Is this legal? Adsense "cheats"...

Sure have. Have you?

According to M-W.com (a "real" dictionary - one who's entries are viewed as acceptable in acedemia, unlike dictionary.com):

Main Entry: 1il·le·gal
Pronunciation: (")i(l)-'lE-g&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French or Medieval Latin; Middle French illegal, from Medieval Latin illegalis, from Latin in- + legalis legal
: not according to or authorized by law : UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT; also : not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

Adsense is niether a game or a program sanctioned and controlled by a government body (no matter how many people worship google). Thus, the use of the word "illegal" to describe an unauuthorized action is wrong and misleading.

Oh, and just in case you want to argue about the validity of dictionary.com, I took the liberty to go ahead and post for you their disclaimer from their About page:

Dictionary.com is a multi-source dictionary search service produced by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC, a leading provider of language reference products and services on the Internet.

(Hense, they can publish any info they deem fit...unless you actually believe everything you read on the internet? )

Continued:

Note that Dictionary.com does not produce all the dictionaries that appear on our Web site; we simply make them available. In that respect we are more like a bookstore or library than a publisher. Thus any comments regarding the content of the definitions that appear on our site should properly be directed to the publisher or copyright holder. The source of each entry is given immediately after the entry in question; follow the source link for information about the dictionary, including publisher contact information.

http://dictionary.reference.com/help/about.html

So Dictionary.com doesn't even stand behind Dictionary.com's definitions. Well, ok. Blows your sarcastic little post right on out of the water, doesn't it?


So yes, kkibak, I have read a dictionary lately. A real one. One that is accepted in acedemia.

Any questions?

 

It all depends on the intent of what yo are trying to accomplish. If your intent is to get people to accidentally click on your ads when they are not really interested in the product, Google may clip your wings.

On the other hand, there is noting wrong with blending your ads into your pages. Google offers many color, size and style variations that allow you to blend your ads. If a person clicks on a blended ad because they are interested in the link, the ad is working and the advertiser is getting the value they are paying for.

 

yeah, play safe

 

I have noticed this technique being employed on quite a few MySpace resource sites.

The Google TOS says you cannot have ads that are similar to AdSense ad units. But it apears that if it's a link to within your website but is designed to look like AdSense than it is okay.

Interesting technique, I'd be curious to know what kind of increase in CTR it generates.

 

cute site though ... and nice trick they got there

 

i think it is allowed.

since google said you are not allowed to make the ads part of the content, but you can make the content look part of the ads

 

There is no such rule. And what if I made the content look like this in the first place and then adjusted the ad's look to it? Use some common sense people.

 

Just send this screen shot to google and they are the best guys to answer it.

i think it's not okay.

 

Nice try.. I might make a silly post like that if someone called me out on that too. Unfortunately, your dictionary that is accepted in academia states "also : not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game) "

as of a game is an example--it is not exclusive.

if you want to continue your little tirade, you might also attack the majority of our programming languages "misuse" the word illegal.

 

Adsense is niether a game or a program sanctioned and controlled by a government body (no matter how many people worship google). Thus, the use of the word "illegal" to describe an unauuthorized action is wrong and misleading.

Stop drudging up old posts just to argue and just accept that you were wrong.