4 ms·
What did Google expect of this? Did they think they would fight this guy, and suddenly he would give up writing about this case? I feel like they got a pyrrhic
by fortunado 17y ago
What did Google expect of this? Did they think they would fight this guy, and suddenly he would give up writing about this case?
I feel like they got a pyrrhic victory here.If your customer is getting his answers in the form of evidence at a hearing, you're doing something wrong, regardless of whether or not he was actually in violation of the terms of use.
Anyway, thanks for adding this. It's good to read how it all ended up.
- tptacek 17y agoUnless the goal is to communicate to small-timers that picking and publicizing legal fights with them will cause them to go nuclear.
- ajju 17y agoWhat they are really afraid of is some slick lawyer getting many such small timers together for a class action lawsuit.
- DenisM 17y agoThey don't care. They don't have to. They are the search company. http://snltranscripts.jt.org/76/76aphonecompany.phtml http://snltranscripts.jt.org/76/76aphonecompany.phtml
- axod 17y agoGoogle did the right thing. He comes across as a whining scammer.
- davidw 17y agoDid you ever find out why they banned you?
- axod 17y agoSomeone tried unsuccessfully to login to my account a few times. They messed up... and yes, it was a pain to get any response from them for a few days, but I love them again ;)
- krschultz 17y agoNot to me, Google comes across as muscling out a small business for their own interest. Isn't this the definition of using a monopoly position for anti-competitive practice? Their position is completely undermined as soon as they introduce a product for squatting exactly like what he had made on his own.
- axod 17y agoYeah did you see the screenshot? Do you think it's a good thing to have him defrauding advertisers like that, or a bad thing? Tip: Don't "make a product" out of someone elses product, if it violates the T&C. The difference is, advertisers can choose if they wish their adverts to appear on parked domains or not with the official product.
- thorax 17y agoSpammers will be bad, I expect that. I expect better of Google, though.
- debt 17y agoWhat the aces? Google is defending the terms of service explicitly agreed upon by this person. He completely and flagrantly went against those terms. The only intriguing part of this whole story is how seriously Google takes their terms of service. Google defended the terms from someone who very clearly broke them. That guy who was shut out of Google Checkout for absolutely no reason? Legit. This guy? Nope. He clearly broke the rules and paid for it justly.
- thorax 17y agoWe all agree Google should cut the spammers off, but they need to have a rational policy for how they communicate with their partners, customers, etc. I expect better from Google regarding the customer service. It shouldn't be a mystery to anyone what happened to their account/balances at Google and he shouldn't have to go to court to figure this out. It's frightening to me that we all depend so much on Google and yet you can chock up the bad service to "defending the terms of service". Sure he has no recourse in the law for this, he did badly, justice was served-- but that doesn't mean it's right for Google to behave the way it does with its users. Google should be open, frank, and clear in their dealings.