Privacy and Opt-Out

Many people are aware of the use of cookies for tracking purposes.  But that is old technology.  Many advertisers use more sophisticated techniques for targeting advertisements, such as tracking pixels or audience matching or audience matched advertising.

In Australia, some advertising systems allow consumers to opt-out of audience matching targeting.  This is not well-known or promoted.  To opt-out, go here.

Targeting Social Media Users

On Monday September 7, 2020, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) issued draft Guidelines 8/2020 on the targeting of social media users.

The Draft Guidelines have far-reaching implications for social media platforms, advertisers, and adtech companies, as they will result in a clarification of the roles and responsibilities of the key stakeholders, and establish rules for consent.

Article here.

Software Applications Hard to Patent in Australia

The decision today of the Full Court in Commissioner of Patents v Rokt  further clarifies the position in relation to whether a computer implemented method can be patentable in Australia.  

The decision follows a series of decisions considering similar issues, which each focus on whether particular software can be the subject of a patent.  In summary, the Full Court finds that the software in question in this case, which related to a method of presenting targeted advertising to a consumer, was not a patentable invention, as it was merely a method for using the well known and understood functions of a computer.

The decision reinforces the fact that a method which gets a computer to do something it has not done before is not patentable – to be patentable the method would have to enable the computer to do something which it was previously unable to do. 

The law of patentable subject matter in Australia is illogical and discriminates against inventors who implement their inventions in software.

See https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2020/2020fcafc0086

It is hard to control where your ads will appear online

Advertisers are leaving YouTube, because their advertisements are being placed in close proximity to hate speech and other offensive material.

See NY Times story, Perils of Online Ads

Google not responsible for contents of advertisements

The High Court of Australia decided today that Google is not responsible for the content of advertisements placed via its AdWords program.

A key reason was the following at [69]:

“That the display of sponsored links (together with organic search results) can be described as Google's response to a user's request for information does not render Google the maker, author, creator or originator of the information in a sponsored link. The technology which lies behind the display of a sponsored link merely assembles information provided by others for the purpose of displaying advertisements directed to users of the Google search engine in their capacity as consumers of products and services. In this sense, Google is not relevantly different from other intermediaries, such as newspaper publishers (whether in print or online) or broadcasters (whether radio, television or online), who publish, display or broadcast the advertisements of others.”

See:
Court Decision, Google Inc v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2013] HCA 1
SMH
Technology Spectator
KWM Bulletin

Do Not Track

THE campaign to defang the “Do Not Track” movement began late last month.

See:  NYT

Facebook Photo Removed

A business was found to have breached advertising standards in relation to a photo on Facebook.  See Smart Company

Week 2: The Law of Google

This class will look at Google's business models, and the legal issued raised.

Have a high level look at the following parts of the Google empire:

• Ten Things We Know To Be True
• Google Products
• Google Books
• AdWords and AdWords Help
• AdSense
• New Privacy Policy (and review material linked from this page)

Reading:

• Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Trading Post Australia [2011] FCA 1086 (22 September 2011), currently on appeal
• Financial Times:  Google Privacy Policy Gets Public Airing (2 March 2012)
• Click Fraud
• Advanced Click Fraud

Additional Reading if you have time:

• Official Google Blog
• Google's Inside Search
• 40 Changes for February 2012
• Google Watch Blog
• Prior Blog Posts Concerning Google
• Google's Guide to having your website indexed properly in Google search results

Hosted Domains

• Example
• Google Closing Down Hosted Domains
• Note

Google Search Results Misleading

"In the Statement of Claim, the applicant alleges that, in the period from at least early April 2011 to 21 June 2011, the first respondent established a process by which searches for the applicant’s website by reference to the words “Pacific Boating” on the internet using the Google search engine were diverted to websites controlled by or associated with the first respondent."

See Pacific Boating Group Pty Ltd v Freedom Boating Club Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 72 (8 February 2012)

Advertising Financial Products on the Internet

ASIC has today released RG 234, Advertising financial products and advice services: Good practice guidance, to assist promoters in complying with their legal obligations when advertising financial products and services. See the media release - 14 February 2012, for further information and related material.

It applies to advertising on the Internet, via Twitter and the like.  See section RG 234.115
and following.
What is interesting is that the Guidelines also apply to publishers (such as newspapers), Internet sites, and aggregators and comparison websites.  See Section E and RG234.164 and following.

"While the primary responsibility for advertising material rests with the organisation placing the advertisement, the publisher may also have some responsibility for the content of an advertisement."

Throwing the Book at Facebook

See this article in the Business Spectator.

"Companies and individuals are increasingly beginning to query why they should simply wear slanderous online comments that they wouldn't hesitate to take legal action against if it appeared on the printed page. From the heady early days when the internet was seen as a beast too wild to be tamed by the law, there is growing debate as to whether and how the web should be regulated.

In the past few weeks, we have seen a series of legal issues arise in relation to comments on the internet – particularly on Facebook.

In one case, $30,000 in damages was rewarded in response to defamatory comments by a man using various pseudonyms on a stock market forum. We have also seen an Indonesian man currently face jail time for insulting his music mentor on Facebook. ..."

See also - Facebook Ads article

Sports Website

A new sports website, run from Brisbane, looks interesting:
www.sportsvolcano.com