News - Written by Renai LeMay on Thursday, September 22, 2011 16:01 - 2 Comments
Google beats ACCC in misleading ad case
news Google has won a lawsuit in which Australia’s national competition regulator had alleged the search giant wasn’t adequately distinguishing paid advertisements displayed by its search engine from ordinary ‘organic’ search results.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission filed the case in July 2007 in the Federal Court, alleging that Google had breached the Trade Practices Act by allowing advertisements placed by the Trading Post about car retailers in Newcastle to appear alongside results displayed by its search engine.
Among the outcomes the ACCC sought at the time were injunctions which would have restrained Google from publishing sponsored links representing organisations which did not exist — such as the Trading Post’s move to place advertisements for “Kloster Ford” and “Charlestown Toyota”, which were the names of car retailers in Newcastle. The regulator had stated at the time that it believed its action was the first of its type globally.
However, in a statement today regarding the outcome of the case today, the ACCC acknowledged a ruling by sitting Justice Nicholas that most people using Google’s search engine would have understood that the label “sponsored links” meant the offending links were advertisements. The Court did find that Trading Post, which had been responsible for the advertisements, had engaged in misleading conduct in doing so — but Google had not, as it had merely displayed the infinging ads without endorsing them.
Since the case was commenced, Google has taken a number of steps to rectify any misconception about its ads — such as changing the labelling of sponsored links to ‘Ads’ and releasing a new policy on the use of unrelated business names in the first line of text for advertisements. That policy was initially applied by Google in Australia and New Zealand, but then expanded in July 2010 globally.
“This case is important in relation to clarifying advertising practices in the internet age,” ACCC Chairman Rod Sims said in the regulator’s statement. “All businesses involved in placing advertisements on search engines must take care not to mislead or deceive consumers.” Nicholas reportedly ordered Trading Post to pay $28,000 of the ACCC’s court costs — but the ACCC has been ordered to pay Google’s costs.
Sounds like a victory for common sense. Most people these days understand that Google has normal links and paid advertisements in its search results — and they’re pretty clearly delineated. But what the Trading Post was doing appeared to be quite out of line.
Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments
More In Enterprise IT
- Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS
- Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles
- Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year
- WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades
- Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision
Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments
More In Telecommunications
- Telstra gets $150m for NBN FTTN trial
- How Australia got online 25 years ago
- Palmer pushes for minimalist NBN policy
- NBN debate heats up at IEEE conference
- Spirit deploys 200Mbps FTTB to Southbank
Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments
More In Industry
- ABC tech reporter founds micro-transactions startup
- Australia’s got ICT talent: So how do we make the most of it?
- ‘Thriving’ Aussie tech incubator scene a ‘mirage’
- Corporate highs: The US P-TECH model for schools in Australia?
- Facebook wants to hide its Australian earnings
Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments
More In Digital Rights
- “Rational debate” needed around surveillance
- Web blocking technically impossible: iiNet reminds Govt of undisputed fact
- We like e-readers – but library users are still borrowing books
- Coalition, Labor support new surveillance laws
- Anti-piracy laws will increase piracy, says Budde