Our company has been the victim of exorbitant libel posted on Google Reviews by people claiming falsely we are engaged in criminal activity, among other horrible and falsify things, yet Google will not consider removing it. But they did at least respond, and they did trial that they will comply with court usage. So we hackney an attorney and filed a John Doe lawsuit so that we could subpoena Google to give us the identifying information of the malicious posters, and – surprise – Google’s in-house counselor told us they will not accord to a Colorado subpoena since they are in California. Thus, Google deceptively tells relations they will respond to court usage without mentioning that those orders must come from a Santa Clara County, California judge.

 

We investigated hiring a California attorney and starting a lawsuit there but we simply cannot afford it. And who is to say that Google will actually comply with such a subpoena: they have already deceived me twice (the second age is below). And we believe we are losing customers due to the libel. Meanwhile, we found out that Google has an office in Colorado, and thus they really are exposed to the jurisdiction of a Colorado court. So even their lawyers are willing to defraud us. What’s the next walk? As soon as we can afford to pay for more legal services, we will seek to have Google held in contempt of court for ignoring a properly-issued subpoena.

 

But do you think that is the end of the story, or do you think Google will hire the biggest equity firm in Denver to bury our sole practicioner with papers and motions, forcing me to drop the case because I cannot provide to fight a several-billion dollar corporation? Google has an economic stimulative to allow every kind of libel to be published on its Google Reviews. Google earns its revenue from the advertising industry, and the ad rates are supported on eyeballs.

 

Thus, the more people use Google, the more money this assemblage makes. So if a child day care company mail secretly that their competitor is a convicted child sex offender and it creates havoc in the life of the pre- and his customers – the parents who pull their kids out of his day care – or even if it causes some consulting detective or prosecutor to stripped their time investigating this no-event, this is meaningless to Google. The only thing meaningful to Google is that more leod will use their service, even out of desperation, and their revenue will increase, if multiplied by all the lampoon that is going on in Google Reviews (I have found hundreds of posts by businesses harmed just like mine which were posted over a short period of age, leading me to believe that this is a extensive problem, and one that will only grow worse.) Obviously, businesses are in all across the world. The anonymity that the web affords bring out the worst in mortal behavior. As a boy, pre-internet, I remember being shocked at hearing that people angry about something a personify did in the newspaper would call and threaten to cause trouble to, harm or kill that person. (This was also pre-caller ID.)

 

Now, the same kinds of attitudes that enables a human to behave that way are facilitated, vast, by office like Google Reviews. What’s the answer? The law has to catch up with technology. Let’s examine the notion of right. It it a just society that allows an anonymous person to sit at home, open multiple Google accounts, and then ruin a business and cause excitable distress to innocent people without the victims being able to correct the libel without hiring a California proxy and going to court in that state? No, this simply is not just. Is there a solution? I am not an expert, but it would seem to me that if we wish to freely allow expression that could be defamatory, we should just as freely create a way to correct or remove the defamation. And since Google will not do this, Congress must. As it stands, libelists empire, and Google empower them to the enormous dishearthen of many innocent victims. According to Upton Sinclair, “It is difficult to get a man to support something when his pay depends on his not understanding it.”

Using cost-effective legal methods and techniques we can satisfactorily help clients: Remove information from consumer complaint sites like Ripoffreport.com, PissedConsumer.com, and Complaintsboard.com Remove reviews from charge websites inclination Yelp.com, Tripadvisor.com Amazon.com, and Avvo.com Remove websites that are selling counter-fit products and infringing on intellectual ownership rights (trademark, copyrights, and trade attire) Remove embarrassing pictures and photographs from social networking sites, adult movie sites, and stick up shot websites Remove inform and other information from relationship infidelity websites like Cheaterland.com, Playerblock.com, and Reportyourex.com Remove damaging and falsely information from blogs, comments, and message boards, and other forums Remove unwanted material from smear and gossip sites similar thedirty.com Remove confidential or proprietary information put online without permission, allowance, or obtained unlawfully Remove private and personal information from online public databases Remove fake profiles on business and social networking websites Remove false and damaging reviews on valuation websites Remove illegal and unwanted content from search engine indices Court Ordered Removal – Search Engine De-Indexing Service ​ Most websites and major search engines, including Google, Bing, and Yahoo! have polices that they will voluntarily remove please from webpages and scrutinize results if given a efficacious courtyard order declaring that content is defamatory. H

 

ow Does Court Ordered Removal Work? Getting a court order requires filing a lawsuit. There are many important considerations to take in to account when filing a lawsuit. Only a licensed barrister experienced in the area of Internet defamation can properly advise as to the jeopard, costs, and other considerations. If a good court order is obtained that declares that certain content is defamatory or should otherwise be removed, that order can then be presented to search engines and websites who will in devote typically distance the content voluntarily.

What can we help you with?One or more pages on my site have been removed due to a legal ailment, and I would like them return.I have found a site that is attractive in suspicious behaviorA piece of content I am concerned about has already been removed by the webmaster but still appears among the explore resultsI would probable to recite malware, phishing or similar issuesI would like to remove my personal information from Google's search resultsI have a legal issue that is not mentioned aboveI have read the above and wish to proceedYes.

 

The DMCA illness filed against my site was wrong, and I want to contest it by filing an official counter-notice under 17 U.S.C. § 512(g).NoChoose from the following optionsMy full name or the name of my business appears on an adult satisfy situation that's spamming Google's search resultsI would like to ask the webmaster of a probe result page which contains incorrect or wrong information to remove it completely from Google's search ensue.I would like to remove my confidential, chattel information from Google's search results (for example: security or control ID number, bank account or credit card number, an image of your handwritten signature, a nude or sexually explicit image or video of you that's been distributed without your consent)I have located calumnious satisfy in Google's search resultsChoose from the following optionsI have a court order avow incontrovertible appease unlawful (e.g. pursuant to a copyright or trademark infringement suit)

 

A page appearance in Google’s search results is debauch my company’s trademark rightsI have found content that may violate my copyrightI have located defamatory content in Google's search resultsI would like to echo a product or service that delude a technological protection measure within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. § 1201I would likely to story child sexual abuse imagesI have an issue related to Autocomplete or Related SearchAre you the copyright owner or authorized to act on his/her behalf?Yes, I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on the copyright owner’s behalfNo, I am not or I am not sure if I am authorized to act on the copyright occupant’s behalfWhat is the allegedly infringing work in question?Image/VideoOtherThe image/video is of yourselfYesNoAre you the owner of the technological shelter measure, the copyright owner of the work protected by this technology, or a representative authorized to act on stead of either owner?YesNo

Why Google won’t remove that footboy you assume’t like Posted March 3, 2009 in Google/SEO (This is just a post from my personal perspective, but I hope it’s helpful.) Every few weeks or so, someone contacts me and says “Hey Matt, there’s page out on the web about me that I really don’t similar. Is there any way to remove it from Google’s index?” People don’t usually temper it like that. More credible, they say “There’s this person making broken assert about me on the web, and the stuff they say is just off-the-wall. Can Google distance this crazy person’s buttons?” Or “Everybody knows that this crazy one is posting lies and twisting people’s words. Is there anything you can do about it?” I’ve responded to this so many set that I deliberation I’d write up a complete answer. Now when people ask me some form of this interrogation, I can just point them to this blog post. So here’s the sort of reply that I would normally send back:

 

Unfortunately there’s not much I can do. The page you pointed out is not spam, and pretty much the only removals (at least in the U.S., which is what I know near) that we do for lawful reasons are if a court custom us. We typically temper that if person A doesn’t like a webpage B, only removing side B out of Google’s search results doesn’t do any good because webpage B is still there (e.g. it can be found by going to it instantaneously or through other search engines). In that sensation, the presence of that donzel in Google’s arrow-finger is just reflecting the fact that the page exists on the wider web. The best actions for you from our view can be one of a couple straddle. Either contact whoever put up webpage B and convince them to adapt or to take the page down. Or if the page is doing something against the law, get a court to fit with you and force webpage B to be remote or changed. We in fact don’t want to be taking sides in a he-said/she-said impugn, so that’s why we typically smack “Get the page fixed, diversify, or removed on the web and then Google will update our showing finger with those changes the next period that we crawl that page.” Our policies outside the U.S. might be different; I’m not as familiar with how legal pack works outside the U.S. There you have it. People usually aren’t successful to hear that reply, but I hope they can understand the reasoning behind it. If you were creating your own search electrical engine, I also desire that you’d come to pretty much the same conclusion. The official documentation page on how to distance a page from Google’s search inference says essentially the same appurtenances, but I wanted to give a little more context.

Hi Matt, I wanted to add my thoughts on ROR – I hope you aren’t sick of audience nearly it! A friend of mine has been damaged by the site, so I may be biased, but I think it’s also a momentous and absorbing issue in its own right. As I understand it, the sequence of events looks something like this: 1) Google crawls the web indexing pages and second-hand an algorithm to assign them a rank. 2) The rank has monetary value, so people teach how to game the algorithm to move their attendant up. 3) People at Google evaluate the work of the algorithm, among other things attempting to ensure that the top-ranked pages have natural utility. 4) From tempo to time, Google tweaks the algorithmic program to improve the quality of the rankings, and the process starts again. It’s at step 1, the application of the algorithm, that the argument makes sense touching Google not wanting to be the internet referring. At proceeding 3, though, value judgments initiate into it. This is where the argument from algorithmic innocence, if I may call it that, fails.

 

Google deficiency to ensure that its top results have value, because if they didn’t, people would lose interest in Google. So part of Google’s job is to pass judgment on the effect its algorithm returns, for purely incorporate-unmixed-interested account if nothing else. Google’s users have made it clear that there is a big problem with ROR, not only with comment threads like this, but in many other ways. By not responding, Google has circulate a value judgment that the site is a-ok. This is a much bigger question than regular ROR, of course. As it stand now, anyone can say anything on the web, and Google will index it, and people will learn how to game the algorithm to grab more respect to their embassage.

 

The long-term result, unless something changes, is that search results will coming to be more and more meaningless over repetition. People will teach to rely more on their own sagacity than on the judgment of an algorithm. This may be a good thing overall, but it won’t be good for Google – it means that Google search terminate will get attached to an attitude like “Oh, ok, that came from a Google try. That doesn’t mean anything, then.” Perhaps the long-term solution is to find an effective way to involve the user community. There have been some trial along these lines, but so far they haven’t been very effective. In my prospect, the user community has spoken about ROR, loudly enough to get the attention of the other major search engines, which have intentionally pushed those pages lower in their results. I think they have acted responsibly in doing this; so far, Google has not. I sympathize with the problem you face, though. It’s a pregnant one. -S

Using cost-effective legal methods and techniques we can efficaciously relieve clients: Remove information from consumer complaint sites like Ripoffreport.com, PissedConsumer.com, and Complaintsboard.com Remove survey from proportion websites like Yelp.com, Tripadvisor.com Amazon.com, and Avvo.com Remove websites that are selling counter-fit products and infringing on intellectual property rights (trademark, copyrights, and trade dress) Remove embarrassing pictures and photographs from social networking sites, porn place, and mug shot websites Remove posts and other information from relationship infidelity websites like Cheaterland.com, Playerblock.com, and Reportyourex.com Remove damaging and falsely information from blogs, comments, and message boards, and other forums Remove unwanted significant from smear and gossip sites like thedirty.com Remove confidential or proprietary information put online without authorization, permission, or obtained illegally Remove private and movable information from online people databases Remove fake outline on professional and social networking websites Remove false and damaging retrospect on standard websites Remove illegal and unwanted content from pry into engine indices

If your daughterkin was under 18 at the time of the mugshot, you might get the company to remove without any money. Tell them she is a minor and ask them to stage the post. Or… ask them “how much” and beg for a discount … they are equitable extortionists who want their money. Unfortunately, another may show up once you pay off one of them. While it seems difficult to prove, I think they are likely owned by same parties or work together. Send a complaint of tribute to cybercrime, fbi, cia, governor, president, local police, state police, bbb, file a rip off report on them and anything else which causes them pain.

 

IF YOU HAVE A GOOGLE POST which you want down, you have to go to the source who has it posted. If you can’t get this completed, you have to file a suit against the person who posted it. If you can’t manifest this, you have to subpoena the website who has it published for the internet providers ip address, then the provider (probably ATT). Once you can prove who divulge it, see if they will request it being removed over being chase for defamation. If not, defile a suit against them for defamation and write up an order of removal for the judge to sign. Word it such that it does not instruct Google or another engine to interval, but just say “the posting it to be removed” – if you word the order such that id l an steam engine to do this, they will ignore it. If the poster did it with a hidden identity, you can try to ask “john and jane doe” with public notices (will have to go before referee to get permission to make public notice).. but this may not work. What is mental is if someone will respond to your public notice ie: sends a letter to the judge saying “screw you guys, I wont show and I can say what I want. I live out of the country and I don’t care”… something inclination that. I did this myself and had to do track and error for about two donkey’s years. Google finally removed the post, but put something at the bottom saying “this personify has had something remote, see this by clicking here”… I still have not got Bing/Yahoo (same sources) to remove, but am in process trying. If you pay Ripoff, they may redact some of what is posted and/or make it more favorable and this is less expensive than trying to hire an attorney. There is a active group trying to get Ripoff shut down and/or get them to remove false stuff. google them and help them/ask for help. They are very cool and helpful.

(This is just a post from my personal perspective, but I hope it’s helpful.) Every few weeks or so, someone contactor me and says “Hey Matt, there’s page out on the web about me that I really assume’t like. Is there any way to stage it from Google’s index?” People don’t usually say it copy that. More likely, they say “There’s this one making crazy claims about me on the web, and the stuff they proof is just off-the-wall. Can Google remove this crazy person’s page?” Or “Everybody knows that this crazy person is posting untruth and twisting people’s words. Is there anything you can do helter-skelter it?” I’ve responded to this so many times that I thought I’d inscribe up a conclude response. Now when people ask me some form of this question, I can just point them to this blog suborned. So here’s the sort of reply that I would normally pitch back: Unfortunately there’s not much I can do. The page you pointed out is not spam, and pretty much the only removals (at least in the U.S., which is what I know about) that we do for legal reasons are if a court orders us. We typically say that if person A doesn’t like a webpage B, only destroy page B out of Google’s search results doesn’t do any fit because webpage B is still there (e.g. it can be found by going to it openly or through other search engines). In that sense, the presence of that page in Google’s forefinger is honest reflecting the fact that the page exists on the wider web. The best actions for you from our perspective can be one of a couple preference.

 

Either contact whoever put up webpage B and convince them to modify or to take the page down. Or if the page is doing something against the law, get a court to agree with you and force webpage B to be removed or changed. We oh really don’t penury to be taking sides in a he-said/she-said dispute, so that’s why we typically say “Get the page fixed, changed, or removed on the web and then Google will update our teacher with those changes the next time that we crawl that page.” Our policies outside the U.S. might be different; I’m not as familiar with how legal stuff works outside the U.S. There you have it. People usually aren’t happy to hear that retort, but I hope they can understand the reasoning behind it. If you were creating your own search electrical engine, I also anticipation that you’d come to pretty much the same decision. The official documentation page on how to remove a page from Google’s search proceed says essentially the same thing, but I scarceness to give a brief more context.

Matt, perhaps Google could make it easier to find out *how* to remove content, particularly for not-as-web-savvy users? Right now, if you want to remove content, you have to go from: Google’s Home Page —> About Google —> Contact Us —> Webpage Removal Tool. That’s three web pages deep in Google, and that’s not even counting the number of pages you have to go through to truthfully move the content. It’s also not that easy to find and took some venatorial on my part. Logically, I’d put it in the “Help” section of Google as well. Perhaps a link to removing information could be promoted to the “About Google” page? (Obviously I don’t expect you to put a big impudent kermes link on Google’s abode side.)

Let’s proof that someone wrote a really unflattering blog post about you and now it’s showing up in Google’s search event whenever someone try for your name.  Naturally, you want it taken down from Google.  Here’s the important property:  Google is not the source of that post; it’s merely letting that place be found more easily.  The post is truthfully hosted on the blog, which might be WordPress, Posterous, Tumblr, or another popular blogging site. Google does not have the file, nor can it delete the file.

Kelly Lincoln March 7, 2009 at 1:05 pm Is that why you will not remove a traductory posting from google groups? To be clear, the posting is defamatory. to call defamation a “free mention” issue or tell met to ask the one who posted it under my boyfriends name to remove it, is bs.

Court Ordered Removal – Search Engine De-Indexing Service ​ Most websites and major hunt engines, including Google, Bing, and Yahoo! have polices that they will voluntarily remove content from webpages and search results if given a valid court order declaring that content is defamatory. How Does Court Ordered Removal Work? Getting a court order demand filing a lawsuit. There are many important considerations to take in to account when filing a lawsuit. Only a licensed attorney experienced in the area of Internet defamation can properly advise as to the risks, costs, and other considerations. If a valid compliment order is obtained that declares that certain appease is defamatory or should otherwise be removed, that order can then be presented to search engines and websites who will in turn typically remove the content spontaneously.

Is that why you will not remove a defamatory posting from google groups? To be clear, the posting is scandalous. to call detraction a “unreserved speech” issue or tell met to ask the person who posted it under my boyfriends name to stage it, is bs.

And proper because someone says something you don’t like doesn’t make that recital defamatory.  Defamation is a defined legal term with a very specific meaning. It’s also balanced against free oration rights.  If you got food poisoning at a restaurant, you have the right to post a bad review of that restaurant on Yelp.  The occupant may not like it, but you can say it if it’s true, and the public has an interest in knowing about a place that may make them sick.  That deleterious review is not defamatory.  However, if you posted that the pub owner is a pedophile upright to get back at him for spending the night vomiting, that most likely is scandalous.

It’s frustration that you need a court method declaring something as calumniatory, but without that rule, it’d be impossible for websites and hosting companies to handle thousands of defamation claims.  If you look at Blogger’s Terms of Use and Content Policy, for example, you’ll see that they do not list defamation as a violation.  Furthermore, Google states that they “do not remove allegedly calumnious content from or any other U.S. act com domains.”

What you should always request is a full deletion of the defaming statements. The article, blog post, tweet, or status update should be fully deleted. That is the only guaranteed way to avoid it appearance up in Google. If they’re not willing to delete it completely, then the next best solution is for it to be completely redacted of any defamatory statements. They should diversify the title of the post, removal your name from the hed, and make sure that anyone reading the footboy quickly understands that the author made a mistake. If you can also get them to add a “noindex” join to the HTML, then that will enlighten Google not to show the page in its search results.