Blackhat isn't illegal but is it ethical or moral?

[Beverly]

There are no legal penalties such as jail time for doing Blackhat SEO unless it involves hacking, spam or theft of private property. But just because it's not illegal does that make it ethical or moral to do?

 

[Rick Ace]

Where did you get the idea that Blackhat SEO is ethical or even legal? In most cases, it is actually illegal.

Blackhat SEO really started out as a type of penetration technique. Most of it involved gaining access to networks without permission. The term was broadened to include the practice of finding loopholes in search engines to manipulate results. The latest view of "Backhat SEO" isn't close to what it used to be in previous years.

Generally, Blackhat SEO refers to obtaining higher search ranks through ways that are not supported by the search engine. Since many search engines have their own policies and terms of use that prohibit such manipulation, it is illegal in the form that you are using a service without obeying its policies and requirements.

 

[pandaa]

As far as I'm aware, a policy violation is way different than breaking an actual law. Just because I tell you that you need to only visit my website if you're wearing red socks, doesn't make it illegal for you to wear socks of another color. Sure, it's against my rules, but not illegal in any form. I highly doubt that any court would have a trial for blackhat SEO. It's way more unethical than illegal, if it can be considered that.

 

[P8I.com]

Generally, Blackhat SEO refers to obtaining higher search ranks through ways that are not supported by the search engine. Since many search engines have their own policies and terms of use that prohibit such manipulation, it is illegal in the form that you are using a service without obeying its policies and requirements.

Most blackhat SEO involves using techniques on your own website, or on another website within your niche, not Google Search itself. Doing something that violates their policy would simply result in you being banned/sandboxed from their service. Unless you're manipulating Google (etc.) sites themselves, then Google has no grounds to involve the law.

Buying ads, hidden text, random link exchanges, posting your same article multiple times with different wording, etc. None of that is illegal. Search engines by their very nature seek us out. It isn't a webmaster's obligation to insure that their website conforms to a search's policies.

 

[Rick Ace]

Most blackhat SEO involves using techniques on your own website, or on another website within your niche, not Google Search itself. Doing something that violates their policy would simply result in you being banned/sandboxed from their service. Unless you're manipulating Google (etc.) sites themselves, then Google has no grounds to involve the law.

As I've said the actual use of the phrase blackhat seo is definitely broader now. But if you are explicitly making changes on your site to manipulate results on Google, you border violating policies, and are probably subject to being banned by the search engine.

 

[VirusZero]

Violating one site's policies (unless in an gross fashion like hacking their server to gain credit card numbers) isn't illegal. But that doesn't make it right, nor should anyone attempt it.

Just because (some) blackhat techniques aren't expressly illegal doesn't mean companies won't/can't discourage their use and put practices into place for that purpose. Some of these techniques do cause problems, harm or issues for the company or it's users.

 

[Bizarrio]

Black hat SEO techniques are 100% illegal, that is why they are called "black hat".

 

[Rick Ace]

Violating one site's policies (unless in an gross fashion like hacking their server to gain credit card numbers) isn't illegal.

If you intend on using a service, it is your legal obligation to follow its policies.

Just because (some) blackhat techniques aren't expressly illegal doesn't mean companies won't/can't discourage their use and put practices into place for that purpose. Some of these techniques do cause problems, harm or issues for the company or it's users.

That's true. 🙂 And part of the confusion is due to the watering down of the meaning of blackhat seo.

 

[Jordan]

But if you are explicitly making changes on your site to manipulate results on Google, you border violating policies, and are probably subject to being banned by the search engine.

That don't make it illegal. Unless you are specifically hacking into websites, (Which btw is not black hat seo at all as some of you may think.. that is hacking. it is illegal) you should be fine. You can't get fines, you cant get jail time, and you cant get charged.

Mind you, it also depends on other things. If you are scamming, manipulating, ruining/tarnishing/slandering ones reputation in order to self benefit you may end up in some trouble.

Black hat SEO techniques are 100% illegal, that is why they are called "black hat".

That is not why its called black hat. And they are not illegal . *shrug*

There are no legal penalties such as jail time for doing Blackhat SEO unless it involves hacking, spam or theft of private property. But just because it's not illegal does that make it ethical or moral to do?

I have always said, any site that comes at least semi successful from only doing white hat, is far better and has far more bragging rights then any site that gets millions of views from black hat seo.

 

[Rick Ace]

That don't make it illegal. Unless you are specifically hacking into websites, (Which btw is not black hat seo at all as some of you may think.. that is hacking. it is illegal) you should be fine. You can't get fines, you cant get jail time, and you cant get charged.

Mind you, it also depends on other things. If you are scamming, manipulating, ruining/tarnishing/slandering ones reputation in order to self benefit you may end up in some trouble.

I used the word "border" with that in mind. If you knowingly manipulate your page rank or break the service's policies while retaining interest in using the service, then yes, it is in fact illegal. For example, if I placed a script on my site to manipulate results specifically on Google, it can arguably be deemed that you are intending on using Google's service, and are breaking their guidelines. This could very well be illegal. But most likely, you will just get banned from Google's services or a portion of them.

 

[P8I.com]

I used the word "border" with that in mind. If you knowingly manipulate your page rank or break the service's policies while retaining interest in using the service, then yes, it is in fact illegal. For example, if I placed a script on my site to manipulate results specifically on Google, it can arguably be deemed that you are intending on using Google's service, and are breaking their guidelines. This could very well be illegal. But most likely, you will just get banned from Google's services or a portion of them.

It'd only be illegal if somebody did what you mentioned earlier, and that is penetrate Google's systems somehow and directly manipulate their service. But as far as what you're doing on your own site (or others), Google really has no say or control over that other to ban you from their results. That would be dangerous and pretty absurd if webmasters were indeed subject to real world punishment over violating Google's policies.

 

[Rick Ace]

I used the word "border" with that in mind. If you knowingly manipulate your page rank or break the service's policies while retaining interest in using the service, then yes, it is in fact illegal. For example, if I placed a script on my site to manipulate results specifically on Google, it can arguably be deemed that you are intending on using Google's service, and are breaking their guidelines. This could very well be illegal. But most likely, you will just get banned from Google's services or a portion of them.

It'd only be illegal if somebody did what you mentioned earlier, and that is penetrate Google's systems somehow and directly manipulate their service. But as far as what you're doing on your own site (or others), Google really has no say or control over that other to ban you from their results. That would be dangerous and pretty absurd if webmasters were indeed subject to real world punishment over violating Google's policies.

You're still missing the point. If you made changes on your site to manipulate Google's results, with the intention of using Google's services, then you are a google user that has violated its policies. It's a grey area. But it's not exactly clean either. A few e-mails or posts for proof of your intentions could land you in a legal dead zone.

 

[P8I.com]

I used the word "border" with that in mind. If you knowingly manipulate your page rank or break the service's policies while retaining interest in using the service, then yes, it is in fact illegal. For example, if I placed a script on my site to manipulate results specifically on Google, it can arguably be deemed that you are intending on using Google's service, and are breaking their guidelines. This could very well be illegal. But most likely, you will just get banned from Google's services or a portion of them.

It'd only be illegal if somebody did what you mentioned earlier, and that is penetrate Google's systems somehow and directly manipulate their service. But as far as what you're doing on your own site (or others), Google really has no say or control over that other to ban you from their results. That would be dangerous and pretty absurd if webmasters were indeed subject to real world punishment over violating Google's policies.

You're still missing the point. If you made changes on your site to manipulate Google's results, with the intention of using Google's services, then you are a google user that has violated its policies. It's a grey area. But it's not exactly clean either. A few e-mails or posts for proof of your intentions could land you in a legal dead zone.

That's still not accurate. "using Google's services" All that entails is Google crawling your website, which is part of their own effort. Doing things to your site that exploits Google's algorithm (e.g. article spinning) doesn't make one a Google user. By that logic, every one is a Google user (at any moment they decide to crawl your page) unless you have code in the Robots.txt preventing them from indexing you. Lastly, nothing that black hats do (that I'm aware of) is necessarily inherant to Google. So you really can't even argue that a black hat is accepting Google policy by virtue of altering his site, because there's nothing saying it was done for Google.

 

[Rick Ace]

That's still not accurate. "using Google's services" All that entails is Google crawling your website, which is part of their own effort. Doing things to your site that exploits Google's algorithm (e.g. article spinning) doesn't make one a Google user. By that logic, every one is a Google user (at any moment they decide to crawl your page) unless you have code in the Robots.txt preventing them from indexing you. Lastly, nothing that black hats do (that I'm aware of) is necessarily inherant to Google. So you really can't even argue that a black hat is accepting Google policy by virtue of altering his site.

What you're talking about is circumstantial and might be something for a lawyer to explore. But the bottom line is that if Google can prove that you have intentions of using their services, while manipulating their search results for your site, you're in deep legal mess. We're talking about avoiding the grey area here, and not about the chances of winning or loses lawsuits.

 

[P8I.com]

Mind you, it also depends on other things. If you are scamming, manipulating, ruining/tarnishing/slandering ones reputation in order to self benefit you may end up in some trouble.

This is a good point to make. There are certain black hat techniques that can get you in legal trouble, and most of them are external. For instance, a major spamming campaigning could violate laws within your country/state. But that, of course, is entirely separate from Google itself.

-- 17 Oct 2013, 23:53 --

What you're talking about is circumstantial and might be something for a lawyer to explore. But the bottom line is that if Google can prove that you have intentions of using their services, while manipulating their search results for your site, you're in deep legal mess. We're talking about avoiding the grey area here, and not about the chances of winning or loses lawsuits.

It isn't circumstantial at all. There is no precedent for a Search Engine suing a person for the changes they made to their own website. The reason for this is that it would be totally nonsensical.

'you have intentions of using their service'

Again, Google is designed to seek out websites. It isn't a matter of the black hat using Google here, because none of the aformentioned techniques use Google in any way (It's the exact opposite). That's why this only results in a ban from Google, which all they legally are capable of doing.

And your logic would have to extend to any search engine on the web, from the ones with the highest amount of traffic to the completely unknown. Which would mean webmasters would have to abide by whatever's in their policy, no matter if it's realistic or sensible.

 

[Rick Ace]

And your logic

It's not about logic, and that's what you are missing. And by intentions, I mean that you've taken serious and clearly defined steps towards using the service you are manipulating.

There is no precedent because the costs and resources towards pursuing such a minimal case would be pointless. However, you can't claim an action is legal because any cases against it haven't been brought against it in the past. The lack of a precedent means nothing.

Let's be specific here. If you used a script on your website that specifically target's TheSearchEngine.Com, then you are approaching a legal grey area. If you sold that script to another individual, the other party can indeed sue you for the amount you requested in return of your services, based on the legal terms of your service. Thus, you cannot "pretend not to use the service" (which is what you are depending on).

Anyways. This argument is futile because we currently have no standard set for "blackhat seo". It's almost anything you want to call it at this point.

 

[P8I.com]

And your logic

It's not about logic, and that's what you are missing. And by intentions, I mean that you've taken serious and clearly defined steps towards using the service you are manipulating.

There is no precedent because the costs and resources towards pursuing such a minimal case would be pointless. However, you can't claim an action is legal because any cases against it haven't been brought against it in the past. The lack of a precedent means nothing.

Let's be specific here. If you used a script on your website that specifically target's TheSearchEngine.Com, then you are approaching a legal grey area. If you sold that script to another individual, the other party can indeed sue you for the amount you requested in return of your services, based on the legal terms of your service. Thus, you cannot "pretend not to use the service" (which is what you are depending on).

It wouldn't just be a minimal case, it would be a case with no legal basis whatsoever.

'you can't claim...'

I explained that it wasn't illegal because you're not agreeing to Google policy by virtue of making changes to your site. That's the crux of the argument. The fact that no one, not even a multi billion dollar company, has expressed your sentiments or tried to a sue is a sign that there isn't anything to it.

'that specifically target's'

Unless your script directly interferes with their code, then there hasn't been any violation made. Search Engine Optimization doesn't entail altering Google's server code or anything of the sort; never has. That would be in the territory of black hat hacking, which is entirely separate.

You should define what targeting a specific search engine actually involves. Article spinning, cloaked/hidden content, link farms, link exchanges, keyword stuffing, fake pages, duplicate content, etc. Those are black hat techniques. Spam (forums, blogs, social sites, email addresses, etc.) is another one and really the only one where there's a "grey area". It's a grey area, not because Google has the authority to sue over it, but because some states prohibit it in mass quantities. If you're black hat seo involves illegal activities, such as hacking, then yes, of course, it then becomes illegal.

 

[Rick Ace]

I explained that it wasn't illegal because you're not agreeing to Google policy by virtue of making changes to your site.

And I never stated that making changes to your site was the only factor involved.

If you use a script on your server to manipulate the SPECIFIC results of TheSearchEngine.Com, then you are clearly directing your intention at changing the results displayed at TheSearchEngine.Com.

I can understand why you're confused. Usually with "blackhat seo techniques" today, you're usually directing your attention at IP addresses. But if your script clearly goes with the company's name, and the purpose of that script is to manipulate results of that company, then yes, you are in legal trouble. The border is thin, and that's why I prefer to call it the legal grey area, as the only way to find out is for the argument to be made publicly.

And your understanding of blackhat hacking being a seperate entity undermines the actual origins of blackhat seo. I will quote myself.

This argument is futile because we currently have no standard set for "blackhat seo". It's almost anything you want to call it at this point.

And let's go back to the original statement before you try forging concepts.

Blackhat SEO really started out as a type of penetration technique. Most of it involved gaining access to networks without permission. The term was broadened to include the practice of finding loopholes in search engines to manipulate results. The latest view of "Backhat SEO" isn't close to what it used to be in previous years.

Generally, Blackhat SEO refers to obtaining higher search ranks through ways that are not supported by the search engine. Since many search engines have their own policies and terms of use that prohibit such manipulation, it is illegal in the form that you are using a service without obeying its policies and requirements.

Finally, I would conclude that your argument would only hold in a diluted blackhat seo environment. But ultimately, we are lacking a standard for "blackhat seo", and we're unable to make any conclusions about something that has no absolute meaning.

Edit: Since this conversation threatens to deviate from the course of this thread, I would like to suggest that we take it to a civilized discussion over the PM system. 🙂

 

[P8I.com]

And I never stated that making changes to your site was the only factor involved.

If you use a script on your server to manipulate the SPECIFIC results of TheSearchEngine.Com, then you are clearly directing your intention at changing the results displayed at TheSearchEngine.Com.

Exploiting a sites algorithm is not illegal unless theft or hacking is involved. That is the point you're missing. How exactly would you target a specific search site, anyhow? The above techniques I mentioned are applicable to just about all.

I can understand why you're confused. Usually with "blackhat seo techniques" today, you're usually directing your attention at IP addresses. But if your script clearly goes with the company's name, and the purpose of that script is to manipulate results of that company, then yes, you are in legal trouble. The border is thin, and that's why I prefer to call it the legal grey area, as the only way to find out is for the argument to be made publicly.

See above.

If you have a script that, let's say, magically places your site at the top of page 1, then that is not black hat SEO. SEO = search engine optimization. Presumably, you wouldn't have actually done anything involving optimizing, you instead manipulated Google code somehow. That's very different.

 

[Rick Ace]

The word optimizing isn't going to save anyone. The words optimizing or even efficiency do not suggest that an action is legal. 😛

What really saves most people is that IP address ranges are targeted and not a specific company. But if you were to target a specific company, it could land you in trouble.

This is a grey area since there are little to no defined elements. There is no standard for "blackhat seo", so you can claim it to be anything you'd like it to be.