Google sells links through its adsense program, and allows you to buy links through its adwords program.

Their business model doesn't allow these ads to pass pagerank, but their business model is not law.

A business may want to be paid for passing pagerank because it makes sense to them, and it is not spam.

In my opinion, it is on this issue that Google will eventually face an anti-trust problem.

Google's adwords and adsense program is not really analogous. Adsense and Adwords involve links displayed as ads. And they do not pass PageRank from the website displaying the ad to the web page linked to.

FindLaw's links, at least some of the one's I saw, are buried below the footer of a web page in what is widely described as spam links. One FindLaw Web page had 100 firms listed in tiny text that these 52 year old eyes could barely read. That's called spam links by people in the SEO and Internet business, and I have to believe by the SEO people at FindLaw.

The real issue is this. Did FindLaw know they were violating Google guidelines? In my opinion, there's little question they did. Second, did FindLaw know that their conduct could be penalized by Google, with the penalty being a substantial decrease in the value of the PageRank being passed to the law firm websites Find Law was selling to? Again, my opinion is they did. Third, did FindLaw sales people disclose to lawyers that what they were spending $12,000 on something that could become worth far less because what FindLaw was selling was considered spam links and in violation of Google guidelines and thus the value of what they were buying could be greatly discounted? Not that I know of. And four, has FindLaw come clean with the lawyers they sold these links to and refunded their money now that it appears those links may not be worth as much after FindLaw appears to have been penalized by Google? Not that I know of.

Every lawyer knows that there's an obligation of good faith and fair dealing in every contract. There's also the obligation to disclose any material fact which could effect the other party's decision to enter into the deal. In my opinion, FindLaw failed on both accounts.

I'm surprised that there's an absence of outrage as to what FindLaw did. Maybe that's a reflection of how far business standards have fallen since I became a lawyer. Maybe it's the total failure of the legal press to do their jobs of reporting on this issue so we have an informed legal profession. Maybe it's because lawyers serving in the role of a blogger, reporter, editor, or legal services provider, are afraid to say what they think for fear that it may adversely effect their business or that their conduct will be called into question.

I don't know. But I do feel FindLaw pulled the wool over lawyers' eyes on this one and people commenting on peripheral issues to what FindLaw did are letting FindLaw off the hook. That's a shame. And it's a sad reflection on our legal profession. Don't we still stand up for what is right?