Dynadot

Google to Defend Ranking Methods in Court

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch
Google today will try to convince a judge to dismiss a lawsuit that challenges the heart of the company's business: its methods for indexing and ranking Web pages.

In March, Google was sued by KinderStart.com, which alleges it suffered crippling financial harm after its Web site got dropped from the search engine's index.

The case reflects the enormous impact of search engines on the business world at large. It has become crucial for many businesses to rank well in search engine results. An entire industry has sprouted to serve this "search engine optimization" need.
'Devastating Effects'

As the world's most popular search engine, Google wields the strongest influence. Having a Web site that ranks low or disappears altogether from the Google index can have devastating effects for a company. This is what KinderStart.com alleges happened to it.

"It's a very important case for many reasons. Everyone uses search engines, so the question is: Are you seeing true and faithful results?" said Gregory Yu, KinderStart.com's attorney.

"Google shouldn't have completely free range to be able to remove sites or hit them with a zero PageRank," he added, referring to the patented technology at the heart of Google's algorithmic ranking.
Charges

KinderStart.com is charging Google, among other things, with violating its right to free speech; illegally using a monopoly position to harm competitors; engaging in unfair practices and competition; committing defamation and libel; and violating the Federal Communications Act. The Web publisher seeks a class action certification for the lawsuit, damages and injunctive relief, among other things.

In motions filed in May, Google argues that Judge Jeremy Fogel, of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, should dismiss the lawsuit, saying that the case boils down to one essential question: Should search engines or should courts determine Web sites' relevancy? "If KinderStart were right... neither Google nor any other search engine could operate, as it would constantly face lawsuits from businesses seeking more favorable positioning," Google's motion reads.

Google also asks the judge to strike three of the suit's counts, alleging they violate Google's exercise of free speech in connection with a public issue. This is prohibited under a California law called the Anti-SLAPP statute, Google argues.

KinderStart.com, based in Norwalk, California, began publishing a Web site for parents of children under 7 years old in May 2000 and in 2003 the site joined Google's AdSense ad network, according to the complaint. Yet, starting in March and April 2005, the Web site suffered a "cataclysmic" fall in traffic of about 70 percent and a drop in AdSense revenue of about 80 percent, from which it hasn't recovered, and which the company blames on its removal from the Google index.

KinderStart.com claims it has never been notified by phone, mail or in person of the reason for its Web site's exclusion. Google states in its Web site that it reserves the right to remove Web sites from its index for various reasons. KinderStart.com states it hasn't knowingly violated any of Google's webmaster guidelines.

In February, Google decided to remove the German Web site of car maker BMW for allegedly trying to deceive its search robot to gain higher placement. Days later Google reincorporated the site to its index, saying BMW had undone the offending changes, although BMW never admitted any wrongdoing.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20060629/tc_pcworld/126285
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
In theory that sounds great. But I would never base my future success on a spike in traffic from google. If one of my sites blew up tommorow I would not go out and purchase new equip, and employees because of increased traffic from them. You would be crazy to do that.

Once again if your company, in KinderStart.com case a "search engine" was good to begin with they would not have needed continued support from google. The site would have performed well on its own.

Google is not the internet. I think of google as a place for free advertising thru a search engine. If I get added great, If I get deleted big deal.

labrocca said:
Well that's really the point I believe of their lawyers. Let's say you had a business and suddenly because Google indexes you for no reason...you have extra business. So you hire more employees, pay more for servers, and all types of infrastructure is created...then BAM...you are deindexed for no reason and must incur these extra costs that GOOGLE created.

Now I ain't saying that they will win but I believe this is the core of Kinderstarts lawyers. Google creates symbiotic relationships with the webmasters....but when Google decides to break the relationship it gives no notice,warning or reason.

I will give one example of how not having a contract can still create a situation for payment. Let's say my girlfriend has a kid. She says it's mine so I feed it, pay for it...and all that fun stuff. Then at the age of 8 I find out the kid ain't mine. Well guess what...the court has decided that I have taken on the role of parent and must continue to pay child support.

I am sure a good lawyer can come up with other examples too.
 
0
•••
Osprey said:
Sounds silly to me. They don't pay google to be indexed, imo google have the right to decide what sites they include and which sites they don't. What right do they have to be indexed?


some people do pay to be indexed. i know you can.

It's way faster as adding a normal site takes months
 
0
•••
0
•••
Robert Allen said:
They are hogging too much of the internet and everything revolves around them and i am personally sick of it.

Um, no, it doesnt. Go to alexa, both Yahoo! and MSN are above them. Some other extremely popular websites are below them - such as MySpace, eBay.

Robert Allen said:
They make billions and we see none of it to improve the internet enviroment.
They are constantly releasing new services, such as gmail, google talk, and more recently google checkout. Even if you don't like any of these services they're pressuring competitors to make better products anyway - Yahoo! Mail Beta, Windows Live Mail, Windows Live Messenger, etc.

Robert Allen said:
If we didnt exist they wouldnt exist
The same can be said for any company.

Robert Allen said:
Google has done nothing to help me so why should i visit it to search everyday?
Can you honestly say you have never found something on Google? Never used any of their services which make your life easier?

Robert Allen said:
Microsoft on the other hand do play with stolen stuff but they donate 53% of thier company earnings to charity, so i am going pro-ms this time.
Who said Google or Yahoo! don't donate to charity?

Robert Allen said:
Colin.
 
0
•••
BMFX said:
some people do pay to be indexed. i know you can.

It's way faster as adding a normal site takes months

Well i usually get my sites indexed in perhaps 1-2 weeks. Perhaps when you mean pay for submission you mean when people pay an alternative company to be submitted to hundreds of search engines?

Osprey
 
0
•••
Being indexed and ranked in a search engine is a privledge not a right
 
0
•••
this case is a joke the only thing that KinderStart.com will get out of it is an expensive legal bill
 
0
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back