Google Is Fined Upwards Of $500 Million For Rogue Drug Ads

TheLostBoys

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
4,315
Location
East Coast
Internet search giant Google is bracing for a fine that could top $500 million, after a federal probe of illegal online pharmacy ads placed on the website over the past three years, CNN has confirmed.

Law enforcement sources tell CNN that federal prosecutors in Rhode Island, along with undercover agents from the Food and Drug Administration, are heading up a massive investigation aimed at showing Google knowingly took advertising money from websites selling highly addictive drugs without a legitimate prescription.
A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Providence told CNN he could "neither confirm nor deny" reports of the probe, and Google declined comment "since this is a legal matter."

But in early May, Google filed a notice with the Securities and Exchange Commission saying it was setting aside $500 million to potentially resolve a case with the Department of Justice. In its filing, Google stated only that the matter involved "the use of Google advertising by certain advertisers."

If a fine of $500 million or higher is in fact imposed on Google, legal experts say it would be the largest such penalty in U.S. history.

A recent study by doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital and the University of Southern California showed a significant expansion in treatment for prescription drug abuse from 2000 to 2007. During those years, the study showed, emergency room admissions for prescription drug abuse rose from 100,000 to 200,000. The study showed states with the greatest expansion of high-speed internet access also had the largest increase in admissions for treatment of prescription drug abuse.

"There's all sorts of drugs one can purchase illegally over the Internet," one of the study's co-authors, Dr. Anupam Jena, told CNN. "So there's narcotics, like OxyContin and Percocet. And there's stimulant medications, sometimes used to treat ADHD -- attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. There are also ... anti-anxiety medications like Ambien or Ativan that people routinely use for the correct indications, but sometimes can be abused."

Furthermore, state regulators and watchdog groups say they have been warning Google and other search engines for years that online pharmacies have been allowed to operate without adequate supervision.

Joseph Califano, the president and founder of Columbia University's National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, warned Google CEO Eric Schmidt of the problem in a 2008 letter. Califano, a former aide to President Lyndon Johnson and a Cabinet secretary under Jimmy Carter, told Schmidt that his research had found "prominent displays of ads for rogue internet pharmacies in a Google search for controlled drugs."

"This suggests that Google is profiting from advertisements for illegal sales of controlled prescription drugs online," Califano wrote. The company never responded, he said.

"I asked him, 'Please, you have to look at what's going on. Why are we having such an explosion of prescription drug abuse among teenagers and kids?'" Califano, now 80, told CNN. "Well, where do they get them?"

Califano warned that illegal online pharmacies are a pipeline for children who want to obtain drugs, and said Google "can do something about this that nobody else can do."

CNN has been breaking news on this story of illegal online drug purchases for several years. In 2008, not long before Califano sent his letter to Google, CNN correspondent Drew Griffin was able to purchase the potentially addictive drug Percocet without seeing or talking to a doctor. He ordered the drug online and within a day, the pills were at the doorstep of his home, the prescription signed by a doctor in Tennessee he had never seen or met.

For Califano, a longtime Washington insider, the ease and availability of online drugs is "a crime."

"To me, it's an example of putting profits over people," he said. "That's what we're talking about here. And it's bad, really bad, because we're talking about kids."



http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/22/google.drug.ads/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
 
lol what a stupid fine

first shot i have at the article is the idea that most kids can safely order drugs from online pharmacies without parental knowledge. bs! and i dont know about their prices but ive learned you usually pay some kind of premium for the convenience of illegal drugs online (ex Silk Road). i could be very wrong but ads ive seen have been ridiculously overpriced, feel free to debunk my theory cuz its late and ive done no real research

if anything tho google shouldnt be punished for this, its silly. why dont they go after wholesale walnut suppliers when kids choke and die on those. or for the psychological damage porn causes to young children, the list goes on.
 
let's outlaw everything that poses a risk to kids. Alcohol and cigarettes immediately outlawed. Motor vehicles outlawed for sure. Large dogs--gone. Multi-story buildings that children can fall from: razed to the ground. Trees down. Pools, lakes and rivers boiled dry. Don't stop. Small objects that can be choked on: from now on, every object must be larger than a tennis ball.

The sun: ban the motherfucking sun!
 
^It is, that's definitely an error in the article. Its pharmacologically similar to benzodiazepines, though, and is recreational at certain doses/roas.
 
The sun: ban the motherfucking sun!

That Motherf***ing sun, is CARCINOGENIC!


In Commercial Law terms, Google faces a big one here.
The are a world leader in the ability to find and filter websites.
This "error" will cost them %5 of a single year of ad revenue.

The Place that Google holds in E-Commerce will likely hold it in a good place to hold its share values.
But speculation is speculation and im far from a finance or economics pro.
 
Last edited:
Wait so, those adverts saying shit like 'CHEAP OXYCONTIN NO PRESCRIPTION!!1' aren't scams?!

wtf..
 
"I asked him, 'Please, you have to look at what's going on. Why are we having such an explosion of prescription drug abuse among teenagers and kids?'" Califano, now 80, told CNN. "Well, where do they get them?"
Family and friends, most likely. I'd like to see exactly what % of abused pharms come from online sources.



Seems to me like they're fining them that ridiculous amount just 'cause they know Google has the money. No different than a con-man targeting the rich...
 
Family and friends, most likely. I'd like to see exactly what % of abused pharms come from online sources.



Seems to me like they're fining them that ridiculous amount just 'cause they know Google has the money. No different than a con-man targeting the rich...



This is exactly whats going on, its pure b.s.
 
Yeah really guys...those online pharmacy prices look ridiculously expensive, I don't know how many kids have hundreds of dollars to drop on the drugs, and then have a way to scoop them from the mail without their parents finding out. Hunting through someone's medicine cabinet is a fuck of a lot easier...and cheaper.
 
People should reward Google for helping people easily identify which drugs they have so they can do them safely.

Google provides as much harm reduction as it does assistance sourcing drugs.
 
/facepalm
This is like when those retards sued ISOHunt for giving links to torrents, they don't host them, they just generate search results for them.
 
I can't see the proliferation of pharmacy ads causing skyrocketing teen addiction either. IME, if you even find a place selling opiods, the prices are at least 20/pill - making them a very expensive high teens can't afford.
 
Google Said to Reach $500 Million Settlement With Government


Regulators will announce Wednesday that Google will pay $500 million to settle government charges that it has shown illegal ads for online Canadian pharmacies in the United States.

The investigation was first revealed in May, when Google said in a government filing that it set aside $500 million for the potential settlement of a Department of Justice investigation into its advertising practices. The move decreased its quarterly profit by 22 percent.

At the time, government officials said the investigation concerned ads from online pharmacies that operate illegally by failing to require a prescription or selling counterfeit drugs. Google has said in the past that regulating these pharmacies on its site is a cat-and-mouse game, because when it introduces rules to prevent them from advertising, they find new ways to appear on Google.

Web sites are liable for ads on their sites from advertisers that break federal criminal law.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/24/google-reaches-500-million-settlement-with-government/
 
I don't care about Google, but the government obviously is motivated by money here.

Web sites are liable for ads on their sites from advertisers that break federal criminal law.

I'm pretty sure that implicates every internet company, what with the recent proliferation of ponzi schemes and mortgage fraud that plastered the internet with ads.
 
that last quote just makes me laugh so hard...putting profits over people huh..well what about all the alcohol adds, what about all the medication being recalled they dont care about the ppl get real, they just want the fuckin money....when is all these lies gonna catch up to these ppl, when are the we the ppl of the u.s. gonna stand up for what WE believe in and what WE want...last i knew the problem with kids doin pills didnt stem from them buying em online, i know a lot of ppl and of all of them i know one person who ever ordered shit online, most of the stuff is coming from dr.s in the U.S.
 
So google is doing something wrong? I don't see the big deal, they take money for advertising. They didn't commit any crimes, imo. 500 Million is outrageous and should be considered cruel/unusual punishment or whatever they call over the top punishment. At the same time, google is probably laughing their asses off considering how much money they pull in and I commend them cause maybe the government/dea is just jealous that google isn't in the hole in the trillions and people like google, unlike the U.S. gov.
 
Top