Alert Blog Reviews

Here’s a fun Christmas game for you to play. How many different types of lawsuits can you think of that include Google AdWords? Put your party creative hats on and see what you can come up. OK, Sellify, you go first! Sue Amazon over defamatory statements posted in Google AdWords by one of its affiliates? Wow! That is creative! And, it’s actually true! Writes Techdirt : The two main complaints are over trademark violations of buying keywords, and then defamation. Defamation? Yes, because apparently when people do searches on Sellify or some of its related trademarked names, like OneQuality, some of the ads that come up say things like: Beware of the SCAM Artist Camcorders at the Best Price From the Trusted Source amazon.com As Mike Masnick points out, this lawsuit is unlikely to go anywhere. Not only is Amazon not actually the appropriate party to sue, but trademark infringements in search ads tend to get bogged down in the courts anyway. Still, you have to admire the creativity of Sellify. If we were really playing the above game, it would have a good chance of claiming the top prize.

Originally posted here:
Amazon Sued Over Defamatory Google AdWords Ads

Google Street View began its European adventure a while ago—and it’s been met with resistance in more than a few places. Switzerland, like several other countries, was concerned that Street View wasn’t sufficiently blurring people’s faces and cars’ license plates, and that the height of the camera meant they’d see over privacy hedges and fences (which, even in the US, might constitute a breach of privacy). Today, the Swiss government tells Reuters that Google is already ready to accede to its pending ruling. The Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (FDPIC) Hanspeter Thuer brought the case against the street-level panoramic photo mapping service, and though it hasn’t been heard yet, Google is ready to comply. As part of this agreement, Google may continue to photograph Swiss cities, but will not put any photos online until the agreement is approved. They must also give at least a week’s notice in cities they plan to photograph. Although today’s agreement didn’t touch on this problem, Google has previously said they’re not willing to lower their cameras (though they did this in Japan, but that was for photo quality in narrower streets). A source told Reuters that a decision from the Federal Administrative Court was “unlikely” in 2010. Switzerland joins England , Germany , Greece , Japan , Australia and even America as countries with some level of backlash—be it grassroots, individual legal challenges or governmental challenges. What do you think? Will Google also give in to the height restrictions, or will they ultimately win out?

Originally posted here:
Google to Bow to Switzerland’s Street View Wishes

Back in July, Facebook was challenged by the Canadian government about some privacy concerns around third party apps and information shared that was taken about users. Many wondered how the social media giant would handle the situation. Would they thumb their nose at the information police? Would they stand up to the Canucks? Well, that was answered in August when they folded like a cheap card table and rewrote their policies to meet Canadian concerns . Well, if that was a precedent then the folks who run the Facebook Legal team fan page (Is there really one of these? I just made that up) are about to get real busy. You see there are several privacy groups who are up in arms about the latest privacy policies handed down by Zuck and the boys. According to the WSJ’s MarketWatch Ten privacy and consumer groups announced Thursday they’ve filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission alleging that Facebook Inc.’s privacy-policy changes violate federal law. The Electronic Privacy Information Center said in a statement that it and nine other groups are urging the FTC “to open an investigation into the recent changes made by Facebook … and to require Facebook to restore privacy safeguards.” These kinds of things usually sound a lot worse when they are first brought to light. Ok, so let’s stand in Facebook’s shoes and let this one sit for a second and let the scariness of the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) being called on to investigate your company’s privacy policies go away. Hmmm. Doesn’t seem to be working this time. Why? Well, because this could be a real serious deal for Facebook. They went from cruising along and just gathering more and more steam in their quest to become a money making machine to now being a social media whipping boy……again. While what they have been accused of lately (breaking a valued trust with their users by making their information, all of it, public unless opted-out) isn’t sleazy on a Tiger Woods like level, it is a serious issue. That’s not good. Now add on the possibility of the US government (you know the one that thinks it can do everything for everyone so no one needs to think for themselves anymore) being asked by not one but 10 privacy advocates to take a look at your policies. There probably were happier endings envisioned by the Facebook folks on this one, like huge profits from data being available to mine and sell. EPIC said in its statement that the service “should not be allowed to turn down the privacy dial on so many American consumers,” adding that the changes “violate federal consumer-protection law.” As they say in some parts of the world “Them thar is fightin’ words!” Of course Facebook has something to say about all of this. In a statement, a Facebook spokesman said: “We’ve had productive discussions with dozens of organizations around the world about the recent changes, and we’re disappointed that EPIC has chosen to share their concerns with the FTC while refusing to talk to us about them.” The spokesman, Andrew Noyes, also said that Facebook discussed its privacy program with regulators “including the FTC” prior to its launch. Well, shame on EPIC for telling on Facebook after the company worked so hard to grease the skids to prevent this very thing from happening. By the way, how productive a meeting is can be pretty subjective. In other words, there is no mention of groups endorsing what Facebook did, just a statement that they met and talked. Look this may turn out to be a non-issue. The FTC may decide to not act on the request of these groups but it might be hard for them to do so. Of course, with Facebook letting the world know that they spoke to the FTC before this move was made may make some wonder just what kind of ‘agreements and understandings’ may have been reached. Whatever they were, they may now be null and void if there is enough of a stink raised. So what looked like a pretty strong year for Facebook may end on a sour note. They’ll get over though just like they did with Beacon. Apparently that gaffe was either forgotten or it’s the policy of the company to see just what it can get away with until someone slaps their hands or slaps them with an investigation. Your thoughts? Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Here is the original post:
Facebook’s Privacy Policy Produces Plea to FTC

In the “Finally!” department, Google is taking legal action against advertisers who used Google’s name and logos to promote their get-rich-quick scams. The “Make Money on Google” ads were rampant in both search and display advertising in the first half of this year. Google cracked down on the search ads in July, but naturally, the scams and the sites continued to flourish. Google, like a good trademark holder, has finally come to its senses and is now suing the scammers for using its name in vain. They’ve filed suit (PDF) against Pacific WebWorks and other unnamed defendants for a number of counts, including trademark infringement, trademark dilution, cyberpiracy and unfair competition. The scams worked by advertising that buyers could “make money from Google.” The buyers purchased a “free” kit to teach them how to do this, paying a nominal fee and S&H. However, Google contends in the suit, buyers received nothing of value and were subjected to high recurring charges on their cards. Some buyers even contacted Google for refunds or to stop the recurring fees—another reason why Google feels compelled to sue now. Pacific WebWorks was slapped with a class action suit last month in Illinois, but the suit sought no injunction to stop their advertising. Google’s, filed in Utah, naturally does petition for an injunction to stop the false advertising until the trial can ascertain whether the claims are true. The unnamed defendants (listed as “Does 1-50″ in the complaint) are kind of like placeholder defendants. Google admits in the complaint that they don’t know everyone who’s running this scam, but that they will amend the complaint once they do. “Upon information and belief,” Google says that the other defendants are materially connected with Pacific WebWorks, though they appear to operate as separate companies. The separate entities use the same website templates, testimonials and other information to purvey their scams. What do you think? Will Google win? And what took them so long?

See the rest here:
Google Sues Make Money with Google Scams

For this post, I need two volunteers! Let’s take this announcement from Google: …we’ve decided to allow publishers to limit the number of accesses under the First Click Free policy to five free accesses per user each day . This change applies to both Google News publishers as well as websites indexed in Google’s Web Search. We hope that this encourages even more publishers to open up more content to users around the world! And yes, you sir. The Financial Times report on how much news scraping exists on the web: The study of 101,000 articles published by 157 newspapers found that more than 75,000 sites reused 112,000 almost exact copies without authorisation, and a further 520,000 articles in part… The study found Google accounted for 53 per cent of the advertising being run alongside unlicensed stories … I will now combine these two articles into an incredible–or incredulous–observation. Is it pure coincidence that on the day News Corp’s Rupert Murdoch was in Washington telling the FTC about the need to reform "fair use" laws to prevent the "theft" of its content, Attributor pulls out some heavy numbers in support and Google decides to bend a little? I think not! Forget the fact that Bing is rumored to be courting the newspaper industry to dump Google, the search engine plans to lose a significant slice of revenue, if the publishing industry faces any kind of mass reform. Think about it, Google offers to change the "First Click Free" terms in order to save the AdSense revenue it makes from bloggers, and the more nefarious scrapers. It’s a small sacrifice, right? You’ve heard of the expression "an irresistible force meets an immovable object," right? News Corp. is about to meet Google head-on! Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Follow this link:
Google Offers Newspapers the First 5 Clicks Free to Keep AdSense Scrapers Alive

When most people hear the word exploit they automatically think that you are doing something unethical or illegal.  However, exploit actually means to take advantage of a situation or to use or develop something in order to gain a benefit.  Thus, exploit is actually the perfect verb to describe how you should approach the online business because you want to take advantage of the fact that the web offers easy access to millions of potential consumers and you want to develop the recession proof business venue to produce high sales figures.  The only thing you need to know now is how you can exploit the online business world in four easy steps, and believe it or not it’s not that hard! Find your target audience- First off; you need to discover where your target audience is located on the web and what their interests are.  It is much easier to see results from your advertising and marketing campaigns if you start by aiming them directly at the crowd of web browsers who are most likely to purchase your product or service.  You can conduct your own research to find their tastes or simply hire a consultant, but you will see much higher sales profits if you go out and find them instead of waiting for them to come to you. Utilize social media- The largest advertising tool on the internet right now is also conveniently very low cost and easy to use, social media websites.  Social networking is becoming the ‘IT’ thing in pop culture even more so every day since you are not somebody until you have a Facebook and Twitter account.  Take advantage of the easy exposure and free advertising venue via status updates by joining and offering users easy access to your company.  Additionally, this is a great way to collect consumer feedback which can help you improve your business in the future. Develop your website- If you had an actual store you would never let the door way and front side look as if it were ancient, so why would you leave your website looking this way?  Your homepage on your website is the first thing that people see when they head over to take a look at your product or service.  In this increasingly technical age people are highly critical of website design, webpage usability, and overall current information.  If you are lacking any of these elements potential consumers will move on to another website that has them, even if your product is great.  So remember, your sale starts with your homepage, not with the actual product introduction. Delegate!- Finally, this is the key to any group project or large business project, in order to accomplish all of your business objectives you cannot be afraid to delegate.  The truth of the matter is that people who try to handle every aspect of their business on their own are doomed to fail because there is not enough time in one day to handle mundane tasks and still have time left for future development and expansion.  Hire a virtual assistant or outsource some of your smaller tasks and web tasks that are outside your area of expertise and you will be surprised with how much time to put your energy where it really counts, into the future progression of your business!

See the original post here:
How to exploit the online business world in four easy steps

At one point in time US President John F. Kennedy triumphantly declared “Ich bin ein Berliner!” in a speech to the German people. Now the debate rages on as to whether the president proclaimed he was a Berlin citizen or a donut but that’s for another blog. Today though we learn from TechCrunch Europe that Eric Schmidt from Google may need to head to Deutschland to proclaim that he is one of the good guys as there are calls to ban Google Analytics from sites with a .de extension. Several federal and regional government officials in Germany are trying to put a ban on Google Analytics, the search giant’s free software product that allows website owners and publishers to get detailed statistics about the number, whereabouts and search behavior of their visitors (and much more). According to an article in today’s Zeit Online (poor Google translation here), multiple federal and state government officials charged with guarding over national data protection are convinced that Google Analytics is against the law in Germany and are mulling imposing fines on companies who use the service to gather detailed stats based on their website visitors’ usage patterns without the explicit consent of those visitors. What is probably just as interesting in this quote is the swipe taken at Google’s translation service . I woudn’t know a good German translation if it came up and smacked me in the head (apologies to Herr Manger who was my German teacher for two years in HS. Nothing stuck other than “Ich habe keine idee” which I think means “I have no idea” – NOTE- This was confirmed by Google Translate ) So apparently this isn’t the first time that the German government has voiced these concerns with most of their worry pointed at healthcare data and other sensitive areas. Interestingly enough some of larger media organizations use Google Analytics so this should be fun to watch if it actually turns into anything. So what’s at risk for those using Google Analytics One German lawyer that gets cited in the article says the penalties could amount up to €50,000 (about $75,000) per website that uses Google Analytics to keep track of its visitors’ usage patterns. Google’s take. Well, they disagree of course. What else would you expect? Google Germany’s Per Meyerdierks, however, says the company is well within its rights to process user data in the United States because it respects the Safe Harbour treaty between the EU and the USA. He argues that an opt-out would be entirely unnecessary, and that users always have the option to refuse cookies anyway. Now my question to the German government is the following. If you are uncomfortable with Google having this kind of data for many companies what about the individual companies that are collecting the same data using something else and not nearly as secure as Google is?

See the original post:
Ich bin ein Googler!