Because I’m a moron, I’m not following you. You did see that this post is from 14 years ago, right? Maybe you are calling me a moron because I didn’t anticipate foreign defamation rulings that were issued after this post? I’m feeling both moronic and confused right now.

What a moron you are.

Regarding the Kinderstart defamation claim:

Kinderstart, as one member of the class might have some slight difficulty proving that their PR=0 is the result of “manual intervention” since their site has not been completely censored. However, the thousands of sites that bave been banned (completely censored from Google’s search results by manual intervention) have no difficulty in proving it. Google admits to manual censoring. Google assigns banned sites a PR of zero. Therefore banned sites can prove defamation per the court’s description you cite. See http://www.searchenginehonesty.com/search_engine_censoring.html#defamation for more on this issue.

I would think that Google has the right to do what ever it wants within the law on their servers. And if you don’t like it go else where?”. After all Commerce has been around a bit longer than Google, and just because Google has been able to build a really popular “Mall” (to speak) it doesn’t mean that additional burden falls on Google.

I would think that you would have an almost impossible argument to make that any public domain falls on Google.

I don’t know what google did to bring our ranking to 0.

Visit a site http://www.organicspam.com and you will find all informations related to Google – its dark and black sides