2 ms·

Yeah 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 o

• thorax 17y ago
  Spammers will be bad, I expect that. I expect better of Google, though.
  • debt 17y ago
    What 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 ago
      We 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.
• ptomato 17y ago
  Note that at the time of the original termination of his account, the terms of use did not forbid use with parked domains and the service itself did not provide any distinction between parked domains and regular domains.
  • paulgb 17y ago
    Last time I looked into adsense was around 2006, and I remember it being pretty clear that sites without content were not eligible.
    • axod 17y ago
      And the text prompting people to click on the adsense is in clear breach of the T&C.