141–150 of 236 posts
I hope Google get enough money from these sites to make it worth it.
It has always boggled my mind that you're even allowed to publish ads targeting other companies brand names as keywords without being the verified owner of that company. But I understand Google here. It's probably their single biggest income stream. Our company is using a very big chunk of our ad words budget targeting our own brand name to make sure it's on top. More than for any other keyword by far. And I imagine…
I disagree that it’s a scam to advertise over someone else’s name as long as it’s clear and you’re not trying to confuse the user. I’ve found better alternatives than what I was looking for through competitor ads. I’ve had this happen on Google and the App Store and I appreciate it. It gives newer, or less well-known, companies a chance to gain exposure. And consumers like me might learn about a superior option they…
Fair enough, but a lot of them are trying to confuse the customer, as Cory Doctorow found
It has always boggled my mind that you're even allowed to publish ads targeting other companies brand names as keywords without being the verified owner of that company. But I understand Google here. It's probably their single biggest income stream. Our company is using a very big chunk of our ad words budget targeting our own brand name to make sure it's on top. More than for any other keyword by far. And I imagine…
This is an underrated comment. Google are enabling fraud on a massive scale by permitting the hijacking of established names and brands. Often brands or names that some small family company has worked for years to build a reputation for. We do indeed live in a world where tech and capitalism have birthed some sort of horrific offspring that’s choking us all.
We are going to end up with 10 'scammer' ad in the top 10 result, each and everyone fighting each other with more ad budget and lower profit margins.
In the end, the website owner won't even need a website.
Simple legislative fix: entitle the victim (small business) to quickly and easily claim a trademark infringement on an ad, and claw back 100% of Google's revenue on that ad. And let Google be civilly liable, if they choose to contest such a trademark claim and they're in the wrong. Inspired by YouTube's DMCA claim system (or my superficial understanding of it). If there's a "bug bounty" on fraud, there will be an ent…
This is already illegal. Mom and Pop businesses don't have the resourced to wage legal battles and in the time it would take to get an injunction, the scam has more than paid for itself. The solution here is for Amex and Google to do their jobs properly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is already illegal. Mom and Pop businesses don't have the resourced to wage legal battles and in the time it would take to get an injunction, the scam has more than paid for itself. The solution here is for Amex and Google to do their jobs properly.
Since lot of sme are impacted, could they join and sue ? I am not an American so could be wrong here - could class action suites be of help here ?
I wrote a comment about it before:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except Walmart has to follow certain standards to ensure the products it sells are legitimate. If they'd literally just accept products from random unmarked vans and put them up for sale, they'd be very much on the line if those products end up being unsafe. Likewise you can't just sell stolen goods even if you don't know they're stolen. They'll be confiscated at best and you'll be charged for fencing stolen goods at…
>> Except Walmart has to follow certain standards to ensure the products it sells are legitimate. And so Walmart makes a solid effort to ensure they know who they are buying product from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the person creating the fake ad is guilty of fraud. Google is guilty of not verifying it enough. Same as Apple/Google aren't guilty of creating malware apps then it slips through, but the predatory ass who coded the app and published it is. Same as Walmart isn't guilty of poisoning people when they stock a product that's spoiled in production, but merely failing to verify proper credentials set up by regulators.…
Google is literally getting paid to advertise fraudulent businesses or websites and / or to deliver malware. If they can't sanitise their primary means of profit then... Nothing, because there's no regulation after how many years?
Why are actual criminals being unpunished while you wring your hands on how megacorporations aren't playing the police?
Simple legislative fix: entitle the victim (small business) to quickly and easily claim a trademark infringement on an ad, and claw back 100% of Google's revenue on that ad. And let Google be civilly liable, if they choose to contest such a trademark claim and they're in the wrong. Inspired by YouTube's DMCA claim system (or my superficial understanding of it). If there's a "bug bounty" on fraud, there will be an ent…
Amazon has a system like this, where you can "claim" listings. It's how scam products get all those five star reviews for some other profuct. They find a t-shirt or some little thing doing well and file claim after claim until they win the listing.