitmeoriseveryoneelsestupid.com/2008/07/18/google-parking-changes-approaching/

Will MFA adsense sites be next?

(thanks to Alex for the above link)

 

[mr-x]

I don't know how anyone could miss the fact that the ads run on affiliate websites. Even if they missed the opt-out, anyone paying attention would notice almost immediately which sources are / not converting.

 

[Ronald Regging]

"Torrijos said the company took the position that clicks made by users who don't have a genuine interest in making a purchase are invalid."

Seriously, advertising has been around since the invention of trade. For thousands of years it's operated on a simple concept: You pay someone to address their audience in an attempt to sell your products or services. End of Story.

Now suddenly after all this time, people are trying to change the laws of advertising. I realize that the Internet is a relatively new and awesome medium, but does that mean we should just completely lose our heads?

The simple fact is that Google has a massive audience. If you want to reach that audience, than you pay them for ad space. Not everyone who clicks on your ad is going to make a purchase. Not everyone who views your television ad, hears your radio ad, sees your billboard, magazine, or newspaper ad is going to make a purchase either.

I think I'm going to open up a small shop and sue every person that comes into my store and doesn't make a purchase, because they're obviously perpetrating some kind of fraud.

 

[davenj]

If someone takes the time to click on an ad they must have some "genuine interest" in at least getting more information on what the ad link is offering. If the offer is misleading or the product inadequate, that is a shortcoming of the advertiser, not the publisher.

Not everyone who views your television ad, hears your radio ad, sees your billboard, magazine, or newspaper ad is going to make a purchase either.

I think I'm going to open up a small shop and sue every person that comes into my store and doesn't make a purchase, because they're obviously perpetrating some kind of fraud.

Perfectly stated.