http://www.flickr.com/photos/criminalintent/440693384/

having recently confronted a band of cretins from Ask.com handing out
anti-google badges and leaflets in my shop doorway,  Ask.com have
started to run an adword campaign which states

(FindSilverstall.
Search Silverstall
www.Ask.com

So they are now paying Google through adwords to tell people to search
for our business in Ask.com and not search for it through Google.
Using the internet in this way to conduct a search engine war to me is
as acceptable forum, however employing heavy handed thugs to stop
customers coming into shop is taking the fight out of the ring and
onto the streets. Luckily we are more than capable of looking after
ourselves and the thugs fled with a few bruises however not every shop
has our weaponry and this tactic of using brutal physical force to
promote a search engine is reminiscent of Hitler using force to burn
all the books etc.
So for anyone taken in by the Ask campaign think twice about the
shopkeepers or the cafe owners who are targeted by these roaming gangs
of thugs.

That's just crazy. Are you sure Ask is running those Adwords? Have you
complained to Google/Adwords? It isn't even in English...

(looking around a bit)

I think I know what it is ... someone is scraping the web for long
tail keywords to use for Ask's partner program:

"It's simple. You place a link to Ask.com on your website and Ask.com
pays you commission when a bona fide user clicks on any Ask.com Search
Box or Ask.com Link and reaches a reply page."
-- http://sp.uk.ask.com/en/docs/about/partners.shtml

The link is marked up with "siteid=41627712"
http://uk.ask.com/web?q=silverstall &qsrc=999 &l=dis &siteid=41627712

If you can trace that back to the site in question, you'll know who's
been doing it. If you search for that number, you'll find quite a lote
of referrers with it. The person behind it is getting money for each
time someone accesses one of those links. If he's bidding on your
name, he's likely earning more per click than he's bidding.

I couldn't sign up with the partner-program (it wouldn't accept any
password I chose :-)). Maybe you have more luck - or better yet, maybe
you can contact Ask and get them to drop that partner/affiliate.

John

Thanks once again John. Found this link http://www.information-revolution.org/?p=42#comments
To me it seems too much of a coincidence that this ad has started to
run at the same time as their aggressive marketing appears in our
doorways.
I have requested ask.com to explain both the adwords and the
aggressive intimidation. I'll let you know the outcome.
Asks.com know that the shop in question is the first retail doorway
outside a university with 25,000+ students. We have a long history of
fighting off fly posters and illegal street traders however we whilst
would expect aggravation from dodgy night-clubs and rave organisers we
do not expect this level of aggression from a company the size of
ask.com.

I managed to sign up -- I'll let you know what I get (should I get
anything; I do have a site that ranks in the top 10 for all sorts of
"ask jeeves" variations :-)).

I have a feeling that the Adwords campaign and the link-spamming
taking place are mostly from that affiliate / partner and not directly
from ask.com. However, I feel that by allowing affiliated links like
that, they're indirectly accepting that things like this will happen :-
(.

John

 www.Ask.com are using our company name on www.Google.com in an ad
that directs to www.Ask.com. When this ad is clicked on, it goes to
the www.Ask.com search engine where searches for the keyword
'silverstall' appear. The adword was evidently taken out by their
affiliate marketing company which is behind the recent 'information
revolution' corporate advertising masquerading as a social movement.
In our area it has totally backfired with the local students union,
who witnessed yesterdays fracas, warning students not to use 'ask'. We
have warned Ask that we will publish the security videos of yesterdays
harrassment on the net and i've a feeling that we will be left alone
from now on.
Thanks for your support John.

Here, we go again!!!

Abusing the English language to suite your own private agenda does not
promote communication at any level.

I can use many different words to describe people hired to pass out
flyers to the public in a shop.

But, certainly describing this nuisance as "heavy handed thugs" is not
one of them.

This morning one male and one female entered one of the shops, caused
a distraction whilst another male outside the shop daubed red paint
over the glass. We have good CCTV footage which the police will not
let us publish yet - although we are allowed to show this image
http://www.silverstall.com/images/nonstockphotos/vandalism.jpg

'heavy handed thugs' maybe this description was a bit off the mark as
they are more the anarchist type.

I still cannot believe a search engine would sink this low in order to
promote their campaign. There were hundreds of witnesses, who all now
associate the name ask.com with jackboot marketing. Whatever their
agenda it has failed.
My agenda its simply to protect staff, customers and property.
Negative publicity of this nature is not a good thing for any business
- even when your the innocent party.

Ve haff vayz off making yu zearch!!

I don't know about anyone else, but that painted window certainly
screams 'heavy handed' at me...

A whole new can of worms in the search engine wars. What's next? The
Yahoo kidnappings? MSN Drivebys?

Search engines aside for a moment though, from a shop owner's point of
view, they don't even need to be heavies to affect customer traffic to
your shop.
When I was in the computer centre back in the 90s, it didn't matter
whether they were BNP, the Salvation Army or a bunch of kids... if
they hung round the doorway, people got discouraged from coming in.

On Apr 4, 3:50 pm, silverstall wrote:

'Ve haff vayz off making yu zearch!!'
LOL -

Ask .com's statement:-
"Everyone knows that: A) you have to try a feature to really
understand it, and most people have been brainwashed that they don't
need to try another search engine's features and B) advertising
doesn't work anymore!! That's why we had to go underground."

The control of information using violent and physical oppression is
essentially the hallmarks of a fascist regime. Ask.com continue to fly-
post and illegally trash our streets, shops and cafes in a Hitler
style attempt to control the rights of internet users. The slick
lawyers are shunning liability away from Ask.com onto the poor idiots
taken in by their sick propaganda. Ask.com are inciting violence and
vandalism as a means of promoting their corporate image. They have
tarnished the image of not only themselves but the whole search engine
industry.

On Apr 4, 3:35 pm, IceGiant wrote:

Criminal behavior is a local matter for the police.

Telling lies about one of Google's competitors is actionable.  And,
that other search engine has every right to put that shop out of
business for publicly defaming their character.

On Apr 4, 3:35 pm, IceGiant wrote:

Criminal behavior is a local matter for the police.

Telling lies about one of Google's competitors is actionable.  And,
that other search engine has every right to put that shop out of
business for publicly defaming their character.

On Apr 4, 3:35 pm, IceGiant wrote:

Criminal behavior is a local matter for the police.

Telling lies about one of Google's competitors is actionable.  And,
that other search engine has every right to put that shop out of
business for publicly defaming their character.

'the poor idiots taken in by their sick propaganda'
for example NHP

http://www.internetmarketingmonitor.com/0724/askcoms-not-so-sneaky-ma...

I read how a cafe window was kicked in when they refused to allow
Ask.com posters being handed out so you are not alone Silverstall in
experiencing the atrocious behavior of a campaign that is going down
as one of the biggest marketing blunders of the year.

As for NHP do as the rest of us do and just ignore the racist troll.
His deluded mindset is the same as theirs - i.e. free increased
traffic if you create enough controversy. Well it simply does not work
which is why nhp's crappy site has crashed through the serps - because
people are intelligent enough to see through his feeble attempts at
creating controversy.

As for your window can't you sue them?

As for your window can't you sue them?

 I can't really say much on that topic at the moment suffice to say
yes it's a possibility.

This was an interesting comment left on their site :-
'advertising for a big company, whatever the strategy inhibits the
free spread of information by helping the rich to get their message
out their (i.e. from tube messages, TV ads etc.) in preference of the
independent smaller information outlets that cant afford such lavish
advertising - the hypocrisy is blatant I really hope no one above the
age of 13 buys into this crap.'

This ought to be extended to those with a mental age of over 13 in
order to exclude NHP and similar retards.

The irony is that right now we want to put our web-site on the back
burner for a few months whist we focus on manufacturing our products -
when we wanted publicity we never had any and now when we don't -
we're caught up right in the crossfire of a search-engine war.

(bummer, lost a long post; grrrr, google-groups)

uk.ask.com pays L(yeah, that strange symbol I don't have: GBP) 0.015
per click (about 3 US-cents) on a marked link. This means that the
Adwords ad would have to be less than that (per click) for them to
make a profit. That might be possible, depending on the quality score
(though personally I feel the quality of the ad is terrible; but it's
automated). In theory, they could bid up to 2 cents/click on the whole
dictionary (and all combinations, including brand names, etc) -- if a
user sees the (even worthless) ad and clicks on it, they'd make a
profit. Bidding on the whole dictionary does take a bit of work, but
it's certainly possible (using the Adwords API).

That also means that you could run Adwords on your company name for 3
cents or less, which might be something that you could look into --
you can control and test the ad-copy to find the optimal version, even
adjust it seasonally (or daily). You could use that information to
adjust the description and content on your website. It's a good
instrument for testing things like that + you'd drive the price for
the other guy above what he's willing to spend :-).

There are a few sites that use tagged ask.com ads as part of their
layout - for 3 cents/click it's not that bad (but not really good
either). One I ran into was miitube.co.uk - a site that copies YouTube
content.

For instance:
http://www.miitube.co.uk/ view.php?video_id=Q5naygQPOt4 (link split to
prevent indexing)

How about that -- use content from a Google website to promote Ask.com
(with an affiliate link even). Strange.

John

Wow thanks for that info John. The problem with own adword is firstly
i suspect whoever is behind all this will create multiple undectable
fraudulent clicks and secondly for us the minimum bid is a lot higher
presumably because Ask.com get a discount due to their size and usage.
Whoever it is still theft of our name whatever angle you look at from.
Whether or not it has an international trademark or just a Uk
trademark the copyright laws extend globally to most countries and in
particualr since all companies involved have been put on notice, the
infringement meter is currently ticking over. (as you know copyright
law is our speciality)

Of interest in the ask.com forum was this post:-

your campaign employs big issue vendors to 'distribute' your
promotional material. I have nothing against the homeless as they are
a vunerable sect of society. It is the fact that you are using that
vunerabilty which sickens me. They are misled and incited to cause
criminal damage in the name of corporate advertising. If they are
caught you deny responsibilty and they are hung out to dry when most
of them cannot defend themselves. Ask.com should be prosecuted - they
are scum.

posted by sherry - April 6th, 2007 at 10:01 am

The adwords are on Google UK so a UK trademark should be all that is
required. You should be able to go through Adwords to get them to
remove the ad in that case.

Here is a link on trademark registration for Google:
https://adwords.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=50007

Also, if your bid is much higher than the 1-2 cents then I assume that
they're paying more as well. I suppose that is a tiny comfort - for
every 3 cents they collect, they might be paying 10 :-). It's not
ask.com directly, it's an affiliate (someone who is just linking in
their name) - they will not get a discount for that.

I doubt that they're monitoring your specific case - they would have
used "english" ad-text in that case. I assume it's mostly automated,
just filled with a list of words / texts from the UK (including your
shop). If it's automated then you would also not have a problem with
them clicking on your ads, they probably wouldn't even notice.

Have you used Adwords? If so, you might have an account representative
that could help you as well.

John

hi John,

thanks for the advice. Google are pretty good at trademark
infringements and as you say they will if requested remove the ad.
They pick on a small business with a small adword cost and then profit
from redirecting users to Ask.com. the fact remains Ask.com are paying
them which in law makes Ask.com vicariously liable for whatever
infringement damages we can ultimately seek. I suspect its some dodgy
marketing company from India (our logs suggest its a possibility)
however  for the time being I can smile with the comfort that both
Ask.com and these losers are paying money to goggle to achieve what?
If it were the other way round and somebody was using the name of a
large company how long would they last before getting hit with a writ
for large infringement damages.

two more gems of comments on their web-site:-

'I am pissed off with having to remove stickers illegally stuck on my
premises. Ask.com deny any involvement however they have their name
all over the stickers. What kind of idiots do they take people for and
why a company of that size has to resort to the same tactics used to
promote car boot sales.

posted by Mirran - April 5th, 2007 at 7:47 pm'

'As a web developer I think this is a load of old tripe. Anything I
write and put on the internet is indexed and available for the world
to see should they feel the need on all decent search engines. I would
understand this a bit more If I lived in china perhaps.

Anyway more to the point, I would be most obliged if you would take
the billboard posters away from my street corner before I billboard
your office with crap!!!!

posted by Andy - March 15th, 2007 at 4:39 pm'

To prove how crap ask.com  are, when you search for 'ask.com
revolution campaign'  in ask.com you get this snippet 'I've confirmed
this is ask.com running this poor anonymous campaign.' (and even then
its only listed fourth or fifth.)

On Apr 5, 10:47 am, borris johnstone wrote:

These SEO Trolls, as usual, do NOT know what they are talking about.

Just because somebody passing out fliers engaged in criminal activity
does NOT in any shape way or form indicate that www.ask.com had any
connection whatsoever to it.

Publicly defaming www.ask.com is always actionable.

Why doesn't this clown own www.ask.com, if what he alleges is true?
Any lawyer worth their salt would sell their soul to get a big chunk
of www.ask.com.

I would say that www.ask.com is more likely to own the shop.  Than
vice versa.

Just my opinion, but I am always right.  SEO Trolls make it so easy to
be right all the time.  :)

I see somebody at the natural health mental institution left the cell
doors open again.

'Just because somebody passing out fliers engaged in criminal activity
does NOT in any shape way or form indicate that www.ask.com had any
connection whatsoever to it.'

Totally agree as i could plaster your window with British Airways
stickers but that does not mean british airways had any connection to
it.
However in circumstances where a group wearing Aks.com t-shirts
handing out ask.com badges coupled with a web-site that amongst other
things states  .. 'We want everyone to get involved and support
freedom of choice! Don't worry you don't all have to take to the
streets' or 'The Ask Revolution is beginning to take wing. Some of our
more adventurous and passionate 'revolutionistas' took it to the
streets this weekend to free people's minds from search stagnation -
creating quite a stir' together with strong images inciting graffiti,
then i think we are entitled to assume Ask.com had a connection to it
albeit maybe not directly but certainly as acomplices/incitors.

'I would say that www.ask.com is more likely to own the shop.  Than
vice versa.'

I think the reflection in the window of the surrounding topography and
neighbouring buidings, together with our logos on the various
jewellery dipslays, coupled with the fact we hold the full image from
which that image was cropped plus this page holds an image of the
window pre-vandalism http://www.silverstall.com/frequently_asked_questions_silver_jeweller...

Take a closer look at some of the comments on their site - they
include:-

'ask.com want to use brutal force and violence to force people into
using their search engine. Luckily people can see what a worhtless
bunch of criminals they really are. The supression of free speech by
this disgusting propganda is an affrontry to democracy. Anyone taken
in by this 'revolution' needs counselling.
posted by sindy - April 5th, 2007 at 1:46 pm'

'Since when has it been a democracy to kick in the glass of a cafe
window just because they refused your stupid posters. Ask.com will be
forever associated with Nazi thugs.
posted by abagail - April 4th, 2007 at 10:54 am'

Perhaps that last comment is what drew your attention to this thread.