Ripped $10,000 from Adsense account

What law are you talking about? If you are talking about the original posters entitlement to the 15k, well it will cost him much more than that to even get a chance of seeing it.

I would suggest if Google banned him for fraud they could make a fairly compelling case that he didn't deserve any of that money. On top of that the threat of criminal prosecution for fraud might make one resistant to pursue things.

The original poster ADMITTED he broke the TOS. I do not even know why any of this in question.

 

Well now, that would partially depend upon what country you are in, wouldn't it?

 

These words sound a lot like the rantings of someone with a closed mind. "My way is right and you shouldn't be allowed to even voice your opinion." Aren't Americans in Iraq right now, fighting for the right of someone to speak their mind? Correct me if I'm wrong on that. They have an opinion. You have an opinion. For you to say "if these people are allowed to spread their lies as gospel...", it sort of makes you look a little..... scary. What's wrong with someone voicing an opinion different than yours?

 

You know why things like stereotypes often come into existance? Because they are accurate. It would be ignorant and irresponsible to ignore the truth and facts of history. We don't just say that wow come here and we will accept you with open arms because Google banned you.

Has nothing to do with a closed mind. As someone else pointed out Google was the first line of defense here. Google has more information on the situation on any of us. Many of us have good relations with them and trust that if they made this decision they likely did it with a reasonable amount of evidence. So right there the case has already been mostly made. When someone comes here the burden of proof is squarely on them. Shrugging your shoulders and claimng you don't know what happened is not going to get it done.

Nobody said anyone couldn't voice their opinion. Who said nobody could voice their opinion here. None of that changes the reality that almost everyone who comes here complaining about getting banned from Adsense broke the TOS almost EVERY SINGLE ONE.

 

Suppose, for a moment, we take everything you just said at face value and accept it as 100% truth. By your own admission, we are talking about ALMOST every single person. That leaves quite a few people not accounted for. That also doesn't take into account the people who never post about their experience anywhere. (Which is probably a pretty high number, when you take into consideration the reception they will receive from people like you.) Then, there are also the people who get banned and subsequently un-banned when they prove Google wrong. Doesn't that make you pause for a moment and think that maybe Google isn't the all-knowing God that it is portrayed to be here? And, what about the fact that they send the same standard form letter to people who click on their own ads as they send to people who put up a page without content, which is the same letter they send to people who later prove Google wrong. Something is very wrong with that mentality and it needs to be put in its place. It kills me that anyone here who hails Google as the God today, may be in the same unfortunate position tomorrow with no recourse and nothing but skeptics and abuse ahead of them. Now, I know you will say they deserved it. But, as it has already been proven.... Not everyone does deserve it. Why not take each case on its own facts instead of saying "Most people deserve it, so don't come crying to me with your story, you thief."? That just doesn't seem right to me.

 

One thing is most likely sure he violated the TOS.
Second thing is: HE DIDN'T STEAL NOBODY'S MONEY! He drove traffic to his site. Many stores pay $$$$ to drive traffic, so they can sell more goods (everyone gets them (advertisement) in the mail). So is with internet. He paid to get traffic and he redirected the traffic to other sites. Where is the teft/crime here? He and his son have run google ads on the same page .... that could be the only "crime", but I see nothing wrong to advertise your services/sites and make money.

Some people ..... seem to just want to hang somebody ..... without a chance of explanation.

THE TRAFFIC WAS VALID! (If we assume the adwords brought it)

 

I agree with ST12.

Btw, don't make bad analogies like Iraq war. Because there can be counter-arguments.

Sometimes it would be nice for some idiots to not voice their opinions. But in this case, it's not too offensive an opinion, so don't whine about it.

 

Hey! Look! It's my second post, so I MUST be here to gripe about something, eh? Can someone loan me a few hundred posts, as so that I can appear to be more legit than I actually am?

Honestly, I've found this thread to be - for the most part - very helpful.

First - yes, I was recently banned. I ran a small blog via blogger and had adsense at the top. The blog URL is http://www.creepyslepy.blogspot.com

It's humble, and never made a lot of money.

This thread has provided me with a great deal of information as to how to proceed with my blog and Google. ...and NO, I'm not here to complain. I came here for information, as I was baffled by the email I received from AdSense last week and wanted to find out what they meant.

I've found this thread to be very insightful. I came here to find out what I may have done wrong. Some comments have sent me in the right direction, and I thank those posters.

I did nothing intentionally wrong - smart enough to not click my own ads, or encourage others to do so. I'm not an expert with code, and did not change any of the adsense code. However, it's quite possible that I made mistakes in editing my template on blogger.

I did purchase some ads from adwords. I did this not to boost my adsense clicks, but rather to promote my podcast. My blog is a supplement to (shownotes, etc) to my podcast, and the promotion I gained from adwords was worth every cent. Subscriptions jumped!

Additionally, I did use BlogThis! plugin to highlight sections from news stories to comment on. I did notice in the TOS that copied text from another site is prohibited. While I can understand this (preventing cheats from copying content, intellectual property laws, etc), it does seem to be in conflict with Google providing a BlogThis! tool.

Also, my blog was excerpted in my college newspaper. I did see clicks jump a bit after publication. Hits from the school increased as well. This makes sense to me as a student, but might Google have had perceived this as click fraud? I have no idea how many clicks were generated from the school, however.

I plan on emailing Google a very friendly email explaining all of this. I will include copies of my logs from stat counter, as well as any other necessary documentation. I come here not to complain, but to learn. I have been invited to give a speech on monetizing blogs and podcasts at a fairly large writers convention in June, and want to provide them with all the necessary info.

As one who has spent money on AdWords, I can understand Google's need for security and prevention of click fraud. However, I believe that this is the wrong way to do it. It generates bad PR, dispels the myth of Google's benevolence (not to mention transparency), and could potentially assist their competition.

Again, I'm not here to complain. I do not begrudge Google. If I did something wrong it was inadvertent, but wrong nonetheless. As suggested above, perhaps Google could establish a warning system or not pay for suspicious clicks?

Constructive comments here could help Google improve the system, and increase the number of happy AdSense and AdWords clients. The presumption of guilt without an appeal process is their right, but may not - in the long run - prove to be wise.

Constructive replies are welcome.

Thanks again.

 

As some people have said, no one pointed a gun at you and made you sign up... those are the terms and you are free to not sign up if you don't agree to them.

 

fryman:

It doesn't matter what is in the ToS and who signed it if the ToS is not in compliance with the law.

You could sign an agreement to sell me a pound of cocaine and I could sign an agreement to buy it and somehow... I think we might both be in trouble.

Google cannot legally, for example, create a ToS that violates the laws against anti-competitive behavior. Google can write it. I can sign it. It's still not legal.

I don't know how to explain this in more simple terms.

 

And do you really believe that Google has some TOS that violates the law?

 

While that question is not directly relevant, I will attempt to address it.

Let me start with the standard disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer. I've taken classes in Criminal Law, Business Law, and Legal Research, so I know just enough to be dangerous.

What is legal and what is not legal has become, in modern times, almost impossible to determine.

In many cases you have dozens of lawyers arguing for each side. What that means is that at least a dozen lawyers are wrong in each case.

In addition, the number of cases being overturned on appeal should be considered as a relative indicator of the difficulty of determining what is and what is not legal.

Personally, I feel that portions of the Google AdSense Program Policies appear to be in violation of Subpart 14 or Chapter 1 of Title 15 in the U.S. Code and the Competition Act 1998 in the U.K.

However, this would have to be determined in a court of law. This would involve dozens of government lawyers disagreeing with dozens of Google lawyers, probably over the course of several years.

It happened to Microsoft. It happened to IBM. It happened to Standard Oil. Google is not special.

However, it does tend to take many years just to get proceedings of that nature started. Making any business decisions based upon possible outcomes of litigation on that scale is not recommended.

I hope that I have impressed upon you the difficulty in making a statement regarding what is legal and what is not legal into today's endlessly and mindlessly beauracratic legal environment.

 

I don't see how it isn't relevant since you are the one saying that they could have a TOS that breaks the law.

And instead of that huge answer, it would be easier to just say that Google has enough billions in their bank account to be able to hire the best lawyers in the world to design a perfectly legal TOS.

 

It appears that you missed the point entirely.

I cannot make it any simpler.

Yes, Google (or Microsoft, or IBM, or Standard Oil) has a lot of lawyers. No, having a lot of lawyers didn't keep Standard Oil, IBM, or Microsoft in 100% compliance with the law.

So yes, what you said is "easier to just say", but it is wholly incorrect.

In fact, I will go so far as to say that no major corporation is capable of being in 100% compliance with the law -- no matter how good their intentions. They are just too many laws and most of them are horribly written. You just can't accomplish anything without breaking a few by accident -- no matter how many lawyers you have.

 

There is NO perfect legal document. That's the point. If there were, then a bunch of attorney's would be out of business challenging them.

 

Well... I haven't heard of a single case of someone banned suing google for that, and winning... have you?

I guess they have a pretty solid TOS to protect them. Don't know if it is perfect or not, but it sure is pretty solid.

 

Google is too young for that.

Please recall that I just stated "However, it does tend to take many years just to get proceedings of that nature started."

All previous major cases have taken longer to initiate ajudication than Google has been in existence as a major corporation.

In more abstract terms, the fact that you have not died yet does not mean that you will never die. Can you follow that analogy?

Here's a more concrete analogy for you. I have, on one of my sites, the lyrics to a song. I have posted these lyrics in willful violation of Federal copyright laws. However, I have yet to be prosecuted for this violation. Does this mean that, since you have not heard of my being successfully prosecuted for this, I somehow have a solid legal case to support my actions? That's the exact logic you just used. Do you now see how it is fatally flawed?

I'm crashing. I'll be back (later) in the A.M.

 

Law often has nothing to do with whether somebody wins or loses a lawsuit. That's why personal injury attorneys always demand jury trials - so they can get a gullible and sympathetic jury to give their client a huge award.

And many dot com's have TOS agreements that may not withstand the scrutiny of a trail. I recall PayPal being ordered to return funds from all the accounts they had closed, and when it comes down to it I can see Google being ordered to do the same.

 

Did PayPal close the accounts for fraud?

 

I have no idea why PayPal froze funds. They froze one of my accounts a year or so ago without a single complaint or dispute.


I think if Google wanted to use that defense they would have to prove (I use the word lighty - civil trials are more drama than science) that users committed fraud.

BTW, long time no see, GFC