[zenspunk]

Edit: parent made a retrospective edit to add the link after I had made this post.

So again, I ask:

- is Google meant to run a background check on each and every report?

- does this not put Google at risk of being sued by the removed advertiser?

- or, if Google wrongfully removes a legitimate advertiser, does this not put them at risk of being sued?

- which broken laws - of which country - should justify removal?

- how should they solve the potential problem of scammers flooding the report system?

Again, I don't think Google can solve this problem without creating larger ones. I don't think it's their job to police copyright.

[jbk]

> is Google meant to run a background check on each and every report?

Yes. They get money from advertisement, they should check reports.

> does this not put Google at risk of being sued by the removed advertiser?

No. If Google ToS banishes copyright infrigement, they can remove advertisers without questionning.

> or, if Google wrongfully removes a legitimate advertiser, does this not put them at risk of being sued?

Sued? This is inside Google system, respecting Google ToS. They have the right to banish accounts and have done repeatedly in the past.

> which broken laws - of which country - should justify removal?

CA, USA, of course.

> how should they solve the potential problem of scammers flooding the report system?

How do they solve spam on gmail?

> I don't think it's their job to police copyright.

I disagree on Adsense, but agree on Search. Making money from illegal activities is illegal in most (if not all ) countries.

[zenspunk]

>Yes. They get money from advertisement, they should check reports.

I don't see how one implies the other. Drug companies get money from selling ingredients for makeshift heroin, they should stop its use?

> CA, USA, of course.

And which laws? Should they block advertisers of euthanasia? Political groups? "Terrorist" groups? This is a very slippery slope.

> How do they solve spam on gmail?

No, if I were to submit many reports with different advertisers from different accounts, there's no way to detect that as spam. There's no comparison with email spam, which is a one-to-many medium.

>I disagree on Adsense, but agree on Search. Making money from illegal activities is illegal in most (if not all ) countries.

Why the distinction between Adsense and Search? Do they not profit from Search?

Google isn't making money via copyright infringement - it's only a byproduct of the actions of separate perpetrators. It's like Microsoft being held responsible for botnets.

[georgemcbay]

> Drug companies get money from selling ingredients for makeshift heroin, they should stop its use?

No, but if they receive credible reports that Joe Drugdealer is is using their ingredients to make makeshift heroin, they should look into those claims before directly selling their ingredients to Joe Drugdealer in the future. That's a more apt analogy to the situation we're discussing here.