Complaints about unfair tactics being used by competitors are certainly not uncommon. Black Hat SEO techniques do work and they are able to deliver great rankings. This leaves those of us who depend upon White Hat SEO feeling frustrated and angry. Fortunately, there is a solution in most cases as the strength of Black Hat SEO is also its greatest vulnerability.
A website which depends upon breaking the rules to achieve rankings is always risking the rules being applied to them. Not only does this result in them losing their unfair advantage, but it frequently leads to additional penalties which place them in a weaker position than they would otherwise have occupied.
As White Hat Webmasters we have three powerful weapons at our disposal:
It is in the interest of every search engine that Black Hat SEO is stopped. In a sense, they are playing on the same team as us as they have good reason to listen when we place our complaints. This can be done in many ways; some much more powerful than others.
The most important part of preparing a complaint to a search engine is identifying what your complaint is in clear and brief language. Vague accusations of 'Black Hat SEO' will not get you very far; whereas being able to identify paid links or deceptive cloaking will bring much better results.
There are two results of a complaint to a search engine. The first is that the search engine is likely to review the website about which you have complained, and depending upon how serious the problem is, take direct and immediate action. Whilst as webmasters we naturally hope for this kind of result, from the perspective of a search engine it is an inefficient means of dealing with the problem - instead they much prefer to use your complaints to adjust their algorithms so that all sites using that technique get hit and not just that one individually.
It goes without saying therefore that where there are multiple sites using the same technique, for example; all created by the same developer, it doesn't hurt to list them all in your report. Whilst they might well be in other sectors which you have no interest in, additional cases will help the search engine both to realise how serious the problem is and to build up sufficient cases to test their algorithm.
As a webmaster, one should not be disappointed if the only response you see from a complaint to a search engine is an automatic thanks message, and the site lives on for quite some time. Sometimes, the site will have had the technique discounted and still rank based upon other merit or techniques; other times you will have to wait until the search engine undertakes a major update; finally you might even be wrong and the technique used might not be viewed as a problem by the search engine to which you have issued the complaint.
Most black hat techniques only break the rules set by search engines, however some actually break the law. Where they do, you have an advantage over law-breakers in most other sectors in that there are multiple entities against which you can take your complaints; from the data center providing their connectivity, through the hosting company providing their service and all the way to the black hat website itself. Typically these will be spread across the globe, giving you a selection of local laws to consider.
Here are a few of the more common areas upon which a complaint can be based:
Taking the complaint up one level from the final webmaster can frequently bring fast results. A hosting company has very little interest in the profitability of the websites they host and a large interest in not becoming involved in legal proceedings. In many jurisdictions a hosting company may absolve itself of liability if it takes action to promptly remove copyright infringements of its customers; failing which it can be considered as a publisher of the infringing content.
Do remember that you can bring your complaints to the source of income as well as to the website itself; this is likely to be to an advertising company used on the website. Most advertising networks impose the requirement that websites running their ads follow relevant law and so by cutting off the stream in income you cut off the incentive for the website to continue to compete against you.
How far you bring your action depends upon you, your location, the location of the other party and how strong your case is. In many cases it is possible to resolve things with a simple emailed complaint. The next level is frequently a letter from a lawyer, following which you might obtain advice regarding legal action through the courts. These are very vague guidelines as your course of action is so dependent upon locations, means and the problem about which you complain.
Modern black hat techniques are almost always multi-layered complex strategies involving numerous websites. Simple techniques are now so short-lived that serious black-hat competitors are unlikely to use them.
These multi-layered techniques mean that they have multiple points of weakness. The complex linking network which uses a 'start page' system can be taken down entirely by wiping out that start page. Therefore, go back down the chain in these cases and try to take out the supports which underpin the technique.
Finally, education of webmasters can be a very valuable part of a strategic response. Where webmasters are being abused for their link value through misinformation or small financial incentives, it is a helpful exercise both to you and to them to point them in the direction of information regarding the risks they are taking, and also to the market value for the links they are providing.
Alloyfish
