Slashdot Mirror
Meta-tag Spam Declared Illegal in Germany
Philipp Lenssen writes "According to Heise.de, a German court ruled excessive use of meta-keywords in HTML unlawful. Meta-tag keywords may still be used if they are in strong relation to the page. The decision does not address more popular search engine spamming methods of today (as meta-keywords are ignored by Google, they are rarely used as core strategy for Search Engine Optimization)." <update> Thanks to Michael Mol for the translation to English pointer.
Just because a court rules it's illegal doesn't mean the court will/can enforce the ruling. Case in point:
1) Who is going to search every web page to find incorrect meta tags
2) Who is going to decide that a given page has incorrect meta-keyword information
3) Define strong relation to a web page
4) Define Excessive use of meta-keywords in HTML
5) What about servers across national lines
6) Does anyone really use meta-keywords other than spammers
And no I couldn't RTFM in German - as you can see, the babelfish translation is so eloquent and can someone translate the keyword information in the linked page to determine if it's using excessive meta information:
meta NAME="Keywords" CONTENT="Gericht: Suchmaschinen-Spamming per HTML-Metatags wettbewerbswidrig"
Court: Search machine Spamming by HTML Metatags competition-adversely
Manual-like listing of many hundred HTML Metatags without each contentwise connection to an InterNet side f?e to a manipulation of search machines and is competition adverse after. 1 of the law against the mean competition (UWG). That decided the regional court meal in a judgement from 26 May 2004 (Az. 44 0 166/03), ver?entlichten now. Kl?rin of the procedure was a rechtsf?ger trade association.
After the Ausf?ungen of the court f?t a such use from search words to the fact that the InterNet sides of the deplored ones when using search machines at one of the front places designated and accordingly by the users more h?iger frequented w?en. When using hundreds encyclopedia-like together to gereihten terms, which do not exhibit also by far Verst?nis connection to the goods and services offered on the sides, k?e it the operator any longer around do not go pr?ntieren its offer optimally. Rather lie? this only the conclusion too that thereby the technical Schw?en should be used by search machines, in order to provide with the search results a competition advantage.
This does not apply in opinion of the judges from meals however f?jede use of HTML Metatags. So m?e it a competitor accept, if a Website with search words am gef?t, in the broadest sense still in a connection for the performance of the operator stand. Same applies f?die use of names to erm?ichen Gesch?sbezeichnungen or marks, if this "component from on the InterNet side switched are advertising on the left of", in order the operator Gesch?e with advertising partner.
The decision of the LG meal extends the anyway v?ig non-uniform iurisdiction of German courts about HTML Metatags, with which it went so far particularly around the use of strange characteristics into the Metas, by a further problem field. A?liche decision for the use of irrelevant terms in Metatage had in the M? 2002 the LG D?eldorf met. The judgement had been waived however sp?r by the OLG D?eldorf. Whether against the decision from meals redresses are inserted, is not yet admits (Joerg Heidrich)/(tol/c't)
I've been dreading this for a loooooong time. The web can hardly improve, if we're starting to get the courts to police what can and can't be put inside HTML tags. I mean, I'm as pissed off as the next guy, when someone abuses meta-tags or any other mechanism in a way just to make them appear higher up in a search engine. But this is NOT the way to deal with it. Forcing people out of using Meta-Tags (and that in ONE country alone), will only make the whole issue of abusing the system move to something new - while the old issue doesn't improve (since it's still perfectly legal to screw up those tags in other countries; or do you think, a search engine would then start handling those tags differently depending on whether they're on a German webpage where they must not be abused, or whether there on a Chinese one, where they can be screwed around with at will?)
:-(
While HTML has been around for 10 years or so, I would still consider it a technology that hasn't settled yet. The whole web is still undergoing changes - shortcomings are (partially) being addressed, new things get added.
Getting the courts in at this stage can only stifle further innovation in this sector, because if it continues as it is, in the future we might have to consult legal departments to see whether any changes we might propose will find their acceptance in the ears of judges.
I would hope that the losing side will go into revision and get this whole thing overturned before HTML officially becomes the "HyperText Markup Law".
how many search engines actually use meta tags? altavista, google, teoma, yahoo and msn don't support it
As a small scale web developer I can attest to the fact that meta-tag 'spamming' can be very effective. Google may not respond, but other engines do. As soon as that happens, up goes your Google ranking.
Of course, I don't really consider it spamming to include variations, common misspellings, etc. etc., and any search engine worth its salt will ignore repeated words in a single meta tag.
As for Google - who knows how they do their rankings nowadays...
Read Pynchon.
First: Anchor tag illegal (requires license to link)
Second: Meta tag illegal
Next: HTML tag declared unconstutional
Since really relevant results aren't generally gained from reading meta tags, and search engines & indexers that analyse pages don't use them so much any more, it seems to be a bit like banning disk notchers for getting double the capacity out of single sided 5.25" disks. Sure you might gain some sales of 5.25" disks but... who really cares?
will they sue The Onion for managing to be the first result for a google search for the?
Can somebody ban the BLINK tag please? And pages full of CENTERed text?
Ñ'
As my German Physics teacher said constantly, and apparently the German court is saying as well - "let's be vague." >:)
While we're at it, I think it should be illegal to cook your eggs on your tinfoil hat.
The real path to male liberation
Babelfished: Court: Search machine Spamming by HTML Metatags manual-like listing of many hundred HTML Metatags without each contentwise connection to an InterNet side leads competition-adversely to a manipulation of search machines and is competition adverse after 1 of the law against the mean competition (UWG). That decided the regional court meal in a judgement from 26 May 2004 (Az. 44 0 166/03), published now. Plaintiff of the procedure was a legally responsible trade association. After the remarks of the court a such use of search words leads to the fact that the InterNet sides of the deplored ones were designated when using search machines at one of the front places and frequented accordingly by the users more frequently. When using hundreds encyclopedia-like together it cannot concern to gereihten terms, which do not exhibit also by far understanding connection to the goods and services offered on the sides, to the operator any longer to present its offer optimally. Rather this would permit only the conclusion that thereby the technical weaknesses should be used by search machines, in order to provide with the search results a competition advantage. This does not apply in opinion of the judges from meals however to each use of HTML Metatags. So it must accept a competitor, if a Website is filled with search words, in the broadest sense still in a connection for the performance of the operator to stand. Same applies to the use of names, business designations or marks, if these "Bestandteil of advertising Links" switched on the InterNet side; are, in order to make possible for the operator business with advertising partner. The decision of the LG meal extends the anyway completely non-uniform iurisdiction of German courts about HTML Metatags, with which it went so far particularly around the use of strange characteristics into the Metas, by a further problem field. A similar decision for the use of irrelevant terms in Metatage had met the LG Duesseldorf in March 2002. The judgement had been waived however later by the OLG Duesseldorf. Whether against the decision from meals redresses are inserted, is not well-known yet. (Joerg Heidrich)/ (tol/c't)
Why was this brought up into the courts anyways?
This is absolutely retarded. The solution against "keyword spammers" is better search engines obviously. If your search engine is going to be so simple and flawed so as to rely strictly on prevalence of a keyword (rather than say, also ranking by link popularity as does Google) then your search engine deserves to be exploited by the "spammers". I don't see why the courts need to get involved at all in such matters.
Perhaps it was the use of the word "spammers" that made the non-techs in the legal system think this had to do with EMAIL spam...???
Retarded Retarded Retarded Retarded Retarded Retarded Retarded Retarded Retarded... OOPS! Watch out Slashdot. The german HTML police will come after you now!
The last time I checked Germany never signed the Bill of Rights.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
It doesn't even matter whether meta tag spamming works, or whether the laws are enforceable. The idea that a government would try to regulate it is insane.
Since when are Internet users under an obligation to be relevant or consistent in anything they write? Sure, we can't infringe copyrights and we can't be libellous, but those are general laws that happen to apply to the Internet as well.
And when were search engines granted protections for their technical operational model, anyway? What's next? All pages must be valid HTML4.01 STRICT so that crawler parsers can run faster? Stupid stupid stupid.
As disappointed as I sometimes get about the USA being out of control in the world, "enlightened" governments like Germany or France or Canada seem to go out of their way to prove that if they had the global resources, they'd be just as bad or worse as the lone superpower.
(1) publishing what exactly they consider to be a single metatag keyword (e.g. a string of alphanumeric characters)
(2) publishing that they will only process the first, say, ten metatag keywords in a document.
(3) acting accordingly
A healthy competition would evolve. Other engines would follow suit. Problem solved. No lawyers needed.
Being well balanced is overrated. -- John Carmack
It's even restricting freedom of speech.
I think the court ruling has nothing to do with spam. The court ruling is based on the German 'law against dishonest competition' ('Gesetz gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb'). So basically it means that the court decided that if a company is trying to lure people to their website by extensively using meta tags which have absolutely nothing to do with their business, they are in violation of this law. IANAL, but I think among other things this law says that a company is not allowed to make false statements in advertisement etc. So saying (eg in an advertisement) that a product has some special property while it hasn't is not protected by free speech. Is it in the US?
to me, it sounds more like deceptive advertising.
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
The German constitution grants free speech rights to it's citizens - however it grants those solely to natural persons, i.e. not to companies. Consequently people can fill their own websites with as many nonsensical meta tags as they want - however company websites face the constraints described in the article. (The court ruling restricted itself specifically to commercial sites.)