Google lawsuit over Adsense fraud!

32 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Have you guys seen this?

New lawsuit accuses Google of AdSense fraud - CNET
#adsense #fraud #google #lawsuit
  • Profile picture of the author Cosmo Demopoulos
    Fascinating
    Whether true or not, enough people think they have been *******s when it comes to AdSense (and other things) that I'm surprised its fake. This long.
    Yes, they cncdlled my a count too
    Signature
    Wine - bubbles and more
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9210938].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jodiesmitham
      Over the years I have been participating in this forum, I've seen tons of complaints about Adsense accounts being pulled in this way - usually when the site starts to earn decent money. I'm surprised something wasn't done about this sooner, but I suspect owners of these sites were convinced it was something they had done wrong.
      Signature

      Jodie Smitham

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9210952].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seekdefo
    Heard about it. About time Google gets a smack on the head. I wish someone sued them for losing business due to Penguin and file a class action. That would be the end of of it
    Signature

    Brevity is the soul of wit

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9211719].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
      Originally Posted by seekdefo View Post

      Heard about it. About time Google gets a smack on the head. I wish someone sued them for losing business due to Penguin and file a class action. That would be the end of of it
      • Because the world needs 200 million spun versions of the same article?
      • Or that every public forum needs 100 million new members each day?
      • Is it really true that blog owners enjoy being told "Great site, I {shall|will} bookmark {certainly|for sure}. 47000 times a day?

      Bad Penguin

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212096].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author paulgl
        When you signup for adsense, you agree to the terms. You cannot
        cry after the fact.

        Funny, someone posts an article from cnet, uses "fraud!" in the
        title of thread, but probably did not dig deep to get this gem
        from cnet. This part makes a better read for rational people:

        "The allegations as published so far lack documentary evidence supporting the claims of abuse and fraud. The accuser says it took until now to successfully conceal his or her identity, which is why it took so long to come forward.

        Several AdSense publishers have volunteered on Hacker News to provide documentation indicating that Google cut off their accounts just before payouts. But the existence of canceled payouts just before they were due is not the same as evidence of a Google policy to unjustly keep money from AdSense publishers."

        Paul
        Signature

        If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212137].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
          Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

          When you signup for adsense, you agree to the terms. You cannot
          cry after the fact.

          Funny, someone posts an article from cnet, uses "fraud!" in the
          title of thread, but probably did not dig deep to get this gem
          from cnet. This part makes a better read for rational people:

          "The allegations as published so far lack documentary evidence supporting the claims of abuse and fraud. The accuser says it took until now to successfully conceal his or her identity, which is why it took so long to come forward.

          Several AdSense publishers have volunteered on Hacker News to provide documentation indicating that Google cut off their accounts just before payouts. But the existence of canceled payouts just before they were due is not the same as evidence of a Google policy to unjustly keep money from AdSense publishers."

          Paul
          Did you read the complaint filed? The only evidence they're presenting in the case against Google is a copy of G ToS, and a copy of the anon pastebin. Like, is that all they have?

          Will this anon guy show up as a stand witness?..I doubt it. Would be fun though and make for a great sequil to that movie about Enron "Smartest guys in the room" Midnight document shredding over at Google HQ. Matts Cutts getting chased in a speedboat running to SA.

          Ah I'm getting a good script going here.

          We could have Google search collapsing overnight and the whole interwebs in mayhem. All searching for their lost Adsense blocks. PPC managers committing armed robbery just to make ends meet. SEO becomes the new name for mental asylums.

          Or we could all just head over to Yahoo instead.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212158].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author webby0031
            yes its a loada bull
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212173].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author rschmitz
              I think the guy said he is waiting to present the evidence. I have my doubts but is still interesting to see what comes of this
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212205].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author RedShifted
            Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

            Did you read the complaint filed? The only evidence they're presenting in the case against Google is a copy of G ToS, and a copy of the anon pastebin. Like, is that all they have?

            Will this anon guy show up as a stand witness?..I doubt it. Would be fun though and make for a great sequil to that movie about Enron "Smartest guys in the room" Midnight document shredding over at Google HQ. Matts Cutts getting chased in a speedboat running to SA.

            Ah I'm getting a good script going here.

            We could have Google search collapsing overnight and the whole interwebs in mayhem. All searching for their lost Adsense blocks. PPC managers committing armed robbery just to make ends meet. SEO becomes the new name for mental asylums.

            Or we could all just head over to Yahoo instead.

            The lawsuit states, "It is Google's *wrongful refusal* to pay terminated Adsense publishers the monies they have earned that is the subject of this complaint. Google's actions constitute breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violation of California Unfair Competition Law"

            Do you think the state of California would make a statement like that with no evidence?

            How about this, "Plaintiff, on behalf of itself and a proposed nationwide class, seeks damages based on, and/or restitution of, the sums wrongfully withheld from it and members of the proposes class; a declaration that Google's adhesive contract terms purportedly allowing it to withhold all Adsense funds owed to terminated publishers are *unconscionable and enforceable, and that they are invalid and unenforceable penalties in violation of California law governing liquidated damages*: and injunctive relief to prevent Google from withholding payment to AdSsense publishers under the circumstances complained of going forward."

            Did you see the phrase "in violation of California law"?

            How about the part where they say that Google banned >>>250,000 AdSense publisher accounts in the year of 2013? That might not be hard evidence to you but a lawyer could represent that as fairly damning evidence.

            There are 754,649 members on Warrior Forum which is the #1 internet marketing forum on Google. Most members of which do not even use AdSense. But if everyone on WF was using adsense, that would be like banning 1/3 of all our accounts.

            Furthermore, lets be real and use our brains for a minute. Every time Google finds some bs reason to ban an adsense account, what they're basically saying is "You violated 1 of our policies and we're not gonna tell you what that policy is unless you take us to court. But simply put - your traffic is BAD. And instead of giving that money back to the person who actually bought the traffic.... we're just gonna keep it for ourselves"??

            What the f##k kind of sense does that make?

            That's like me selling someone a stale piece of bread. And the person never comes back to return the bread. But 1 month later my boss approaches me and says "you broke a policy because we knew there was a speck of mold on that bread you sold 4 weeks ago... so we're gonna take that money from your paycheck and keep it for ourselves".

            It Google has all these "Eagle Eye" teams working so feverishly on AdSense accounts, they should be fully capable of identifying these "violations of policy" BEFORE traffic is sold. The same way a supermarket takes bad food of the shelves so people don't buy it. But to actually sell the bad product, then keep the money for themselves... instead of giving it to the person who paid for the product.... that's the most corrupt and unethical shit I could possibly think of. It doesn't take a smart person to realize how wrong that is.

            Where is the accountability when Google BENEFITS from people violating their own policies? They don't just "benefit" they make a FORTUNE from this. If Toshiba sells you a bad computer, they LOSE money when they give you a new one. But if Google sells you shit traffic, they just keep the money for themselves and ban the publisher LOL. Yeh, there's certainly no "evidence" here of any wrongdoings.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9219216].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
              Originally Posted by RedShifted View Post

              How about the part where they say that Google banned >>>250,000 AdSense publisher accounts in the year of 2013? That might not be hard evidence to you but a lawyer could represent that as fairly damning evidence.
              Maybe I missed something (which is quite possible), but there is no actual evidence of Google banning that many accounts. It is just the plaintiff saying that they did.

              Originally Posted by RedShifted View Post

              Furthermore, lets be real and use our brains for a minute. Every time Google finds some bs reason to ban an adsense account, what they're basically saying is "You violated 1 of our policies and we're not gonna tell you what that policy is unless you take us to court. But simply put - your traffic is BAD. And instead of giving that money back to the person who actually bought the traffic.... we're just gonna keep it for ourselves"??
              That's not entirely true. Now, none of us have access to all of the data to see what has happened in every single case of this happening, but I know as an AdWords advertiser I have gotten money back in the past from them. Maybe there are some cases where they kept the money. I don't know. I just know I have been refunded money that was spent on ads in the past.
              Signature
              Get the TIPS and STRATEGIES I use to HELP businesses GROW through SEO.
              Delivered to you each week!

              >>> Sign Up Now <<<
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9221164].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author zenichanin
      Originally Posted by seekdefo View Post

      Heard about it. About time Google gets a smack on the head. I wish someone sued them for losing business due to Penguin and file a class action. That would be the end of of it
      Maybe someone should sue you too if you make changes to your website. That's some great logic there.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9217729].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ronrule
    Google will win this lawsuit, it's a slam dunk in their favor. Even if they are guilty.

    Know why? Because the person who initiated the suit has not been harmed.

    In order to sue someone and claim damages, you must prove how their actions harmed you. The person who filed the suit was not an Adsense user, he was an employee. Therefore even if he truly is a "whistle-blower", even if 100% of what he says happened DID in fact happen, he was not damaged by Google's alleged deceptive practices. Case dismissed.

    Here's what the headline should read: Disgruntled Ex Google Employee Thinks He Can Blackmail Google and Make Them Pay Him to Shut Up and Go Away.
    Signature

    -
    Ron Rule
    http://ronrule.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212217].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
      Originally Posted by ronrule View Post

      Google will win this lawsuit, it's a slam dunk in their favor. Even if they are guilty.

      Know why? Because the person who initiated the suit has not been harmed.

      In order to sue someone and claim damages, you must prove how their actions harmed you. The person who filed the suit was not an Adsense user, he was an employee. Therefore even if he truly is a "whistle-blower", even if 100% of what he says happened DID in fact happen, he was not damaged by Google's alleged deceptive practices. Case dismissed.

      Here's what the headline should read: Disgruntled Ex Google Employee Thinks He Can Blackmail Google and Make Them Pay Him to Shut Up and Go Away.
      Ron,

      It's not the employee whistle blower who has filed the suit. It's a company who had their accounts banned pre-payout. They're using the whistler blowers anon statement as their only pre trial evidence. Unsubstantiated Evidence

      I wonder if Judge Judy will take the case?

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212244].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ronrule
        Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

        Ron,

        It's not the employee whistle blower who has filed the suit. It's a company who had their accounts banned pre-payout. They're using the whistler blowers anon statement as their only pre trial evidence. Unsubstantiated Evidence

        I wonder if Judge Judy will take the case?

        Ah ok, somehow I got the impression that it was the same anonymous whistle-blower coming forward because enough time had passed. Totally misread that, lol. Although it makes me wonder if the company in the suit has anything to do with that... Interesting.
        Signature

        -
        Ron Rule
        http://ronrule.com

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212260].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
          Originally Posted by ronrule View Post

          Ah ok, somehow I got the impression that it was the same anonymous whistle-blower coming forward because enough time had passed. Totally misread that, lol. Although it makes me wonder if the company in the suit has anything to do with that... Interesting.
          The full complaint is at the bottom of the articles in Scribe,
          "for entertainment purposes only"


          New lawsuit accuses Google of AdSense fraud - CNET
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212282].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Google will probably win & file a $40,000 counter lawsuit for slander.

    D'oh!




    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212271].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author timpears
    Even if Google loses, thy will just appeal and string it out. They got the money to appeal it from now till breakfast, and no one will ever get any money they have been screwed out of. And you know Google is guilty. But it is a civil suit, not a criminal suit, so they can just appeal till hell freezes over.
    Signature

    Tim Pears

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212461].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by timpears View Post

      And you know Google is guilty.
      Only one problem... there is zero evidence of any kind of guilt on Google's part.

      Sorry, but AdWords ,and to a lesser extent AdSense, are their cash cows. I highly doubt they would do anything as stupid as this lawsuit suggests to jeopardize them.
      Signature
      Get the TIPS and STRATEGIES I use to HELP businesses GROW through SEO.
      Delivered to you each week!

      >>> Sign Up Now <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212483].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    What's silly about that OP link/article is the guy claims he hit $40k, thought something was wrong, tried to contact Google to fix whatever he thought was wrong. The one thing the guy didn't do is remove the Ads from his own site.

    If he thought something was wrong he should have removed his Adsense code from the site/page.

    Judge Judy will tear him a new one, ha, ha...
    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212479].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author charto911
    oh no not this argument again
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212608].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 1ebooks
    You got to control your money

    Letting google pay you was and is a bad idea, destined to the whims of google

    Just try to call their main office on the phone, try to get their legal department, for a public company they violate every rule there is. You are suppose to have a public number the public can REACH a human on.

    The general counsel of Google has 2 SEC FRAUD CONVICTIONS

    Yet they let him still run the legal department that says it all

    In fact he now has a criminal conviction in Italy

    How he's not disbarred in California is beyond me.

    GOOGLE SUCKS
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212858].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dentist
    That's interesting for me that most people here think Google will win. This is a serious case, and will become huge cause of class action. There are thousands of unhappy people and of course thousands of their opportunist attorneys that are waiting to make some money off Google, and this gives them enough ground for following that. Even only by this article getting public, thousands of attorneys will join force against Google. This can seriously harms Google's brand so they eventually have to give up and settle for a big chunk of money which will make everyone in the lawsuit rich. Google has been spreading the vibe of dominating the world enough to scare everybody including their competitors and government to become more serious about taking them down, and that includes their competitors, government, everybody in power and lot's of people that just or unjust have been hurt by Google's behavior. Most people in this forum have a godly view of the Google (a lot of times I think some of knowledgeable people here are hired by Google) and think nothing can happen to Google cause they are so big. Don't forget it is just about one century from breaking down the Rockefeller's company that personally owned 1% wealth of the America.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9216823].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rap3003
    This is interesting!! What happens now if adsense is gone..
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9219268].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TZ
    Be nice to get back our $15,000 they robbed from us.
    Signature

    $php_coding = "consistent cash";

    echo ("Give me" . " " . $php_coding . "!");

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9221042].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Whenever anyone signs up for Adsense they agreed to lose all money in their account If their account is ever terminated by Google. It's a contract.

    Not sure why people think Google created all those TOS & policies. Do you really think Google would risk billions of dollars? Silly argument.
    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9221232].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dentist
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      Whenever anyone signs up for Adsense they agreed to lose all money in their account If their account is ever terminated by Google. It's a contract.

      Not sure why people think Google created all those TOS & policies. Do you really think Google would risk billions of dollars? Silly argument.
      It doesn't matter. Even if you put a term in contract, and people agree to lose money or whatever, if there is a real fraud case none of that applies. Basically the regulation in the US is that all of those terms work if they are within the regulations of the US, and if you put an unfair term in the contract, it can easily be surpassed by the court, even if people agreed to it by signing, and no contract term works if it is because of keeping the government from knowing something (keeping the government from whistle blowing) or taking action by government against something. So, if there actually is a fraudulent behavior, contract doesn't protect it.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9221442].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Dentist View Post

        It doesn't matter. Even if you put a term in contract, and people agree to lose money or whatever, if there is a real fraud case none of that applies. Basically the regulation in the US is that all of those terms work if they are within the regulations of the US, and if you put an unfair term in the contract, it can easily be surpassed by the court, even if people agreed to it by signing, and no contract term works if it is because of keeping the government from knowing something (keeping the government from whistle blowing) or taking action by government against something. So, if there actually is a fraudulent behavior, contract doesn't protect it.
        Actually it does matter which is why a few folks are whining in court.

        How are you going to prove fraud, when the TOS says Google has the right to cancel an account If they think it's necessary to protect their business?

        Nobody in their right mind would think there's a problem earning $40K & leave the ads running on their site. If there was a problem the webmaster would have removed the ads. There wasn't a problem, the ads stayed on the site.
        Signature
        Hi
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9221649].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dentist
          Originally Posted by yukon View Post

          Actually it does matter which is why a few folks are whining in court.

          How are you going to prove fraud, when the TOS says Google has the right to cancel an account If they think it's necessary to protect their business?

          Nobody in their right mind would think there's a problem earning $40K & leave the ads running on their site. If there was a problem the webmaster would have removed the ads. There wasn't a problem, the ads stayed on the site.
          I don't think the legal problem is when Google decides not to continue working with some individuals. I think they or any other business can decide at any day to discontinue working with anyone. The problem and what can make this lawsuit serious is when they don't pay the money they owe without providing enough understandable reasons, and they simply say because we think so. That part is what can make them trouble.
          I don't know if there is a fraudulent activity or not, but my point is if there is, having the contract with people doesn't protect Google or anybody else for that matter. I don't think Google legally has to provide proof to people when they cancel the accounts (that's strange to me though), but if it is a class action lawsuit, they will eventually either have to settle (for money), or provide the proof of what went wrong for thousands of accounts that made them decide to close them, i.e. providing the court with lots of internal information they don't want their competitors to know, and the court should become convinced by their provided proof.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9221950].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ronrule
            Originally Posted by Dentist View Post

            I don't think the legal problem is when Google decides not to continue working with some individuals. I think they or any other business can decide at any day to discontinue working with anyone. The problem and what can make this lawsuit serious is when they don't pay the money they owe without providing enough understandable reasons, and they simply say because we think so. That part is what can make them trouble.
            I don't know if there is a fraudulent activity or not, but my point is if there is, having the contract with people doesn't protect Google or anybody else for that matter. I don't think Google legally has to provide proof to people when they cancel the accounts (that's strange to me though), but if it is a class action lawsuit, they will eventually either have to settle (for money), or provide the proof of what went wrong for thousands of accounts that made them decide to close them, i.e. providing the court with lots of internal information they don't want their competitors to know, and the court should become convinced by their provided proof.
            This is exactly what I've been thinking the more I read about this incident. Google's ToS are pretty clear that they can kill your account for any reason they like, what will come into question is:

            * Whether or not they're legally required to pay you for valid clicks prior to the termination date.
            * What constitutes a "valid click"

            I would draw the line based on the action taken with the advertiser; if the advertiser is refunded for the cost of the click, then Google has deemed the click invalid - they are collecting no money from the advertiser, thus there is nothing to pay the publisher. However, if the advertiser is NOT refunded for the click then Google by their own definition considers the click valid and must pay the publisher any monies owed, regardless of their current account status.

            Think of it like renting space on a billboard... if you decide you don't want the billboard anymore that's your right, but that doesn't mean you don't have to pay the owner of the billboard for the last month where your ad was still in full view.
            Signature

            -
            Ron Rule
            http://ronrule.com

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9223384].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dentist
              Originally Posted by ronrule View Post

              This is exactly what I've been thinking the more I read about this incident. Google's ToS are pretty clear that they can kill your account for any reason they like, what will come into question is:

              * Whether or not they're legally required to pay you for valid clicks prior to the termination date.
              * What constitutes a "valid click"

              I would draw the line based on the action taken with the advertiser; if the advertiser is refunded for the cost of the click, then Google has deemed the click invalid - they are collecting no money from the advertiser, thus there is nothing to pay the publisher. However, if the advertiser is NOT refunded for the click then Google by their own definition considers the click valid and must pay the publisher any monies owed, regardless of their current account status.

              Think of it like renting space on a billboard... if you decide you don't want the billboard anymore that's your right, but that doesn't mean you don't have to pay the owner of the billboard for the last month where your ad was still in full view.
              I think it would be strange if they didn't pay the advertisers back while they have been claiming so for years. That's the recipe for disaster just right there. I don't think there is anyway around that one if that's the case, but I will personally be very surprised if that's the case. They should be smarter than that.
              What I think is even that not being the case, they may still lose in court or settle and pay a lot of money. Here is the thing: they should show that they have done the best they could to be fair and pay the money to the right person. Now, returning the money to advertisers with a simple message to publisher without providing enough proof might not be the best they could do. It may be the easiest way with least amount of investment. They have lot's of money and could assign more resources and do better. Result: they may return some money that should have been paid to someone(advertiser) to someone else(publisher). That would not be fraud but still wrongdoing or at least a systematic mistake they can be penalized for. Now, if the court finds out that they systematically favor the advertisers(because they pay them money and they are more important for Google) over publishers, and in most cases they pay the publisher money to the advertiser unfairly, that's another problem for them right there.
              Now any company can debate that they have done the best they could. How does a court know if that's the best they can do? Comparing Adsense with their other operations and checking the consistency. If they had provided Adsense publishers with the same type of care, reporting, etc. they provide Adwords advertisers they have been on the safe side, because they have done the best they could do all across the board. I don't think court would believe that's the case and that's why I think this would be a serious case, and they might settle.
              BTW, have you noticed that they have started to adding more sections to the Adsense accounts recently providing more Analytics?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9224309].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author yukon
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Dentist View Post

            I don't think the legal problem is when Google decides not to continue working with some individuals. I think they or any other business can decide at any day to discontinue working with anyone. The problem and what can make this lawsuit serious is when they don't pay the money they owe without providing enough understandable reasons, and they simply say because we think so. That part is what can make them trouble.
            I don't know if there is a fraudulent activity or not, but my point is if there is, having the contract with people doesn't protect Google or anybody else for that matter. I don't think Google legally has to provide proof to people when they cancel the accounts (that's strange to me though), but if it is a class action lawsuit, they will eventually either have to settle (for money), or provide the proof of what went wrong for thousands of accounts that made them decide to close them, i.e. providing the court with lots of internal information they don't want their competitors to know, and the court should become convinced by their provided proof.
            This looks like a never ending debate...

            Your only looking at this from a banned Adsense perspective.

            Once again, it's impossible to apply for an Adsense account without first agreeing with the Adsense TOS which points out forfeiting money in an Adsense account If the account is closed by Google.

            You can't agree with a TOS & then later say I don't agree with the same TOS when it doesn't suit your immediate needs. It's too late, you've already agreed or you wouldn't have an Adsense account.
            Signature
            Hi
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9223418].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Bleh I am no fan of Google and definitely not of adsense but the whole thing looks Hokie.

    The anonymous accusation from the end of April alleged that Google had an internal policy that included a color-coded plan detailing when to block or approve different kinds of AdSense subscribers, called AdSense Quality Control Color Codes.
    "We were told to begin banning accounts that were close to their payout period (which is why account bans never occur immediately after a payout). The purpose was to get that money owed to publishers back to Google AdSense, while having already served up the ads to the public,"
    seriously? so Google exposed themselves by having color coded charts and using lower level employees to manually ban? Its essentially a programming company. Why wouldn't they trigger the ban programmatically? rather than having ton loads of possible whistle blowers?
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9221304].message }}

Trending Topics