Honestly, this kind of automated banning with no appeals process is a huge problem. I don't usually opt for the government to step in - but giving Google the power to essentially take away hard-earned money with no recourse is reprehensible.
Banning an individual from a service without clear proof that they committed or colluded to do fraud or otherwise malicious behavior -should- be illegal. And when you ban that individual, you should be responsible to tell them why and be willing to defend yourself in court.
This would, I suspect, rather than cause a large amount of litigation, cause Google to reform from a banning mentality to a permissive one. There will be individuals who try to abuse it, the same way SEO does for Google Search, but Google could easily route around this issue if given a reason to do so.
I could say similar things about other services that employ automated banning/freezing that's way too aggressive with no recourse: Paypal is a good example. It's wrong, and needs to be fixed.
> Banning an individual from a service without clear proof that they committed or colluded to do fraud or otherwise malicious behavior -should- be illegal.
I disagree. It's Google's service, Google has a right to decide who gets to use the service. They are under no obligation to make their banning process transparent. It's not illegal to kick someone out of a store you own (unless you're systematically refusing to serve certain types of people), so the same should be true here.
Also, making the automated banning system transparent essentially teaches people how to circumvent the system. This is why games companies so jealously defend their anti-cheat systems, if word got out on how they worked they would be done for.
I do agree that it's unacceptable to withhold earned or paid money as a result of the ban. If you're an advertiser, you should get a refund, if you're a site/app administrator, you should be paid any non-fraudulent earnings up to the time of the ban.
Kicking people out of a store is a really poor analogy. AdSense is a business relationship (governed by contract terms) between two professionals, that may operate over the course of months or years or even decades. During this time one party offers services (displaying ads) in exchange for monetary compensation from the other party, under established rules.
Arbitrarily terminating an account immediately before the payout date - after services have already been rendered - without any recourse or information is not 'kicking someone out of a store you own', it's fraud. Plain and simple. Companies like Google and PayPal mistreat and defraud customers like this because they know they can get away with it - they're too huge and well-lawyered to ever get punished for breaking the law.
Banning an individual from a service without clear proof that they committed or colluded to do fraud or otherwise malicious behavior -should- be illegal. And when you ban that individual, you should be responsible to tell them why and be willing to defend yourself in court.
This would, I suspect, rather than cause a large amount of litigation, cause Google to reform from a banning mentality to a permissive one. There will be individuals who try to abuse it, the same way SEO does for Google Search, but Google could easily route around this issue if given a reason to do so.
I could say similar things about other services that employ automated banning/freezing that's way too aggressive with no recourse: Paypal is a good example. It's wrong, and needs to be fixed.