Google agrees to pay $90 mln in click fraud suit

Discussion in 'Google' started by woodside, Mar 8, 2006.

  1. Dekker

    Dekker Peon

    Messages:
    4,185
    Likes Received:
    287
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #41
    that's assuming the contextual precision of the ads were 100% accurate.

    and you forget about hiding text in invisible layers and keyword stuffing.
     
    Dekker, Mar 9, 2006 IP
  2. Sharpseo

    Sharpseo Peon

    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    52
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #42
    The important part of the article is this:
    Like Netmidwest said, the only people getting any Cash are the Lawyers.

    This isn't a big loss for GOOG, in fact I almost consider it a win. In their legal opinion, this settles all outstanding cases involving click fraud. Anyone who claims they're a victim can apply to be part of the settlement, and will receive "credits".
     
    Sharpseo, Mar 9, 2006 IP
  3. Dekker

    Dekker Peon

    Messages:
    4,185
    Likes Received:
    287
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #43
    and the only way they can receive their 'benefit' is to use those credits........with google adwords.

    i'm guessing most of them will say they have too much pride which means in the end google gave them nothing.
     
    Dekker, Mar 9, 2006 IP
  4. GeorgeB.

    GeorgeB. Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,695
    Likes Received:
    288
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #44
    Doesn't matter. If they are looking for what the ads are advertising they'll click it.

    If not, they wont.
     
    GeorgeB., Mar 9, 2006 IP
  5. Dekker

    Dekker Peon

    Messages:
    4,185
    Likes Received:
    287
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #45
    heh, you'd like to think that's how people use the internet, but they don't

    something like 80% of people click on a link instead of using the back button.

    apparently alot of people go to google.com type in the URL of that website and then click on to their site

    to them google IS the internet, that's how i used to get to google adsense's frontpage for a very long time.
     
    Dekker, Mar 9, 2006 IP
    mad4 likes this.
  6. mad4

    mad4 Peon

    Messages:
    6,986
    Likes Received:
    493
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #46
    An excellent point, check your logs to see how many people searched for yoursite.com on google and visited. Its amazing and due in part to the number of people who have G as their homepage. Whenever you load up the homepage the curser jumps to the search box rather than the address bar.
     
    mad4, Mar 9, 2006 IP
  7. Arnie

    Arnie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    116
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    #47
    A clever move from Google.
    Nothing lost for them. A few will get some credits and not what they perhaps thought - money.
    And additionally some Lawyers will be buying new yachts, that's it.
    Since Google can't deny click fraud or even proof details for good, it would be silly for them to reveal their algo systems etc..

    The signal for winers is set!
    Ok, if it happens you'll get some credits but we wont buy you a yacht. If you want to stay in business then concentrate on your products and services and don't try to get money for nothing and chicks for free.

    I don't think that anyone will try to sue them again, exept a few stubborn losers, but they wont have any show any longer by then.
     
    Arnie, Mar 9, 2006 IP
  8. JdpWorld

    JdpWorld Peon

    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    11
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #48
    Google offers $90m to 'click fraud' victims



    fraud' victims
    By Philippe Naughton

    Google, the search engine giant, has offered up to $90 million to settle a class action lawsuit by advertisers who accuse it of overbilling them through "click fraud".

    The move, announced on the official Google weblog, will give advertisers credits to reimburse them for "invalid" clicks over the past four years

    Click fraud, which is not actual fraud as defined in criminal law, is as old as the internet itself. But it has become a defining issue for Google, the world's most valuable internet company, which makes 99 per cent of its income from pay-per-click ads.

    The fraud comes in various forms and both propagating and fighting it have become niche industries in their own right.

    Click fraudsters commonly create dozens of websites and sign up as resellers of Google advertising and then use either computer scripts, infected "zombie" computers or even low-paid workers in the Third World , to click repeatedly on adverts to earn money from Google for the sites.

    Another twist involves clicking thousands of times on the adverts on a rival website so that the search engine's anti-fraud mechanisms are alerted by the sudden increase in traffic and that site is blacklisted as fraudulent by Google.

    The other main form of click fraud is when an advertiser's competitors persistently click on their links, upping the amount their rival will be billed on a pay-per-click basis by the host site. Although many advertisers pay their host only a few cents per click, those selling high-value goods or services with good repeat revenues can pay as much as $100 per click so even "drive-by click fraud" - casually clicking on a rival's advert every time you see it - can end up costing thousands of dollars for businesses.

    The problem is that Google and its search engine competitors tend to win every which way, especially when groups of business rivals selling porn, ringtones or other web favourites are busy clicking away on each others' adverts, skewing attempts to work out what the real return on investment (ROI) should be.

    Google says it does its best to root out fraudulent clicks, monitoring traffic patterns and internet addresses constantly. Some studies have suggested that as many as one in three clicks could be false, although the figure is more commonly put at 10 per cent.

    In 2004, Google's Chief Financial Officer, George Reyes, described click fraud as "the biggest threat to the internet economy". It was a comment that his colleagues have since tried to play down - Google claims that only a tiny proportion of clicks are fraudulent, although it does not say what percentage.
     
    JdpWorld, Mar 9, 2006 IP
  9. NetMidWest

    NetMidWest Peon

    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    151
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #49
    And they will use those credits to bid against others who got credits, lowering the value of those credits.
     
    NetMidWest, Mar 9, 2006 IP
  10. Dekker

    Dekker Peon

    Messages:
    4,185
    Likes Received:
    287
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #50
    READ!!

    publishers get the sharp end of the knife up their butts.

    they're not even involved in this.
     
    Dekker, Mar 10, 2006 IP
  11. angelos

    angelos Peon

    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #51
    "Plantiffs argue Google and other search providers indirectly benefit from click fraud by doing too little to thwart it".
    That's the crucial phrase in that report that turned my attention mostly. If the advertisers agree to the rules of the game when they consciously participate in AdSense program, why should they complain? Google is not omnipotent and can't probably prevent all cases of click fraud.
     
    angelos, Mar 10, 2006 IP
  12. scaredcrow

    scaredcrow Active Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #52
    I agree with caydel, click-frauds and click-bombs are part of the risk you are taking when you sign up. They are damn lucky they were able to get away with that $90M.
     
    scaredcrow, May 23, 2006 IP
  13. seopup

    seopup Peon

    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    10
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #53
    MFA websites aren't bad for AdWords advertisers in my opinion .
    The difference between mostly MFA (Made for Ads) websites and "good" websites it's that they bring more attention to ads .

    I am ok with them as long as ads aren't blended in website design and people clicking on them thinking that this is another page on this website .

    And I see no reason to ban MFA websites . Google must do something not to allow blending ads too much on websites .

    Just my $.02
     
    seopup, May 24, 2006 IP
  14. Dekker

    Dekker Peon

    Messages:
    4,185
    Likes Received:
    287
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #54
    True....who's to say a person isn't going to click on an ad on a MFA and buy something?

    The thing about MFA's is they're usually on target, in regards to keywords, they're just crappy sites.

    I think part of the hatred for them is that they manage to rank higher than most of our websites :p
     
    Dekker, May 24, 2006 IP
  15. forgetmenot

    forgetmenot Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    473
    Likes Received:
    22
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    110
    #55
    Personally I think $90M is really cheap to Google. Recently they send out email for this $90M class settlement. So everyone are automatically in the class unless you opt out. If you do nothing about it, you are in the class and will not be able hold Google responsible for whatever click-fraud since 2002.
     
    forgetmenot, May 25, 2006 IP