Google Bizopps Last Warning
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
I am in my cell that does not have wifi. Instead I McGyvered an antenna that is stealing from a coffee shop next to the bail bondsman outside my cell window. Have it hooked to a Dell Axim I had smuggled in.
Yes. This works fine for diet/teeth especially having "This is an advertisement" in small letters at the top.
Bizopp advertisers and pubs will get sued for using the google name on their LP's and the offer LP's. Google is getting assloads of complaints from consumers about the bizopps using google's name, and consumers think its google who is charging their credit cards (one of the reasons they fall for the scheme in the first place).
The government body that will sue people for the fake testimonials on fake news landers would be the FTC or your own State AG.
My point is that you have to look at their goals. Their goal is to make it stop. It isn't necessary to build a case one at a time against a few thousand people strewn across the internet to meet that goal. As soon as the major networks stop running them, it will be over.
Remember the RIAA suing 13 year old girls? Did they sue everyone who was pirating music? No, they made some examples, filed a bunch of suits in an attempt to extract settlements (most of which were thrown out by asking for summary judgement), and then shut down as many large sites as they could. This will be no different.
You can't protect yourself with a disclaimer if you are breaking the law. Tradermark infringement, i.e. using Google's trademarks to imply some kind of association with them when there is none at all, isn't something you could disclaim. If you were selling a program that somehow assists you with AdWords (and you state this in your ad), THEN you could, under fair use, use Google's logo as long as your disclaimer states you are not associated with google and do not own their trademark.
One thing you need to know about Trademark law is that if a company does not go after infringers, they may lose the rights to their mark. They, by law, HAVE to do this or they risk becoming public domain. The RIAA/MPAA is trying to scare people away from file sharing their content...it hasn't worked at all, and their motivation is largely financial. Google's motivation is to protect is reputation and its claim to the Google trademark.
This holds true for any person or company that owns the rights to a trademark.
In all fairness, Jon would be one of the last people to try that. He already has his own offers and other shit to worry about, he wouldn't waste his time doing that. He was just passing on information that he has heard to maybe help out a few people or have them take a closer look at stuff.
Yes, Jon already has his own offers, why would he want to scare people into not running his competitors offers?
Yeah, this must have all been an attempt for everyone to replace those google links with grant links.
If he didn't start this thread someone else would have, judging from the amount of talk going on about this.