The case against computer programmer Anthony Bradley began in March, 2004, when he arrived at Google’s offices with an offer to sell the company a program he had created called “Google Clique.”
Bradley told representatives from Google, who had alerted law enforcement about the meeting, that “Google Clique” was designed to generate false clicks on Google ads. According to Bradley’s sales pitch, Google could pay him approximately $150,000 not to release the program or face an online world where companies could use “Google Clique,” costing the search engine millions of dollars from false clicks.
When law enforcement officials listening to the meeting from the next room heard the alleged extortion plot, they arrested Bradley.
But the “slam dunk” extortion case, according to Business Week writer Ben Elgin, hit a snag late last month when prosecutors dropped the charges, refusing to give an explanation.
Bradley’s attorney, Jay Rorty also declined to explain why the case was suddenly dropped.
A Google spokesman said the decision to drop individual cases is a matter of prosecutorial discretion, but he added, the company continues to cooperate with law enforcement in many areas, including click fraud.
In Elgin’s piece, the Business Week writer questioned whether the about-face in the Bradley case stemmed from Google’s secrecy surrounding the issue of click fraud.
“There is little about Google's business that is more closely guarded than the issue of click fraud,” Elgin said. “Company officials say they take the issue seriously and have zero tolerance for fraudsters who generate bogus clicks on ads in order to profit. The search giant says it detects most fraudulent clicks before advertisers are ever billed and that industry concerns are overblown.”
Wayne State University law professor Peter Henning said a court proceeding against Bradley may have forced Google to open up its books on click fraud.
“You can't charge extortion unless you explain what you're being extorted over,” he said. “You have to show the economic harm being done.”
Google contends that less than 10 percent of its clicks are fraudulent, although the company won’t say how it detects or defines such clicks.
Industry estimates put the click fraud range at between 10 and 15 percent.
“By all appearances, Google faced a difficult dilemma,” Elgin said. “It could risk divulging information about its approach to click fraud and help make a case against Bradley, who faced a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, according to a Justice Department press release. Or, Google could keep its efforts to detect and quantify click fraud a secret, which could allow Bradley to go unpunished.”
