The Vanishing Click-Fraud Case

[typist]

Why was a seemingly slam-dunk case against an alleged click-fraudster who attempted to extort Google quietly dismissed?

A detective novelist might call it The Mystery of the Vanishing Click-Fraud Case.

It began on Mar. 10, 2004, when a computer programmer from Oak Park, Calif., named Michael Anthony Bradley arrived at Google's (GOOG) offices for a prearranged meeting with the company's engineers, according to a criminal indictment filed two years ago in the U.S. District Court in San Jose. Bradley, then 32, proceeded to demonstrate new software, dubbed "Google Clique," designed to generate false clicks on Google ads. Bradley claimed his program could force Google to pay millions of dollars on false clicks and threatened to release it to others unless Google paid him approximately $150,000, according to the indictment.

Law enforcement, tipped off earlier, taped the meeting from the room next door and soon arrested Bradley. It appeared Bradley would become the first person criminally prosecuted for charges related to click fraud, the Achilles heel of the Internet-advertising industry, which costs marketers as much as $1 billion a year (see BusinessWeek, 10/2/06, "Click Fraud").
Google Backs Down

But on Nov. 22, the U.S. Attorney's Office quietly dismissed charges against Bradley. The prosecutors, who had announced the arrest and indictment of Bradley in press releases, refused to discuss why they dropped the case. Defense attorney Jay Rorty declined to comment or make his client available. Attempts to reach Bradley weren't successful. A Google spokesman issued a vague statement: "We continue to work closely with law enforcement in many areas, including click fraud. Individual cases may or may not be pursued by law enforcement at their discretion."

Why did a seemingly strong criminal case simply vanish? A key culprit may have been Google's own unwillingness to cooperate with prosecutors, according to people familiar with the case:

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...eek+exclusives

[damion]

Perhaps he is now working for Google with a $150.000 per year salary
I mean if his software could truly do that then the smart thing to do is get such brainpower on your side instead of putting him in jail.

[Expirepro]

it's a good possibility that he may have been better working for them ....than in prision imo....They take someone with his talents and put it to work for them...they gain alot.

[Bender]

talents?
talents in what? blackmail?
most decent programmers can write a similar program, yet they don't ask money from google.

[Keyword Factory]

Interesting to note that Andrew Maclaughlin who was heavily involved in ICANN is now Google Chief Legal policy Analyst

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/mclaughlin.html