Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!



Photo
- - - - -

Paid Links Violation Of Google Guidelines Or Not?


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 SergePon

SergePon

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 10:38 AM

According to my knowledge it is clear violation of Google’s Webmaster Guidelines to buy or to sell links.

[Removed] is trying to sue me, and Judge asked [Removed]  solicitor is it violation of Google’s Webmaster Guideline to buy links.

Solicitor answered:

My clients say no, but the Google policy changes from time to time. It

depends on the nature, my clients say, of the site. So take a pure spam website,

something that says “Poker, poker, poker” and was of no consumer interest.

If one paid for that, then that would be said by Google to be in breach of their

guidelines. If there is a genuine piece being written and my clients can encourage them

and pay for them to mention and link to [Removed]  within that piece, then they would say that is not in breach of the guidelines. That is my clients’ stance.

When I provided Google’s Webmaster Guidelines and Link Schemes explained, solicitor continue to argue that in some cases it is OK to buy links.

 

What evidence to put before court to prove that buying links is against Google’s Webmaster Guidelines?


Edited by Jill, 18 September 2015 - 03:43 PM.


#2 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,718 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 17 September 2015 - 12:16 PM

 

 

What evidence to put before court to prove that buying links is against Google’s Webmaster Guidelines?

Absolutely none at all because they are not.

...

...

Provided that the links do not pass 'value' to the target URL.

 

 

So you can buy as many links as you want provided the above is true about the links you are buying.



#3 SergePon

SergePon

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 12:29 PM

Absolutely none at all because they are not.

...

...

Provided that the links do not pass 'value' to the target URL.

 

 

So you can buy as many links as you want provided the above is true about the links you are buying.

Thank you for your answer, but we are talking about do follow links. 



#4 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,325 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 18 September 2015 - 02:43 AM

If you can show that the links are influencing Google's search results AND that they would not have existed without the enticement of compensation then you can prove they violate Google's guidelines.  I don't know how well a court would understand what it takes to prove which links influence search results (without full disclosure from a search engine).  Third-party methods of link analysis are unscientific and unreliable.  As for compensation, I don't think an affiliate program would qualify so I guess you would have to show that money changed hands explicitly for the sake of placing search-influencing links.



#5 Alan Perkins

Alan Perkins

    Token male admin

  • Admin
  • 1,648 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 18 September 2015 - 03:05 AM

I see you have already commented on this video, which means that presumably you have watched it all the way through:

 

 

That's a fairly clear explanation of paid links. If that's not enough, see this page for extra info:

 

https://support.goog...wer/66356?hl=en



#6 Mikl

Mikl

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts
  • Location:Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted 18 September 2015 - 04:11 AM

You are asking us what evidence you should submit to the court. Given that we don't know anything about your contractual relationship (if any) with [Removed]  or why they are suing you, it would be completely meaningless for us to try to answer that question.

 

What's more, if you are involved in a court case, and you have to resort to a technical forum to get advice about how to conduct that case (albeit a high quality forum like this), then there is something seriously wrong with your representation. Surely, you are taking legal advice? If you are not, I doubt if anything we say here will help you.

 

Finally, keep in mind that Google's guidelines are just that: guidelines. Based on what little you have told us, you have no contractual relationship with Google, and neither you nor Google would be able to rely on the guidelines to resolve a dispute.

 

Mike


Edited by Jill, 18 September 2015 - 03:44 PM.

  • torka likes this

#7 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,718 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 18 September 2015 - 12:48 PM

 

 

do follow links

 

There is no such thing, so if you are buying (or selling) them based on that premise, you ARE being conned out of your money, and of course likely to find that they are totally useless from ALL aspects of 'link value'


Edited by chrishirst, 18 September 2015 - 12:51 PM.


#8 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,718 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 18 September 2015 - 01:15 PM

The thing I don't understand is:

 

There is no 'law' governing links. Google is a private concern with NO judicial power to make buying or selling links "illegal". Not even in the US of A.

 

The only thing that is remotely a legal concept about link buying and selling,  is 'caveat emptor', and if the plaintiff cannot PROVE due diligence, the whole case is a joke and any competent judge should dismiss the whole thing as frivolous and a waste of court time.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

We are now a read-only forum.
 
No new posts or registrations allowed.