Feeds

Google ads 'misleading and deceptive'

Oz court: Advertiser keyword grabs ARE Google's fault

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

Australia's Federal Court has found that some Google ads are misleading and deceptive, overturning a previous ruling that the search giant is not responsible for dodgy ads its advertisers create.

The case centered on advertisers who bought keywords and created ads using rivals' names. Travel agency STA Travel, for example, bought ads that appeared when Google users searched for rival travel agency Harvey World Travel. The copy for some of those ads mentioned Harvey World Travel, but the embedded links sent users to the STA Travel website. Several other companies indulged in similar practices.

Australia's consumer watchdog, the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC), has pursued Google through the courts for several years over this kind of advertising, arguing that it is unfair to consumers and to business misrepresented by their rivals.

The Federal Court agreed with that proposition today, saying that consumers would assume that there is an association or affiliation between the two travel agencies and that information about Harvey World Travel could be found on the STA travel website. That, the court says (in a ruling available at Scribd), means Google misled and deceived the general public.

Google must now institute a compliance program to make sure this kind of thing doesn't happen any more.

In a statement issued after the judgement, ACCC Chair Rod Sims said the body “... brought this appeal because it raises very important issues as to the role of search engine providers as publishers of paid content in the online age” and declared the win “an important outcome because it makes it clear that Google and other search engine providers which use similar technology to Google will be directly accountable for misleading or deceptive paid search results.”

Google Australia sees things differently and has said it already checks for this kind of misleading ad and removes offending examples. The company also says it feels it is unfair it is held responsible for advertisers' actions.

Australia's High Court is the only avenue of appeal beyond the Federal Court. Google has not yet said if it will appeal but is considering its options. ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
GCHQ protesters stick it to British spooks ... by drinking urine
Activists told NOT to snap pics of staff at the concrete doughnut
Britain's housing crisis: What are we going to do about it?
Rent control: Better than bombs at destroying housing
What do you mean, I have to POST a PHYSICAL CHEQUE to get my gun licence?
Stop bitching about firearms fees - we need computerisation
Top beak: UK privacy law may be reconsidered because of social media
Rise of Twitter etc creates 'enormous challenges'
Redmond resists order to hand over overseas email
Court wanted peek as related to US investigation
Ex US cybersecurity czar guilty in child sex abuse website case
Health and Human Services IT security chief headed online to share vile images
NZ Justice Minister scalped as hacker leaks emails
Grab your popcorn: Subterfuge and slur disrupts election run up
prev story

Whitepapers

Endpoint data privacy in the cloud is easier than you think
Innovations in encryption and storage resolve issues of data privacy and key requirements for companies to look for in a solution.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Advanced data protection for your virtualized environments
Find a natural fit for optimizing protection for the often resource-constrained data protection process found in virtual environments.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.