Comments on: Lawsuit seeks to block Google settlement

Suit argues that affected advertisers would not be compensated enough by $90 million click fraud settlement.

[Cyrus_K]

About time Google & Yahoo are being seriously held responsible for Click fr

Click fraud via Ad sense of Google and similar offering of Yahoo is massive.
In reality more than 70% of clicks on Ad sense Ads are click fraud.
Even 90% click fraud would not be an over statement.
Why? Because there is ABSOLUTELY no way that Google or Yahoo can detect and prevent someone from engaging in click fraud if they know what
they are doing and have the right software to continuously cloak their IP. In fact I am prepared to prove this to you, or Google or Yahoo, by challenging Google or Yahoo to try to catch me clicking fraudulently on 1000 different Ad sense Ads. If they can catch me I will give them $1000, if they cannot they will pay me $1000. I know that they will no take this challenge because as I said there is NO WAY
to monitor and prevent click fraud SPECIALLY when the clicker is a non registered user, again if the click fraudster knows what they are doing.

So for Google and Yahoo agent to say:
"Google and other search engines say they catch most click fraud and that it is not a serious issue." is a complete lie and one. But then what else do you expect from these 2 Big brother companies? The truth! I dont think so.

My challenge to Google or Yahoo will be open until next week.

[FaveoKatro]

Genius!

Yeah, the title says it all! You're my hero now, can I shine your shoes for you? /sarcasm off. You know that your "call" out to google and yahoo is pretty stupid right? It's not as if they're going to respond personally on this board, and I know that they don't send click fraud perpetrators personal messages. They'd need three times the number of staff they've got to do that.

And your assessment of 70-90% is kinda high considering even people MAKING click fraud software only peg it at 30%? Do you always pull numbers out of your ass and pretend they're facts?

And just as a note, your entire message reeks of a 14 year old geek who just downloaded his first nuking program and is all giddy. I doubt you even have 100 dollars to pay up if you lose, and they're certainly not going to pay you squat. So just go to sleep and keep dreaming.

[stephenpace]

Cite Your Source, Please

Please cite your source for 90% ClickFraud. Thanks, I knew you couldn't because it isn't true. Think about it for a second. People wouldn't buy the ads if they didn't think they worked. No one is forcing anyone to purchase ads. Is there some fraud there? Sure. Google, Yahoo!, and Microsoft are all working behinds the scenes to address the issue, doing much more than 'checking IP addresses' as you state. But advertising is something that works best when it is targeted, and this is very targeted advertising. If you purchase a television ad, a lot of people you don't care about it may see it, and others you do want to see it may skip over it. People using these services clearly feel they are getting value and continue to use it. If they didn't, they would stop.

As for your challenge, yeah, right. Your solution is to have your 'friends' vote for sites, and I've already addressed how stupid that idea is.

[thatxbxtchxnicoll]

*sigh*

While I do have to agree with the other posts saying that this
reeks of a 14 year old with an aol prog, I'd also like to point out
that both google and yahoo's method of tracking clicks is a bit
more sophisticated, and ghosters don't always work against it.

I run ghost ip on my pc (mainly because I think its funny when
the porn ads are totally confused as to where I am). No, I'm not
some big 31337 h4x0r or anything, I wouldn't know what to do
even if I had the right software, but it is amusing for the
moment to mess with stuff like that. To sit there and say that
Google and Yahoo haven't figured out a way to get around that
is laughable. I have friends running scripts on forums that will
still tell me my exact ip. if some 23 year olds can figure it out,
why wouldn't 2 major corporations be smart enough to do it?

[Jackson Cracker]

The settlement doesn't cover Yahoo

only Google

[arcon5]

ott

that is ridiculous, that amount of money will affect google in the longrun, but for the individual advertiser, only $50 for $10K is apauling.

!!!!!!

http://www.arcon5.com

[nirving]

Google is Evil!!!!!!!!!

Not only do they organise a Quest (Da Vinci Code promotion) where UK and Australians cannot answer questions because the answers lie in Google Books that only can be seen from the US. They close the UK competition 24 hour early leaving thousands of questers not being able to complete the quest. Google you need to get your act togethor, as you are loosing it.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=507663&p=22#r425

[nirving]

Google is Evil!!!!!!!!!

Not only do they organise a Quest (Da Vinci Code promotion) where UK and Australians cannot answer questions because the answers lie in Google Books that only can be seen from the US. They close the UK competition 24 hour early leaving thousands of questers not being able to complete the quest. Google you need to get your act togethor, as you are losing it.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=507663&p=22#r425

[BelaLugosi123]

Institutional Scam

It seems that many of you received the e-mail about the Arkansas class-action lawsuit against Google. Here?s the catch (if the whole thing is real at all): The issue is complex enough that most of the recipients don't understand it and they just delete the message. By doing so, they give up the right to sue Google for click fraud forever. So, here is what the e-mailed document says and these are the statements that you have to put into context. Pay close attention to them:

1. The settlement will provide advertising credits to class members who certify that they were the victims of ?click fraud?

2. Under the settlement, Google will establish a $90 million settlement fund, of which a portion will be used to pay class counsel?s fees and costs, and the remainder will be available to class members in the form of advertising credits that may be applied to up to 50% of the cost of future online advertising purchased from Google.

3. The Court will decide the amount of fees to be paid to class counsel and the extent to which the expenses that they incurred in working on the case should be reimbursed. Class counsel intend to seek a maximum of 33 ? percent of the settlement fund, or $30 million, in attorneys? fees and expenses in this case. Under the settlement, Google has agreed that it will not oppose an award of up to $30 million to class counsel.

4. Credits will be awarded on a pro rata basis, taking into account the amount that you paid to Google for the ads and the total amount of credits available. For example, if the amounts that you paid to Google for the affected ads were 1% of Google?s revenues from online advertising since January 1, 2002, you would be eligible to receive 1% of the total available credits. You must certify in your claim form the percentage of your ads you believe were affected by ?click fraud?.

5. Unless you exclude yourself (opt out), you are staying in the class, and that means you can?t sue, continue to sue, or be part of any other lawsuit against Google relating to the subject matter of this case.

Here is what all the above means (again, if it's real):
- If you do nothing (and this is what most recipients of this letter will do), you'll remain in the class which eliminates your right to sue Google for click fraud beyond the scope of this settlement.
- If you remain in the class, you might (emphasis on might) earn a certain amount of credit points that "may be applied to up to 50% of the cost of future online advertising purchased from Google."
- The maximum amount of the credit points you might earn is the equivalent proportion of the available fund to your spending relative to Google's total advertisement revenue from January 1 2002. Let's say Google's advertisement revenue during the mentioned period was $2.7 billion. If you'd spent $100,000.- on the affected campaigns you are eligible for a maximum of 0.03% of the available fund which equals $2,222.- (Don't forget that 33,1/3% of the fund will be spent on class counsel fees.) Sheer eligibility of course does not mean that you automatically will get this amount if you spent one hundred thousands. I quote: " You must certify in your claim form the percentage of your ads you believe were affected by ?click fraud? ". If you say that 30% of your clicks were fraud, you MIGHT get away with a hefty 666 dollar credit, that goes back to Google with your additional 666 real dollars as the other 50% of your total purchase that is required for the credit reimbursement.

The total net loss of the process for Google is a maximum of $30 million that is paid for attorneys? fees and expenses in this case.
The gain for Google is that for this 30 million is they can eliminate the vast majority of their advertisers from filing a click fraud claim against them in the future. If you remain in the class and do the paperwork, you can get an insignificant compensation in the form of future purchase discount. If you do nothing you don't get anything right now and you also lose the right to get back your fraudulently taken dollars forever. The only chance you have for real compensation is to opt out and start your independent litigation. Question: How many of Google?s client will do that?

If this thing is real, then it is one of the most insidious institutional scam we've ever seen.

Your opinion?

[BelaLugosi123]

Institutional Scam

It seems that many of you received the e-mail about the Arkansas class-action lawsuit against Google. Here?s the catch (if the whole thing is real at all): The issue is complex enough that most of the recipients don't understand it and they just delete the message. By doing so, they give up the right to sue Google for click fraud forever. So, here is what the e-mailed document says and these are the statements that you have to put into context. Pay close attention to them:

1. The settlement will provide advertising credits to class members who certify that they were the victims of ?click fraud?

2. Under the settlement, Google will establish a $90 million settlement fund, of which a portion will be used to pay class counsel?s fees and costs, and the remainder will be available to class members in the form of advertising credits that may be applied to up to 50% of the cost of future online advertising purchased from Google.

3. The Court will decide the amount of fees to be paid to class counsel and the extent to which the expenses that they incurred in working on the case should be reimbursed. Class counsel intend to seek a maximum of 33 ? percent of the settlement fund, or $30 million, in attorneys? fees and expenses in this case. Under the settlement, Google has agreed that it will not oppose an award of up to $30 million to class counsel.

4. Credits will be awarded on a pro rata basis, taking into account the amount that you paid to Google for the ads and the total amount of credits available. For example, if the amounts that you paid to Google for the affected ads were 1% of Google?s revenues from online advertising since January 1, 2002, you would be eligible to receive 1% of the total available credits. You must certify in your claim form the percentage of your ads you believe were affected by ?click fraud?.

5. Unless you exclude yourself (opt out), you are staying in the class, and that means you can?t sue, continue to sue, or be part of any other lawsuit against Google relating to the subject matter of this case.

Here is what all the above means (again, if it's real):
- If you do nothing (and this is what most recipients of this letter will do), you'll remain in the class which eliminates your right to sue Google for click fraud beyond the scope of this settlement.
- If you remain in the class, you might (emphasis on might) earn a certain amount of credit points that "may be applied to up to 50% of the cost of future online advertising purchased from Google."
- The maximum amount of the credit points you might earn is the equivalent proportion of the available fund to your spending relative to Google's total advertisement revenue from January 1 2002. Let's say Google's advertisement revenue during the mentioned period was $2.7 billion. If you'd spent $100,000.- on the affected campaigns you are eligible for a maximum of 0.03% of the available fund which equals $2,222.- (Don't forget that 33,1/3% of the fund will be spent on class counsel fees.) Sheer eligibility of course does not mean that you automatically will get this amount if you spent one hundred thousands. I quote: " You must certify in your claim form the percentage of your ads you believe were affected by ?click fraud? ". If you say that 30% of your clicks were fraud, you MIGHT get away with a hefty 666 dollar credit, that goes back to Google with your additional 666 real dollars as the other 50% of your total purchase that is required for the credit reimbursement.

The total net loss of the process for Google is a maximum of $30 million that is paid for attorneys? fees and expenses in this case.
The gain for Google is that for this 30 million is they can eliminate the vast majority of their advertisers from filing a click fraud claim against them in the future. If you remain in the class and do the paperwork, you can get an insignificant compensation in the form of future purchase discount. If you do nothing you don't get anything right now and you also lose the right to get back your fraudulently taken dollars forever. The only chance you have for real compensation is to opt out and start your independent litigation. Question: How many of Google?s client will do that?

If this thing is real, then it is one of the most insidious institutional scam we've ever seen.

Your opinion?

[jsmith12]

Wonder if they consider PTR...

Which is a HUGE source of 'human bot' click frauds.

Naa, since they aren't 'obvious' frauds