Google Loses AdWords Lawsuit
Posted by dw2003 on 16 August 2005 - 08:12 · 46 comments & 13112 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: dw2003
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: dw2003
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(9 replies)
#1 Posted by SimplyPotatoes on 16 Aug 2005 - 08:47
- macs rule
ps: google rule -
#1.1 Posted by Bwizzel-B on 16 Aug 2005 - 08:54
#1 Mac's don't "rule", substandard hardware, and an extreme minority of desktop share.
#2 Neither does Google. What were they thinking by selling trademark names in advertising space to companies other than Geico?-
#1.2 Posted by Peter McGrath on 16 Aug 2005 - 09:02
QUOTE #2 Neither does Google. What were they thinking by selling trademark names in advertising space to companies other than Geico?
This will be a non-event.
The only people who could be liable are the advertisers themselves.
Trying to say google is liable is like trying to say neowin is liable because it was mentioned in a new story...-
#1.4 Posted by lare2 on 16 Aug 2005 - 10:58
QUOTE What do macs have to do with this anyway ?
Back in time trolls usually waited for people to bring the war on to jump. Now they just start trolling from the first post
-
#1.5 Posted by Skinmeister on 16 Aug 2005 - 11:13
- I don't like Macs. I'm straight.
-
#1.7 Posted by Ravensworth on 16 Aug 2005 - 17:08
QUOTE Trying to say google is liable is like trying to say neowin is liable because it was mentioned in a new story...
Huh? I don't think you understand what this is about. If Neowin was selling trademarked names to other companies for ad revenue, then certainly Neowin would be liable. That's what Google was doing.-
#1.8 Posted by threedaysdwn on 16 Aug 2005 - 17:41
- Am I understanding this right?
Google said to various companies (let's say, Progressive) that "If you pay us $$$, we'll make it so everytime the word "Geico" is searched for, we'll link to you."
So I search for Geico, and the first thing I see is a link for "The best car insurance evAR!" - I click it, and I go to Progressive?
If that is what happened, IMHO it's shakey ground. -
#1.9 Posted by Ravensworth on 16 Aug 2005 - 17:54
- I think so, if I understood it correctly. Sort of like keyword spamming on eBay (I hate people who do that).
-
(14 replies)
#2 Posted by YaZoR on 16 Aug 2005 - 09:06
-
-
#2.1 Posted by SoLiD_MasteR on 16 Aug 2005 - 09:38
-
-
#2.5 Posted by i like chips on 16 Aug 2005 - 14:06
-
-
#2.9 Posted by Chaoserver on 16 Aug 2005 - 15:23
-
#2.12 Posted by SergeantNoob on 16 Aug 2005 - 18:55
-
-
#2.13 Posted by Angry_Badger on 16 Aug 2005 - 19:04
-
-
(5 replies)
#3 Posted by shafi on 16 Aug 2005 - 10:55
- Blow in the head. Insurance companies are greddy.Needs Lawer to fight them. what they do with profits?
-
#3.1 Posted by AethylFilth on 16 Aug 2005 - 12:42
- you're completely right!!
wait, I don't understand what you're saying at all. -
#3.2 Posted by lbmouse on 16 Aug 2005 - 13:04
- No, insurance is just a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of potential financial loss. Insurance companies are a group of people (real humans - employees and investors) that manage a pool of money that insured individuals can use in case of a claim. The only "profit" an insurance company receives is in the form of a fee for managing the pool of money. Any excess either goes back to the policyholders (mutual companies) or stockholders (stock company). In the US, insurance companies are regulated by each state. In most states, the insurance departments set the max profit margins for insurance companies. There is as much greed with insurance companies as there are with any other business.
Now, as far as this as this deal with Google, I think that Geico is in the wrong for raising such a stink on such a trivial matter, but then again I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance. -
#3.3 Posted by i like chips on 16 Aug 2005 - 14:10
- ^ Come here to New Brunswick where there is little to no regulation on insurance companies. They can charge whatever the heck they want. When I was shopping for insurance I got quotes from anywhere between $400/month to $130/month. Needless to say I went for the $130/month. You should see how some of these companies calculate what your premium is. They're borderline crooks and makes me wonder what the government is getting in return for not regulating their profit margins as they've all been posting record profits in the past few years.
-
#3.4 Posted by lbmouse on 16 Aug 2005 - 15:08
- ^ It looks like Canada insurance regulation structure is very similar to the US. The New Brunswick Insurance Board (not FF friendly) is responsible for approving rates for all products being sold.
The profit the insurance company receives is from managing the pool of premiums, not from the actual premium. The range of rates you received is based on the company's perceived risk of you. Not all actuaries and underwriters are good at what they do
. -
#3.5 Posted by i like chips on 16 Aug 2005 - 16:12
- ^ haha good find. Not safari friendly either. Anyhoo, it notes as of January 2005. I don't think they've gotten around to regulating anything around where I live anyway :/
-
(2 replies)
#4 Posted by Skinmeister on 16 Aug 2005 - 11:12
- Everytime someone sues Google, they should completely remove them from their database, along with anyone who links to them.
-
#4.1 Posted by threedaysdwn on 16 Aug 2005 - 17:45
- Yes, because fascism is the way to the future!
-
#4.2 Posted by Skinmeister on 17 Aug 2005 - 10:59
- Precisely.
-
(7 replies)
#5 Posted by MasterTae on 16 Aug 2005 - 12:22
- Maybe someone should sue Geico for them idiotic commercials they have. Seems to me they waste (MILLIONS) of the insurance payers money on them dumb ass commercials. I don't see how people can save 15% on there car insurance. What a bunch of fools.
-
#5.1 Posted by Space Guy on 16 Aug 2005 - 12:38
- i love their commercials! have you seen the tiny house one? thats funny as hell!
-
#5.2 Posted by MasterTae on 16 Aug 2005 - 13:49
- How could you not see any of there commercials. Sometimes on certain cable networks, there posted every 15 minutes to every hour on certain days. What a waste of your money on senseless entertainment.
-
#5.3 Posted by Toastyone on 16 Aug 2005 - 14:16
- You don't see how they save you 15%? Simple, they charge you less
Geico really does have cheap prices, and they are in the right here since Geico is a registered trade mark -
#5.4 Posted by MasterTae on 16 Aug 2005 - 15:17
- For some people living in cities, I could "maybe" see a slight reduction in GEICO's insurance costs due to the fact of there extreme amount of advertising. But we all know that rates most of the times are based on one's driving abilities, etc. I quoted a adequate insurance plan on GEICO's website where I live in the northern sticks of Michigan. I have never had a ticket or caused a accident in my 16 years of driving (so essentially a perfect driving record). Well for one, the insurance company I have had for the last 16 years I have stuck with. For two, I have full coverage broadform insurance on all my vehicles. The most I pay for a 2004 full sized truck with full coverage broadform is around 47.80 a month. I quoted my insurance with GEICO for full coverage broadform on the same vehicle for 85.23 a month! Well obviously, that is almost twice what I pay now, and 449.16 added onto my yearly bill. I think for me I will stay with my car insurance company because they pool between the good drivers and the bad drivers. I shouldn't have to pay for others reckless driving. For me anyways, I save roughly 85% by staying with my local insurance company.
This is not relavent to the subject anyways, but my whole point here is, I have honestly never ever seen a insurance waste so much money on TV ads as much as GEICO. Regardless if you save money with them or not, you might even save more than 15% if they quit spending all your money on TV ADS! Besides, after the lawsuit from Google, they might use some of that money for new TV advertisting! -
#5.5 Posted by Ravensworth on 16 Aug 2005 - 17:09
QUOTE Maybe someone should sue Geico for them idiotic commercials they have.
Brilliant, then we'd have to sue every single company on the face of the earth. Good luck with that.-
#5.6 Posted by threedaysdwn on 16 Aug 2005 - 17:46
- Actually, the more low-risk people they get, the lower premiums will be (more people = bigger pool).
-
#5.7 Posted by MasterTae on 17 Aug 2005 - 07:03
- First of all Ravensworth, next time full-fill the WHOLE QUOTE. Cutting the secondary comment from the first line, reminds me of someone working for a news reporting station. HEAR or TELL what we only want you to hear.
And the way this world seems to work nowadays, just about every company will be sued on the face of this earth in one way or another. I'm discriminated by the GEICO insurance company for wasting my insurance money on dumb ass advertising instead of working towards a so-called cheaper premium. I guess that is a start. (START THE CUT-OUT QUOTES as soon as you come off your next vacation.)
-
(1 reply)
#6 Posted by jpcahn on 16 Aug 2005 - 13:09
- I shopped around and Geico killed everyone on the price. Progressive was hundreds more. I switched from a 99 Sebring convertible to a 2005 PT Turbo Convertible and the rate barely went up at all. I have nothing but love for Geico. Before you rag on the PT it hauls compared to a Sebring and there are very few true 4 seat Convertibles in that price range.
-
#7 Posted by Echelon Left on 16 Aug 2005 - 18:25
- Leave it to The Register to not explain what this lawsuit is actualy all about.
The Register is an embarasment, a blight on the otherwise laudable landscape that is the tech-news community.
I wish Neowin would stop accepting submisions that reference items from The Register.
-
#8 Posted by rm20010 on 17 Aug 2005 - 01:52
- Google - A 15 second-taking removal (of Geico from Adwords) could save them $15 million or more in lawsuit fees.
Car insurance firm GEICO sued both Google and Yahoo! subsidiary Overture in May 2004 over the sale of its registered trade marks as sponsored search terms in the keyword advertising services of both search engines.
According to GEICO, the court has stayed the trial for 30 days to give the parties an opportunity to settle. If the parties do not settle, the trial will continue on the question of damages and on the issue of who is liable: Google or Google's advertisers.
What's new in Advanced Installer 3.1: