Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Jan 2012 22:45 UTC, submitted by bowkota
Thread beginning with comment 503444
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-06-24
So it seems that Google f*cked up on this one by trying to get the business owner confused about their relationship with Mocality. So, clear -1 for Google.
Now, on the other side (the whole IP "forensic" analysis), Mocality basically claims that Google has no right to use their directory to get business owners phone number... Well, Mocality is running a publicly-accessible directory, so Google employee can just browse it as everybody else and get phone number from there. Sure, Mocality TOS try to prevent this, but this seems like abusive TOS to me. The damn thing is public and they even have a sitemap for search engines to index them better... It's kind of like when the newspapers don't want to be indexed by Google News but want to appear in Google Search.
Not trying to defend Google here, they clearly screwed up badly. But that doesn't mean Mocality is 100% right either.