As a sole practitioner, or partner in a small law firm, you may struggle with the technology-related issues dealt with here at the James Attorney Digital Marketing Blog. This week we take a break from computer stuff in the SEO trends column to take a look at a number of legal matters that have arisen over the last week in the world of SEO.
Search Engine Journal has a particularly interesting article this week that speaks directly to lawyers with websites. This SEO round up will also touch on articles from Search Engine Roundtable and Search Engine Land.
This Search Engine Journal article was written by a lawyer who specializes in the law relating to the World Wide Web, so you should have no trouble understanding the words of your learned friend. The article specifically covers the law related to copyright protection on the Internet and explains actions that can be taken to protect your original site content through the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
Last week’s SEO trends review was based on news about the Bing search engine. The roundup featured an article on Bing’s Image Widget Tool. This is a snippet of code that can be included in a Web page and calls in an image gallery generated from a Bing search when activated. It seemed like a good idea. However, it has already got the search engine into hot water. Getty Images is suing Bing over the tool on the basis of copyright infringement.
It took just a few days following the filing of the Getty Images case for Bing to decide that discretion is the batter part of valor. They have disabled the tool for the time being, pending the outcome of the case. This is an annoying development for anyone who has already included the tool in their site because it will now result in an untidy error message displayed on the page in place of a slick gallery. Archive that page for now and reintegrate it once this case is settled.
This is a very interesting piece of legal news published in Search Engine Journal this week. Yelp was accused of manipulating reviews of small businesses on its site in order to empower its sales force. Aggressive sellers for the company explained to potential customers that the site would only allow negative reviews of that business unless they paid for advertising on the site. The case has been thrown out without reaching an examination of whether these allegations were true or not. The ruling concerns Yelp’s right to decide which reviews to post no matter what their selection criteria or motivation. This is bound to be an issue that will raise its head again given that reviews can make or break a business.