Lawyers Sue SEO Firm for Violating Google Guidelines

Antics

Antics

New member
Mar 30, 2014
353
4
0
Philadelphia
"A law firm in Michigan, Seikaly & Stewart, is suing its former SEO provider — but not for a lack of ranking success. Rather the firm is getting sued for allegedly using “spammy” techniques violating Google’s guidelines. That comes via Eric Goldman.

The defendant Rainmaker Institute, which specializes in online marketing services for the legal profession, is accused knowingly violating Google SEO guidelines by building “link farms” on behalf of the plaintiff’s several legal domains...."

Lawyers Sue SEO firm For Violating Google Guidelines

How does someone go to law school and think this shit is going to fly as a fucking RICO case?

On the flip side if this precedent is set operating as a freelance SEO could become a lot less attractive, very quickly. If you 'build' links you're outside of the Google guidelines and if you don't build links you are being negligent in your duties to the client.
 


I have nothing to add about the lawsuit. People can - and do - sue for any reason.

But on a related note, Fairley - the guy who runs Rainmaker - is a great marketer. I've been on his list for a couple of years. He's aggressive, which complements the personality of his target audience (lawyers who want to promote themselves). He also pumps out content, which is fun to watch.
 
Is it really smart to sue an SEO? How long before their website is spammed with cheap forum and porn links? Additionally their admitting that their ranking isn't based off natural linking building. If they haven't been penalized already, they should be soon. It must of been a slow day for them
 
Yeah so almost all the internet marketers are violating google's rules .It's against Google's TOS to build /buy links which 95% of wf brethen do .This sucks.
 
Sour fucking grapes!

Expert analysis performed since the conclusion of the contract has shown that essentially no links were created for protectyourstudent.com and seikalystewart.com. Approximately 6720 links appear to have been created for Oaklandbusinesslawyers.com, but all the links with the exception of approximately 188 links, were worthless links built with link farming techniques and, in many cases, were not forwarding to the Plaintiff’s webpages at all. In approximately April 2012, Google stepped up enforcement of its policies against link building schemes, in part through the implementation of new programs and algorithms collectively known as the “Penguin” update.
The Penguin update made it even less likely that the link building schemes being utilized by the Defendants and THE RAINMAKER INSTITUTE would be of any value to its clients.
Upon information and belief, it quickly became even more apparent to the Defendants that their schemes would have no positive effect and might have a detrimental effect on the webpages in domain names owned by the Victim Firms; however, Defendants continued to take money for their worthless services, without disclosing that it knew that the alleged services would be of no value.
​
Click to expand...
 
RIP Local SEO

19?? - 2014

Just took on a gig like this too.

Having second thoughts...
 
Expert analysis performed since the conclusion of the contract has shown that essentially no links were created for protectyourstudent.com and seikalystewart.com. Approximately 6720 links appear to have been created for Oaklandbusinesslawyers.com, but all the links with the exception of approximately 188 links, were worthless links built with link farming techniques and, in many cases, were not forwarding to the Plaintiff’s webpages at all. In approximately April 2012, Google stepped up enforcement of its policies against link building schemes, in part through the implementation of new programs and algorithms collectively known as the “Penguin” update.
The Penguin update made it even less likely that the link building schemes being utilized by the Defendants and THE RAINMAKER INSTITUTE would be of any value to its clients.
Upon information and belief, it quickly became even more apparent to the Defendants that their schemes would have no positive effect and might have a detrimental effect on the webpages in domain names owned by the Victim Firms; however, Defendants continued to take money for their worthless services, without disclosing that it knew that the alleged services would be of no value.
Click to expand...

What a fine line, and it is glad I expose to my clients when I did SEO for them to the basic methodology that I used and then had them sign off on it.

It is hard to be sued when you have a signed authorization. Of course, anyone can sue for anything, but it is an easy win. And since violating Google's TOS is not a criminal activity, the authorization will stand up in court.
 
sublimeguy said:
Not sure anyone would take a lawyer on as a client, seems like a terrible idea.
Click to expand...
<3 Lawyers/law firms as clients. It is different to deal with a lawyer vs. a lot of other fields though.

medicalhumor said:
This. Lawyers are going to have a hard time finding anyone willing to provide any type of service. Fuck them
Click to expand...

Not sure if sarcasm or not. The legal marketing area is fucking huge, huge conferences, bigger budgets, etc.
 
Leo Flynn said:
Yeah so almost all the internet marketers are violating google's rules .It's against Google's TOS to build /buy links which 95% of wf brethen do .This sucks.
Click to expand...
Well, I'm under the impression that, for the most part, breaking Google's TOS is 100% legal. If that's the case it should take a lot of steam from the lawyer's suit.

I'd have to guess this is about bad blood more than anything else.

And let me add: there is no SEO client like a legal firm. They read everything. Every last thing that you give them.

Yes, we all should. But many of us don't. As a rule, lawyers do. Remember that and don't be sloppy or it will be re-rammed up your ass at the most inopportune moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom