Comments on: Google and Paid Links http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mwshead/2007/04/17/google-and-paid-links/ Musings of Mark Shead Fri, 13 Nov 2009 14:15:04 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2 hourly 1 By: Naho http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mwshead/2007/04/17/google-and-paid-links/comment-page-1/#comment-189 Naho Wed, 19 Sep 2007 20:32:57 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mwshead/2007/04/17/google-and-paid-links/#comment-189 Hi, I really don't understand this! Everyone will agree with me to say that paid link was around way before google &pagerank right? Secondo, how do we know how sponsored versus ''links'' are treated? I am going to give you a little example: Supposs I buy a link from..... My link is listing with the advertising, right under google advertising adds Is this legal or will Google consider this wrong? Thanks, <a href="http://www.positionnementsite.ca" title="Naho" rel="nofollow">Naho</a> Hi,

I really don’t understand this! Everyone will agree with me to say that paid link was around way before google &pagerank right?

Secondo, how do we know how sponsored versus ”links” are treated?

I am going to give you a little example: Supposs I buy a link from….. My link is listing with the advertising, right under google advertising adds

Is this legal or will Google consider this wrong?

Thanks,

Naho

]]> By: Shane http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mwshead/2007/04/17/google-and-paid-links/comment-page-1/#comment-14 Shane Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:29:46 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mwshead/2007/04/17/google-and-paid-links/#comment-14 I think this is just another broomstick in the wheel spokes of Googles competition. If a site owner has enough resources to buy a link and the publisher is willing to sell that site a link, then that's sort of a vote. It's a skewed vote because of the payment involved. But it's still a vote. If neither the advertiser nor the publisher deserves to be relevant, this'll all wash out over time. It might help stop large companies from buying their way into the SERPS by buying links, but it hurts small websites just as much. I just don't see any fundamentals with Google doing this other than to hit smaller advertising brokers. Some of which are very good monetizing options I think this is just another broomstick in the wheel spokes of Googles competition.

If a site owner has enough resources to buy a link and the publisher is willing to sell that site a link, then that’s sort of a vote. It’s a skewed vote because of the payment involved. But it’s still a vote.

If neither the advertiser nor the publisher deserves to be relevant, this’ll all wash out over time. It might help stop large companies from buying their way into the SERPS by buying links, but it hurts small websites just as much.

I just don’t see any fundamentals with Google doing this other than to hit smaller advertising brokers. Some of which are very good monetizing options

]]>