Healthy Blog Reviews

Google has pushed the boundaries on just about everything they have done. As of late, their Street View escapades have created some serious ill will on most continents. While it seems that some of the trouble has cooled off a bit ( but not completely by any means) outside of the US it may just be heating up stateside. According to the Wall Street Journal The attorney general of Connecticut said 37 states have joined his investigation of Google Inc. and that he continues to seek information about whether privacy laws were broken when Google’s Street View vehicles collected personal data of unsuspecting Internet users. In a letter dated Wednesday sent to Google, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal seeks specific details about the collection of data, including whether Google sold or used any of the information it collected. He threatened legal recourse if he doesn’t get the answers he wants, requesting the response by Friday. What better way for a s state’s Attorney General to make a national name for himself than leading the charge against Google. Google is the rare company that is loved and hated in equal amounts. People who use it for search and other business services rarely complain because what you can get for free from Google is A) free and B) usually very good quality. People who don’t like it as much think that Google is a corporate bully that throws its weight around without much push back. I think that both sides have merit but I tend to fall on the side of being a fan rather than a detractor. In this case, though, Google is drawing the ire of a public official in an election year (Blumenthal is running for the Connecticut senate seat recently vacated by Christopher Dodd’s retirement). That’s a perfect storm in this kind of situation because any traction gained against corporate America could be impressive to certain types of voters. Blumenthal is questioning just how Google ‘allowed’ this to happen since this potential issue should have been revealed during testing of the data collection process. Mr. Blumenthal, updating an investigation that began last month, said if Google had been testing the data it should have foreseen the trouble. “Google’s responses continue to generate more questions than they answer,” he said in a statement. “We will take all appropriate steps—including potential legal action if warranted—to obtain complete, comprehensive answers.” Google is trying its best to say that this was a mistake and placing the blame on a piece of experimental software used in the process of gathering their street view information. Overall, this is something that could turn into a rather large distraction for Google as it works toward growing its business in areas outside of search ads. Having pending cases around the world and a heated up interest in the US regarding this activity by the company could very well hurt them to some degree. To what degree may be determined by just how hard Mr. Blumenthal thinks he has to push in order to get elected in November. Ain’t America great?!

Tags: America, answers, attorney, cloud-computing, internet, investigation, rarely-complain, Search
Posted July 22, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

I think that based on the legal angle of much of the news around Google lately, we could see a service called Google Legal. I have no idea what that might look like but since the Internet behemoth spends so much time in court battles they should be able to find a way to monetize that right? They make money on everything else they do so why not? The latest case was brought against Google by Daniel Jurin. MediaPost gives some of the details Jurin, who sells StyroTrim building material, brought suit last year for trademark infringement, false advertising, interference with contractual relations, and other counts. The allegations all stemmed from Google’s AdWords program, which allows trademarked terms to trigger pay-per-click ads. If you want to get a lesson in whether this kind of thing is a good idea to do, take into consideration these two results from the case. Jurin has to pay $6,000 for Google’s legal fees and most of the case was dismissed. Not exactly a winner other than getting some press that won’t likely help his business any. In a ruling issued this week, U.S. District Court Judge Morrison England in the eastern district of California dismissed a host of Jurin’s claims, including allegations that Google confused consumers about who produced StyroTrim by returning links to a variety of companies in response to a search on the term. “Even if one accepts as true the allegation that a ‘Sponsored link’ might confuse a consumer, it is hardly likely that with several different sponsored links appearing on a page that a consumer might believe each one is the true ‘producer’ or ‘origin’ of the Styrotrim product,” he wrote. What is probably the most interesting outcome of this whole thing is the assertion by the court that essentially says that Google sells ad space and not keywords. If you are Google that’s a nice thing to hear a court say because it could potentially take away a lot of the responsibility that many place on Google to police trademarks and more. As of now, the trademark infringement piece of the suit has not been dismissed but it is believed that the likelihood of anything coming of it is slim. So Google continues to fight the AdWords fight in court and why wouldn’t they? It accounts for the overwhelming majority of the company’s revenues so it is worth fighting for. Of course their legal woes aren’t even close to being over. Google is currently facing 10 trademark infringement cases stemming from AdWords. No court has yet definitively ruled on whether using a brand name to trigger a search ads infringes trademark. The one case to go to trial, a lawsuit by insurance company Geico against Google, resulted in a victory for Google in 2004. In that case, a judge in Alexandria, Va. ruled that Geico had not proven that consumers were confused when they typed “Geico” into a search box and were served with ads for other insurance companies. There will always be legal battles for Google and any other successful company to fight especially in this day and age where unscrupulous folks look at the legal system as the the lottery system. As long as the impression is that Google is playing on the right side of the law in most instances then this whole process can just be chalked up to the cost of doing business. Hey, it is America after all. Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Tags: America, Business, case, legal, responsibility, Search, styrotrim, trademark
Posted March 5, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

Last week, Google announced they would soon begin building high-speed broadband networks . They’re currently taking requests to select the markets where they’ll begin—but it’s still not too soon for at least one former FCC chair to endorse the idea. Former FCC chairman Michael K. Powell, blogging for Broadband for America, says that Google’s effort is further proof that network investment and innovation matter to the future of the Internet . Google’s success is built upon the success of the Internet, he says, and as Internet speeds improve, so does access to Google and the vast stores of information on the Internet. Basically, Powell encourages the current FCC board not to block Google’s move into the ISP realm: the FCC should take note that it is the extraordinary success that Google has enjoyed as a search and applications platform as well as one of America’s premiere advertising media that has generated the cash necessary to engage in this kind of high-capital cost experiment. . . . So, if we look at the development of the internet as we know it today it is clear that the best way to innovation is for the government, academia, and private corporations to cooperate – each building on what the other can provide. What we have to very careful about is allowing one of the legs of that stool, either by design or by accident, to cut off one of the other legs. . . . As the FCC completes its work on a National Broadband Policy, it should keep in mind that it should promote competition, foster innovation, and encourage all three of the historical partners in the development of the internet to continue and enhance that partnership. Powell, son of former Secretary of State Colin Powell, was appointed to the FCC in 1997 by Bill Clinton. George W. Bush made Powell chairman of the commission in 2001, where Powell served until 2005. The current chairman, Julius Genachowski, was appointed last June by Barack Obama. Traditionally, the FCC (and other federal regulatory bodies) and Google aren’t exactly the best of friends. Just in the last few months, the commission has inquired about Google’s Nexus One termination fee s and eyed Google Voice’s rural call blocking . Google has long been among those lobbying the commission for Net Neutrality . But will Google’s move into the ISP industry hurt their argument for Net Neutrality, even with Powell’s endorsement? What do you think? Hat tip: Simon Owens

Tags: America, clinton-george, commission, development, extraordinary, internet, markets, powell, secretary, the-development, voice
Posted February 16, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media