Google Lawsuit Against Online Pharmacies Details Adwords Violations

In Google’s law suit complaint filed September 21, 2010, online pharmacy advertisers violated the Terms and Conditions required for AdWords use and circumvented the automated monitoring systems.

Google named two domain names, www.4rx-online.com, which is no longer operating, and www.onlinedrpharmacy.com, which is still operational. Neither domain name appears in the VIPPS database. Google requires VIPPS verification as a prerequisite for AdWords engagement.

In addition, LegitScript, which uses pharmacy verification standards recognized by the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy identifies both pharmacies as “rogue pharmacies” and says each site, “intentionally or knowingly…1. violates, appears to violate, or encourages violation of Federal or state law or regulation; 2. does not adhere to accepted standards of medicine and/or pharmacy practice, including standards of safety; and/or 3. engages in fraudulent or deceptive business practices.”

In Google’s law suit complaint filed September 21, 2010, online pharmacy advertisers violated the Terms and Conditions required for AdWords use and circumvented the automated monitoring systems.

Google named two domain names, www.4rx-online.com, which is no longer operating, and www.onlinedrpharmacy.com, which is still operational. Neither domain name appears in the VIPPS database. Google requires VIPPS verification as a prerequisite for AdWords engagement.

In addition, LegitScript, which uses pharmacy verification standards recognized by the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy identifies both pharmacies as “rogue pharmacies” and says each site, “intentionally or knowingly…1. violates, appears to violate, or encourages violation of Federal or state law or regulation; 2. does not adhere to accepted standards of medicine and/or pharmacy practice, including standards of safety; and/or 3. engages in fraudulent or deceptive business practices.”

Google goes on to describe the methods of AdWord manipulations used by the defendants. Both named defendants used “keyword insertion” which is a method that allows the word in the user’s search query to appear automatically in their advertisements. Jackman, for example, circumvented Google’s monitoring software by using prescription drug name misspellings such as “sildennafil” instead of “Sildenafil” (a drug used to treat erectile dysfunction and pulmonary arterial hypertension). Although, Google’s software blocks thousands of prescription-drug-related terms, including misspellings, the defendants used even more creative misspellings to sidestep the detection systems.

Eventually the defendants’ violating advertisements were identified in “sweeps,” which are reviews of advertisements that have passed through the automated systems, and Google suspended their AdWords accounts. Google states that advertisers frequently create new accounts with false contact information to continue evading Google’s Terms and Conditions. Google has been forced to “implement systems to prevent, detect and take action” and has suffered costs of $75,000 to do so.