The saying goes a license or contract has no teeth unless you enforce it.

I typically enforce my comment policy by simply deleting the comments, but I have a clause that specifically caters to SEO agencies spamming my comments whether for themselves or on behalf of clients.

100% Proof Is Impossible

All I have is an email address, IP address and the content of the comment that has been posted in a number of places, and based upon some basic checks, most sites are simply deleting the spam, whether it is in the form of comments or forum profiles.

The information would be easy to fake – current comment systems it is very easy to fake the original author.

A Comment From Positive Search Results?

This was probably a manual comment, because the guy “Joey” has a typo for “Webmaster” and a typo in the intended link location – if you are going to pay someone to build links for you, at least make sure they get your domain right, even if they are spamming.

Lets look at the content of the comment itself

Hi i am joey from California. Basically i am a programmer working for a web designing company. I am going to discuss about <a href="//positivesearchresults.com”" rel="nofollow">positive searches</a> and online reputation. Positive Internet Results - Take control of your <a href="//www." rel="nofollow">online reputation management</a>. Create positive search results for your name and company. Push down rip off reports and complaints. SEO experts for pushing your Keywords to the top of search engines. The <a href="//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media”" rel="nofollow">social media</a> is the network which is used for affiliate marketing management.

• The first anchor link missed the http, so is a broken link
• The link for Onine Reputation Management I have no idea what was meant to be there, but it isn’t a link now
• The social media link to Wikipedia is also missing the http

Whoever left these links is an idiot who shouldn’t be link building, or making it appear they are an idiot. I can’t rule out this was an attempt to discredit a competitor.

“Joey from California” lives in India

Looks like Joey has an authenticity problem.

Positive Search Results, Positive Searches & Positive Internet Searches

There are at least 3 domains that are being used as a front for the same company.

Names involved include Richard West, Joe Webb, Gene Burns, Kay Jordan

Many of those are fairly common names, even within a small niche such as SEO and internet marketing

I did a search on the names with SEO as an extra term such as ["Richard West" SEO] and didn’t find any results of note for Nevada or Colorado.
There are plenty of good SEOs that fly under the radar and good SEOs at large brand agencies such as Bruce Clay who wouldn’t be in the public eye, but I expected to find something.

This is stated on one of their many websites

Positive Searches is a proud member of the Better Business Bureau (BBB) and the Chamber of Commerce and is rated on Dun and Bradstreet (the leading business reporting service)

I did spend 10 minutes searching for evidence of being listed with the BBB with no success
Apparently they are “America’s leading Internet marketing, SEO and Reputation Management Firm”

Submitting poorly spun press releases that are almost unreadable, even if they include the name Danny Sullivan are not going to get you any positive press or recognition.
hxxp://www.free-press-release.com/news-search-engine-web-promotion-1280823199.html

Positive Search Results & Positive Searches – Complaints

I couldn’t find anything positive about this SEO company, but I did find complaints from one person in multiple locations – for a reputation management specialist making huge claims about performance, I expected complaints, but as I recently mentioned, bad news tends to fill a vaccum.

I couldn’t find any redeeming factors at all which might suggest that the comment was a fake – maybe a competitor trying to harm their reputation.

Positive Search Results & Positive Searches – Verdict

My personal opinion is they are a craphat SEO, Internet Marketing & Reputation Management Company that outsource their linkbuilding to incompetent comment spammers in India.

p.s. a Ceise & Desist will not get this post removed – factual errors will be corrected but I have undertaken sufficient due dilligence to have reached an honest personal opinion about a company spamming my comments.

Pending “reputation management disaster”

Here is what I received:-

This is the first page of the cease & desist.

3 potential jurisdictions though the primary business location of the lawyer’s client is almost certainly the UK & my blog is not set to target any particular regional audience within Google webmaster tools, and in fact hardly ranks in the UK as there is far more negative press from blogs & forums that do target the UK.
The lawyer has trouble distinguishing blogging terminology and differentiating between a “blog post” and the blog itself.

The issue seems to be:-

• Use of trademarks
• Infringing on intellectual property
• Use of copyright material

The name in question certainly wasn’t any kind of registered trademark at the time I wrote my post back in December 2009 – applications happened in March 2010. Trademarks exist from use rather than registration but their primary function is to prevent confusion in trade, not to prevent free speech.

I have searched United States Patent and Trademark Office TESS system, and it appears the US Trademark hasn’t been awarded yet as there is a bunch of information that wasn’t supplied in the original application, thus why a serial number was included (at least that is my understanding)

I have also searched the the UK Intellectual Property Office and a trademark was awarded 2nd July 2010 – that is a few days after this letter was drafted… but the postmark in the Fedex paperwork was 4th July… so the trademark was something they were obviously waiting for…

But trademark has absolutely nothing to do with the content I wrote. It was very clearly a thoroughly researched review & personal opinion. The letter was cleverly (sneakily?) worded suggesting a registered trademark in both territories, when at the time it was drafted their was neither.

Intellectual property becomes complicated…

I included a picture of a full beermat which was being used for marketing purposes. The beer mat included a photo of the gentleman/business who the lawyers represent. Why anyone would include their photo on a beer mat amazes me, because people use them to stub out cigarettes, as makeshift dart boards, to clear up vomit etc. They also get drawn on, just imagine how many times someone has added devils horns to the face on that very same beer mat.

As my review covered the advertising methods used by the person who has set the legal dogs on me, and the source was achnowledged with a followed link, I think I am covered under the UK concept of “Fair Dealing“.

But there were 2 photos I included:-

The first was the same photograph as used on the beermat, and used very frequently within marketing materials. I have similar mug shots out all over the internet – people pick them up, include them on blog posts etc. Lots of people use a similar photo for their avatar on social networking sites and they get syndicated all over the internet.
Plus I have never known a marketer who would require permission to use such a photo, especially on a post which was fairly neutral in tone (it wasn’t totally negative, in fact I have some respect for the guy).
In many ways in this current social media climate, such a photo is more a trademark in many cases than their actual name.
It is like a log… part of a brand, and when referring to that person/brand, especially on a social blotform such as a blog, use of such would be looked on as normal.

Can you seriously imagine not being ridiculed if you sent out a cease and desist because someone included your social media avatar within a blog post that links through to lots of your sites?

I also included a photo from the sales page of a conference held in the UK in 2009. It was being used in a marketing context thus wasn’t a private photo and I did link through to the sales page in question. It was a good photo and showed the subject of the review in a very positive light. My commentary about the conference in my mind was neutral. There are 2 types of internet marketing conferences… Solid content & pitch fests. I couldn’t comment on what kind of conference he held, but I have heard mixed reviews.

My use of these 2 photos is the only part of my original post that might be looked on as copyright infringement under “fair dealing” in the UK. I am not a lawyer, I think the claim is a little tenuous, and it would be interesting to contest that, but those photos have been removed from my post & I don’t intend to ever republish them.

Lets deal with the linking claims after this next cease & desist screenshot.

This lawyer is really struggling with web terminology – no wonder – cookie cutter legal website with 8 links pointing to it. Just the kind of firm I would love to be advising me on online reputation management. Mr Olin, a specialist would have told you this was going to backfire.
In fact most people involved with reputation management especially after the ePerks incident will probably be shocked by my tempered reaction.

“Furthermore you have linked your forums and blogs to other websites, forums & blogs that contain notably patently false statements that [name withheld] and his business practices are a scam and that hi marketing materials are fake and/or fraudulent, or insinuations of the same.”

It is quite possible that the lawyer didn’t actually read every word I wrote, or follow the links.

Most of the links were to [name withheld] owned web properties, his media on sites such as YouTube, and one very complimentary review.
I also linked to 2 other reviews from readers whose opinion I trust, which I believe were fair and balanced.

Absolutely none of the sites I linked to claimed [name removed] was in any way a scam. At times some of the comments weren’t very complimentary, people struggling to get refunds as how to get a refund wasn’t a simple process at the time, and thus people were thanking the writer for providing the information.

As such I dispute this claim 100%, but to be honest I should have updated my post in April 2010 when certain newsworthy events took place that did warrent further commentary.

7th April 2010 ASA Adjudication on [name withheld]

2 of 3 counts upheld

The ASA isn’t “The Law” in the UK – they manage the regulations and advertisers generally listen to them, because whilst they can’t impose fines or stick you in jail, some of the sanctions that can be imposed could make some forms of doing business, especially direct mail or buying ads in newspapers pretty uncomfortable, or unprofitable.

For a direct marketer to ignore the ASA ruling would be business seppuku.

The law that their regulations are based around is The Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations 2008 – SI (Statuary Instrument) 1276 of 2008 – that is the stick used by the Office of Fair Trading.

But I didn’t write anything even though I saw the news, and had already been provided copies of the adverts that were being mailed in November/December.

I can’t imagine that [name withheld] was unaware of the complaints well before the final decision date.

But it was just an ad, ads come before the ASA all the time, it is no big deal.. slap wrist, learn from this mistake.

But then the advert continued appearing in people’s mail boxes.

Someone mailing a misleading advert that the ASA have upheld a decision on is newsworthy.

So there were a number of blog posts complaining about it, and in my personal opinion that was well justified.

SPAM = Sites Positioned Above Me

So these blog posts seem to be disrupting the sales & conversion machine. Wise business people were searching for information about [name withheld] and discovering blog posts of people complaining about advertising practice.

That must have been a big stick stuck in the gears of an otherwise well oiled marketing machine.

What to do about it?

• Ignore it – everyone gets a bit of bad press once in a while and even I tend to admire people who push the limits and test things which might be thought acceptable in other markets
• Make it a learning experience – admit it, even make it a marketing point & lesson freely available. There is a lot to be learnt from the whole process and it can even help open up new traffic sources.
• Build links to positive articles – this is the classic reputation management option – find some positive articles about you and drive lots of links to them. Based upon the marketing materials of [name withheld] he has mentions in all kinds of national press, “As seen in” blah blah blah… the only problem is so far from all the claimed appearances I have only been able to find 2 very dated mentions. Not a lot for a reputation management specialist to work with. To be quite honest even my article might have been a suitable candidate assuming action had been taken to rectify a few of the isues I had found (however no action had been taken that I can find evidence of)
• Build lots of brand domains – this is a fairly poor option unless they really have a purpose in being in the SERPs – if they are obviously just properties owned by the same person full of duplicate marketing articles the average surfer looking for information to base a decision on is just going to dig deeper.
  This was one of the actions taken by [name withheld] – either his own initiative or someone he hired – idiots
• Build a social media presense – this is something different than just a brand domain because it could show a more human site to interested customers.. it helps if you update your Facebook once in a while, actually own your own name on Twitter etc.
  In this case facebook hasn’t been updated in ages, the Twitter account may have been run by an imposter, at the time of my post back in December it seemed it might be legitimate… though some of the content didn’t seem very typical of the overall marketing message. The Twitter account is now devoid of content.
• Create content – press releases, authority interviews, even some article marketing… do whatever you can to build content that can then have links pointed at them.
• Release a book – even a short one, even a ghost written one based upon a couple of your existing videos – tons of press even if it isn’t very original

So what does a leading authority on marketing who also teaches SEO do?

Yup – he hires a lawyer to send cease & desist notices to a bunch of bloggers who complained about his direct marketing tactics and the upheld decision by the ASA, and his continued mailing.

Someone involved in this is a marketing ignoramus – I don’t know who that is specifically as it is quite possibly [name withheld] isn’t the one pulling the strings on this.

Of course the saga isn’t over yet… whilst it seems lots of people have taken down their content, I think all of them are British and aren’t overly fond of unwarranted litigious tendancies, especially with the letters originating from the US.

Bad News Fills Vaccums

Bad news / Negative press tends to fill the gap in the SERPs a bit like a hydra. It can’t be killed with legal threats easily, especially when some of the coverage is probably justified.

My actions? I have removed the blog post in question, and deleted it from the one place I believe it was syndicated (automatically) – my facebook account.

As far as I am concerned just before my post I hadn’t heard of the guy, and I am quite prepared to impose permanent obscurity (which is what his lawyers seem to want) as far as my own web properties are concerned, assuming no legal action is taken against my readers… then it would be a case of taking legal consultation.

My reasons are fairly simple

I am in the middle of some marketing experiments, and I certainly wouldn’t want to upset my test data with a whole load of untargeted traffic, plus I wouldn’t want it looked on as trying to profit from a poor reputation management decision.

I don’t want the name of the person mentioned in the comments however there is something my readers can help me decide.

You see I haven’t redirected the old post to a new one yet so any potential visitors currently receive a 404 error.

I have narrowed it down to 3 options for the redirect

• To this post (name isn’t mentioned anywhere)
• To the ASA decision on advertising practice (stuffed with the guy’s name/trademark)
• To a popular Rick Astley video

Nothing preculdes any of those to rank on Google, even #1 in the UK for this guy’s name/trademark in the future, without any further action on my part.

As a niche marketer, considering the niche for promotion of various products, I thought I would take a closer look.

The Overview Approach

• Do you classify things like issuing press releases as SEO, PR or SERM?
• How much does it cost a VC and a company CEO to spend time engaging in comments on blog posts about a company, and is that SERM or something else such as a marketing activity engaging an audience?
• Are the creation of linkbait and viral marketing campaigns looked on as preventative SERM or marketing? They can certainly be a liability if they go wrong, but when they are successful, there is the opposite effect

In many ways Andy’s estimates could be on the low side, and Trackur, a tool Andy has created and actively markets could be a good solution to monitor your brand online.

The Forensic Approach

This is an industry which is just bubbling to the surface, how can we determine whether it is a viable niche to be involved with?

Google Trends

I would love to show you some graphs, but Google trends doesn’t have enough data for some of the primary keywords

Google Adwords Keywords Tool

If Online Reputaion Management or Search Engine Reputation Management is a market with money in it, then there should be some aggressive advertising in Google. Most of the people involved should be highly proficient in Adwords already as many of them offer Adwords management as a service as well.

There is certainly some growth, but a large proportion of the search volume might be companies offering this service checking out their competitors, and their own rankings in Google.

The Adwords keyword tool does highlight quite a wide range of related search terms, but nothing compared to SEO, SEM, PR etc.

Confusing Niche

I know companies where if I apply the time they spend on reputation management based upon my overview approach, their costs for a single company might be as much as $300,000, without allowing for whatever time or money they have spent on custom tool development to service at least in part their own need.
At the same time they have reduced marketing costs – controversy is free advertising, and as the saying goes, the biggest problem is if no one is talking about you.

Based upon that information alone, Andy’s estimate of the ORM or SERM market size I would think is conservative, but Adwords tells a different story.

There are Adwords bids, but nowhere near the competition I would have expected if firms are really making a huge amount of money in reputation management. Maybe they all have as much work as they can handle, or they gain enough visibility through other marketing channels not to even bother with Adwords on keyword terms which are showing buying intent.

Based upon the Adwords market, I would almost pass on the niche as being one which doesn’t have enough search volume and marketing spend to be one worth entering under normal circumstances.

But it is a fairly new niche market, with unrefined terminology – potential customers might not necessarily use obvious search terms, and business is mainly on a referral basis or with existing clients as an upsell.