<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Click Fraud Settlement a Raw Deal?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-raw-deal.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-raw-deal.html</link>
	<description>Internet Marketing News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:00:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AussieWebmaster</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-raw-deal.html/comment-page-1#comment-335</link>
		<dc:creator>AussieWebmaster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2006 21:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost:8888/wp_import/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-a-raw-deal.htm#comment-335</guid>
		<description>Andreas I think you have that way wrong....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andreas I think you have that way wrong&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andreas Ramos</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-raw-deal.html/comment-page-1#comment-334</link>
		<dc:creator>Andreas Ramos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2006 22:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost:8888/wp_import/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-a-raw-deal.htm#comment-334</guid>
		<description>The article on your blog is seriously incorrect. Your numbers are factually wrong. I have the notice from Google. It is NOT 1/2 of one percent. If you have (for example) $100 in fraudulent clicks, you get credit for $100, which is applied to $200 in new advertising.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The article on your blog is seriously incorrect. Your numbers are factually wrong. I have the notice from Google. It is NOT 1/2 of one percent. If you have (for example) $100 in fraudulent clicks, you get credit for $100, which is applied to $200 in new advertising.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tyson Kirksey</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-raw-deal.html/comment-page-1#comment-333</link>
		<dc:creator>Tyson Kirksey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost:8888/wp_import/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-a-raw-deal.htm#comment-333</guid>
		<description>I definitely concur with my old friend Tony here, advertisers got screwed big time. Pressure should be put on Google to submit an &quot;opt-in&quot; as opposed to an opt-out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I definitely concur with my old friend Tony here, advertisers got screwed big time. Pressure should be put on Google to submit an &#8220;opt-in&#8221; as opposed to an opt-out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Wright</title>
		<link>http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-raw-deal.html/comment-page-1#comment-332</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Wright</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2006 01:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost:8888/wp_import/2006/04/google-click-fraud-settlement-a-raw-deal.htm#comment-332</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s exactly what I thought when I first saw the settlement. The lawyer got his fee. I&#039;ve met him - nice guy, but doesn&#039;t know that much about search. And doesn&#039;t realize how this could affect the future. $90 million is chump change compared to the actual damages out there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s exactly what I thought when I first saw the settlement. The lawyer got his fee. I&#8217;ve met him &#8211; nice guy, but doesn&#8217;t know that much about search. And doesn&#8217;t realize how this could affect the future. $90 million is chump change compared to the actual damages out there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

