back to article Google lies about click-fraud refunds and tried to destroy us – ad biz

AdTrader, an online ad agency, has accused Google of reneging on promised ad payments, stealing clients, and fraud. In a complaint filed in a US district court in San Jose, California, on Wednesday, the ad biz claimed Google failed to refund almost $500,000 paid to place ads on websites that drove invalid traffic, in violation …

vir
Silver badge

Conflicted Here

On one hand...Google screwing over comparatively smaller companies: bad.

But...bottom-feeder middleman ad placement outfit losing money: good?

34
0
Bronze badge

Re: Conflicted Here

Yeah, but ultimately in the chain, they will have minimum wage employees, and when this revenue doesn't come through, we all know who the victims will be.

This is purely disgusting and immoral business activity from Google. If the previous actions and these allegations aren't enough for governments around the world to start full head-to-toe investigations of Google's practices, then they will carry on forever.

30
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: Conflicted Here

An immoral act carried out against the devil himself is still an immoral act. The fact that the putative victim of the act is bottom-feeding scum doesn't change the fact that the act itself is wrong.

45
0
Silver badge

Re: Conflicted Here

And even if it sounds like fun, an immoral act carried out against the devil himself might have consequences.

http://archives.sluggy.com/book.php?chapter=1#1997-08-25

Moral: don't spam Satan. Or threaten to neuter cute little bunnies who carry switchblades.

11
0
Silver badge
Stop

Re: Conflicted Here

* alleged disgusting and immoral business activity. At the moment, it's an accusation by a company which seeks to directly benefit financially if Google is found guilty.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Conflicted Here

"The fact that the putative victim of the act is bottom-feeding scum doesn't change the fact that the act itself is wrong."

It does, however, severely limit the amount of sympathy I can feel for them. Down to zero, in fact.

16
0
Bronze badge

Re: Conflicted Here

Not only do I not have a lot of sympathy for them as one of the ad-placement companies that stink up the Internet and should be blocked by default by any major browser - if they are able compare both sides of the ledger then they are most certainly partnered with and/or managing the fake content sites that are being penalized by Google. If it wasn't for the collateral damage I would encourage Google to turn the screws a bit more....

4
4
Silver badge

Re: Conflicted Here

"alleged disgusting and immoral business activity"

True, it's just alleged at this point. But (a) I think it's pretty well known in tech circles that a large %age of "clicks" aren't clicks at all (b) Google has plenty of public history of screwing advertisers, no doubt also a few others kept quiet with a hidden payoff.

7
2

Re: Conflicted Here

Is google not a bottom-feeding middleman ad-placement outfit though?

5
0
Silver badge

Re: Conflicted Here

http://archives.sluggy.com/book.php?chapter=1#1997-08-25

Ahhh.. Sluggy Freelance. That takes me back..

To this day I have a tendency to be wary of rabbits - you know.. just in case.

2
0
Silver badge

Don't Do Evil

Hmmmmm

11
0
DJO
Silver badge

Re: Don't Do Evil

Note they don't say "Don't be evil", I wonder why

2
0

Re: Don't Do Evil

Google employees came up with that slogan. The CEOs and senior management refused to adopt it. Clearly they didn't buy into it.

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: Don't Do Evil

Just as a general FYI.

Don't Do Evil was never the official Google slogan.

The real slogan was Always Do Good, which by simple reflection, also means Never Do Evil or Don't Do Evil.

0
0
Silver badge
Mushroom

Would it be too much to ask for both to implode

14
0
Silver badge

@FozzyBear

No. Definitely not.

3
0
Silver badge

"Would it be too much to ask for both to implode"

Asking for more is fine by me :-)

2
0
Silver badge

Proportionality

Google pays taxes, right? I'm sure they pay out on everything else in the same proportion.

7
0
Alert

Google could look into Youtube while they're at it ?

Google and their "Youtube" could use a little review as well. I have to wonder about their mysterious supposed "algorithm" (sic) and how they're withholding the conditions on how to not get "Demonitised" during a video's peak of ad revenue earning period. There HAS to be serious contract law issues there.

12
0

Re: Google could look into Youtube while they're at it ?

Off topic ... but ...

This seems like a place to punt the question.

Did Google run an organisation wide Gmail service for the Democratic Party in the 2016 US election - or was it just John Podesta that just happened to have a Gmail account?

0
8

Re: Google could look into Youtube while they're at it ?

@moonrakin,

Half the world has a gmail account.

Instead of looking for pinko-liberal-communist conspiricies maybe you should look for some counsellin. Possibly you could sue some hate radio station for the damage done to you.

12
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Google could look into Youtube while they're at it ?

"This seems like a place to punt the question".

No, it isn't.

This is neither a political story or political discussion board.

Try J.Paxman@gmail.com

6
0

Re: Google could look into Youtube while they're at it ?

I'm well aware of Gmail account numbers

The leaks of DNC emails did huge damage in he 2016 election and the provenance of the leaks has not really been elaborated while people chew through the content.

As it turns out Google didn't have much to do with it

Try GitHub

As far as your last paragraph is concerned - up yours you tosspot.

0
0
Silver badge

Anyone who sees Youtube content/DMCA claim can tell you Google must be pocketing or (facilitating others too and taking a cut) fraudulent systems. Either the fake channels (bot generated to get kids/babies click throughs... yes that's a thing now) or the DMCA that just so happens to hurt the content creators only, not the corporations or Youtube (who just either turn off advertising and block the video, or take over advertising even if 99% of claims are fake/fraud).

4
1
Anonymous Coward

A look behind the veil - at last

The fun part of this complaint is that, for once, someone sees both the in and out of Google's activities. Normally, Google can comfortably play both ends against each other because nobody ever gets the complete facts.

In this case, however, someone is actually in the position to properly tally deductions and payments - in other words, this is about hard facts. I reckon this will be settled out of court and out of sight as soon as the evidence is submitted because even Google can only suppress so much bad publicity.

Expect an update to Google T&Cs soon, banning organisations from being on both ends of the value chain. I'm pretty certain harsh words are spoken in their boardroom right now that someone didn't spot a company getting into the position to get actual facts out of Google.

After all, Google appear to have a LOT to hide..

12
1
Silver badge

Oh, so you were witholding payment then

"We have a longstanding policy of refunding advertisers for invalid traffic. As we recently announced, this is currently being expanded to include ads purchased via DoubleClick Bid Manager.”

I mean, Google's only owned DoubleClick since 2007.

5
0
Silver badge

One treats privacy like a cash cow and the other spams ads all over the internet.

Sorry can't feel sorry for either of them.

4
0

I am not tech expert, but as a customer who uses google to provide lists of suppliers I have to rely upon their honesty. Some companies get to be too big to be controlled, here I cite the car manufacturers, who once they received your monies disappeared over the horizon when problems appeared. This is the situation that Google is in now, it plays governments off between each other to keep as much of its 'earned' monies.

It is time for these companies to be broke up, each part to be a company within its own country, not spread over like a jam sandwich with the strawberry sitting in the lowest and least caring country.

2
0
Silver badge

Google Evil?.................... *sarcastic shocked face*

As an ad company, it only makes sense.

These company's shouldn't be upset about the money, think of the EXPOSURE they've gotten. EXPOSURE is the future of currency, not yer fancy BitDollars or whathaveyou.

1
0
Silver badge
Pint

Google Ads on my many blogs

My share of the revenue quickly shot up to $50, $75, $80... before beginning to inexplicably slow. It took quite a while to reach $95, $96, $96.50, $96.75, $96.875, $96.9375, ...

Their payout increment is $100. I suspect that it'll NEVER reach $100.

They're holding *many* BILLIONS of dollars of other folks' money.

Too obvious when you see it first hand.

1
0
Silver badge
Angel

doubleclick

Doubleclick?

Can't say I've ever come across that. Maybe there's something amiss with my hosts file ...

0
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018