Not getting enough hits? Sue Google...

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by emw, Nov 2, 2006.

  1. emw macrumors G4


    Aug 2, 2004
    Only in America. :rolleyes:


    Isn't it Google's right to rank sites as they please? This seems to me to be a suit without merit, but I'm no lawyer.
  2. clayj macrumors 604


    Jan 14, 2005
    visiting from downstream
    This lawsuit is moronic. The only way it has any kind of merit that I can think of (and I am not a lawyer) is if a court deems that Google, through its ubiquity, has attained some sort of "common carrier" status, like a utility company.

    I don't think this suit will go anywhere... Google will fight tooth and nail to protect their methods for ranking pages.
  3. link92 macrumors 6502

    Aug 15, 2004
    … and it sure ain't easy to get yourself moved down to a PR0 anyway. To my knowledge that's done by a human, and human alone. It's never done purely automatically.
  4. wallock, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2013

    wallock macrumors member

    Sep 11, 2006
  5. question fear macrumors 68020

    question fear

    Apr 10, 2003
    The "Garden" state
    This lawsuit is almost as funny as the company trying to sue youtube because their website is utube. Everybody wants a piece of google these days.
  6. dmw007 macrumors G4


    May 26, 2005
    Working for MI-6

    If you can't beat them, sue 'em. :rolleyes: :D
  7. iMeowbot macrumors G3


    Aug 30, 2003
    That is exactly what the judge has been asking :)
    [edit: ah, orig. link has that line in it too! ]
  8. TheMonarch macrumors 65816


    May 6, 2005
    Bay Area
    Hold up a bit. This suit is just a tad bit different...

    As I understand this:

    Utube is suing YouTube because of the sudden fluctuation in hits that utube has gotten due to typos that people make when trying to access YouTube.

    Utube's traffic went from a couple of hits per day, to 2 MILLION hits per day. Thats a whole lot of typos, and its costing Utube a whole lot of money.

    I'm not for, or against either party, I'm just trying to clear things up a bit. :cool:
  9. iJaz macrumors 6502a


    Dec 16, 2004
    I usually laugh at all the stupid lawsuits in America, but I actually don't think it's such a stupid one. Google should have clear rules on how to get listed, now nobody knows how to get in there. They seem to decide arbitrary which sites that make it and which don't, it can make a huge difference for sites if they are ranked highly or not even in there. Google is almost the Microsoft of search engines.

    What if a major newspaper stopped making reviews of films from a certain movie company? Maybe not the best example, but I hope you get the point.
  10. poppe macrumors 68020


    Apr 29, 2006
    Woodland Hills
    I've heard alot worse

    This really doesn't sound all that bad.

    Its very bold to say "Only in America" When this one is not even close to the really bad cases. This acctually makes some sense. And if google does win then as an above poster explains it sets precedents for not only Google, but all the other search engines.

    And if google looses then it still sets precedents and demands change.

    I understand it isn't erin brockovich or anything, but it still has a lot more (whats the word I'm looking for) merit? to it than cases before it.
  11. iMeowbot macrumors G3


    Aug 30, 2003
    You're right, maybe that isn't the best example, because studios are recently in the habit of skipping early screenings to shut out critics. But the point still comes through.

    For what it's worth, companies and groups that flood publications with pointless press releases do tend to find themselves ignored, and that's how it should be. A publication full of unappealing drivel won't have many readers, and editors are there to prevent that. Sources of more interesting content will naturally get more attention and a better chance of appearing before readers' eyes.
  12. emw thread starter macrumors G4


    Aug 2, 2004
    I know, I'm just wondering what peoples' opinions here are.

    So if I make a product, I should be able to sue Target because they don't carry it?

    Should I be able to sue MacRumors if they delete one of my posts?

    Should I be able to sue Starbucks if they don't carry my favorite flavor of coffee?

    I suppose the question is really what clayj asks - has Google migrated from a standard "private enterprise" into a "common carrier" that would be required to treat all sites equally and have, perhaps, published "rules" for how they rank sites? Would al search engines be subject to those same rules?

    If a newspaper chooses not to run a story, they are doing so at the risk of losing readers. If Google chooses not to rank a site more highly, they risk people going to other search engines, perhaps.

    In the end, if your marketing is solely determined on whether or not Google brings up your website, then perhaps you need to find some new marketing people. Or pay Google to be a sponsored link.
  13. poppe macrumors 68020


    Apr 29, 2006
    Woodland Hills

    First off you missed my whole point. The point of my posts was that there could be more valitdity to this case then most are giving it. "only in America." thats what has been said among other things. This case has some validity. And the whole point of my posts was that I'm glad it's happening because it will acctually set precedents. Even if Google is in the right here then at least it will set precedents for future companies.

    This are not good examples at all.

    The Target one... Maybe that works, but even then still because there is some corporate guy/girl in Target sitting there deciding the products that go in to Target because thats what he/she is predicting will sell. Google is using an algorithm so it is still different. This example kinda fits, but kinda doesn't.

    But the MR and the Starbucks one are completely different
    If Macrumors felt like not letting you post just because it tickled someones fancy, then yes you should be able to; as long as you have gone through all the steps of contacting them and what not. If they don't let you post becuase of rules that have been broken then they have every right. The startbucks thing is ridiculous and you know it. That isn't even close to this case in anyway

    Again my point was not to say who was right or who was wrong only that this case is alot better than some cases that have gone up in the system.
  14. 114211 macrumors newbie

    Nov 3, 2006
    thats so stupid. those guys are officialy bankrupt. theres no way that their struggling company can still stand up after they get demolished to the ground by the best paid lawyers on the earth.
  15. dextertangocci macrumors 68000

    Apr 2, 2006
    LOL!!!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :D :eek:

    This reminds me of "I'll sue ya" by Weird Al' Yankovic:D
  16. jsw Moderator emeritus


    Mar 16, 2004
    Andover, MA
    Um, no. MR is a private forum. Arn owns it, and no individual has any privileged right to post whatsoever. While it doesn't happen, he could boot anyone for any reason and have no legal liability whatsoever.
  17. Apple Hobo macrumors 6502a

    Apple Hobo

    Mar 19, 2004
    A series of tubes
    Maybe these guys were keyword spamming or doing something to manipulate their standings. :confused:

    Utube should put some hit-based advertising in their page. There...2M clicks into cash. :D
  18. poppe macrumors 68020


    Apr 29, 2006
    Woodland Hills
    I guess no one reads anyhthing I post... That was the point!!! he was saying MR comment was the same as this case...

Share This Page