Criteo and Steelhouse legal spat escalates

Legal case between ad retargeting vendors in the US

The legal dispute between ad retargeting vendors, Criteo and SteelHouse, has gone up yet another notch after Criteo filed papers that feature several SteelHouse customers claiming to have been deceived by its rival.

The papers filed on 15 August include sworn testimony from several of SteelHouse’s clients claiming the vendor went against established marketing measurement practices, along with industry expert commentary that Criteo claims demonstrates SteelHouse’s unacceptable industry conduct.

Criteo launched legal action against its ad tech competitor on 13 June in the California District Court, claiming both click fraud as well as a misrepresentation of its services. Specifically, is alleges SteelHouse used a counterfeit click fraud scheme to trick e-tail clients into thinking that Internet users had clicked on SteelHouse-placed ads when they did not. It also claims SteelHouse subsequently took credit for online sales attributable to Criteo and other online marketing vendors as well as e-tail clients’ own direct Internet traffic.

Criteo alleges the practice, which has disadvantaged partners and competitors and which SteelHouse has used to inflate its performance, has been running since at least May 2015. Both companies operate on a pay-per-click model.

In July, SteelHouse filed a counterclaim, alleging Criteo had “resorted to gamesmanship and unlawful tactics” in a bid to both discredit SteelHouse as well as shield its own artificially inflated click count numbers.

“By falsely inflating its click count numbers, Criteo has deceived its own customers, and diverted actual and potential customers from SteelHouse by promising inflated click rates,” the lawsuit alleges.

“Criteo has compounded that behaviour by making false, misleading and malicious statements about SteelHouse, directly to its customers, prior to the filing of any lawsuit. These false allegations have not only caused SteelHouse substantial harm by damaging its reputation in the ad tech industry, but have also resulted in loss of actual and potential clients, and loss of revenue.”

Criteo returned the sally on 25 July, saying it will continue to prosecute SteelHouse and calling the latter’s claims both baseless and a deflection away from its own misconduct.

“SteelHouse’s counterfeit click fraud scheme has harmed and continues to harm both Criteo and the online advertising industry as a whole and should be enjoined,” it stated in its latest documents, filed 15 August.

The question of views versus last-click attribution

Among the latest papers filed are several testimonies from purported SteelHouse and Criteo customers, along with industry experts, supporting Criteo’s claims and criticising SteelHouse’s practices. Several of these refer to SteelHouse’s use of an algorithm to claim impressions and views from end consumers that directly contradicts the last-click attribution model used by many of its former customers.

The declarations of Leah Bliss, a senior specialist in external marketing at Vistaprint, and Elyse Burns, lead for channel marketing at Vistaprint, states that the company worked with both vendors prior to the legal dispute.

In a statement, dated 10 August, Bliss said Vistaprint terminated dealings with SteelHouse after it allegedly discovered SteelHouse had “used malicious code to make it appear as though an Internet user clicked on a SteelHouse-placed advertisement event though no such click occurred”. The practices also contradicted to the last-click attribution model uses to evaluate marketing vendor performance at Vistaprint.

“In its Opposition, SteelHouse asserts that its code was meant to allow SteelHouse to receive credit for ‘view throughs’ or impressions,” the statement reads. “SteelHouse apparently believes it should receive credit for views even though there was no click.”

Another testimony, from paid-for industry expert witness, Hugo Loriot, media technologies director at fifty-five SA, alleges “SteelHouse is manipulating Google Analytics to falsely attribute conversion credit to SteelHouse instead of Criteo”.

“SteelHouse’s manipulation does not allow e-tailers to fairly and correctly use attribution models being applied by Web analytics systems like Google Analytics,” Loriot claimed in his testimony. “SteelHouse’s code is interpreted by Google Analytics as an Internet users clicking on a SteelHouse advertisement, where no such click occurred.”

The hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injection is up before the Californian District Court on 12 September.

Follow CMO on Twitter: @CMOAustralia, take part in the CMO conversation on LinkedIn: CMO ANZ, join us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CMOAustralia, or check us out on Google+: google.com/+CmoAu

Join the newsletter!

Or

Sign up to gain exclusive access to email subscriptions, event invitations, competitions, giveaways, and much more.

Membership is free, and your security and privacy remain protected. View our privacy policy before signing up.

Error: Please check your email address.
Show Comments

Latest Videos

Conversations over a cuppa with CMO: Microsoft's Pip Arthur

​In this latest episode of our conversations over a cuppa with CMO, we catch up with the delightful Pip Arthur, Microsoft Australia's chief marketing officer and communications director, to talk about thinking differently, delivering on B2B connection in the crisis, brand purpose and marketing transformation.

More Videos

Great content and well explained. Everything you need to know about Digital Design, this article has got you covered. You may also check ...

Ryota Miyagi

Why the art of human-centred design has become a vital CX tool

Read more

Interested in virtual events? If you are looking for an amazing virtual booth, this is definitely worth checking https://virtualbooth.ad...

Cecille Pabon

Report: Covid effect sees digital events on the rise long-term

Read more

Thank you so much for sharing such an informative article. It’s really impressive.Click Here & Create Status and share with family

Sanwataram

Predictions: 14 digital marketing predictions for 2021

Read more

Nice!https://www.live-radio-onli...

OmiljeniRadio RadioStanice Uzi

Google+ and Blogger cozy up with new comment system

Read more

Awesome and well written article. The examples and elements are good and valuable for all brand identity designs. Speaking of awesome, ch...

Ryota Miyagi

Why customer trust is more vital to brand survival than it's ever been

Read more

Blog Posts

A Brand for social justice

In 2020, brands did something they’d never done before: They spoke up about race.

Dipanjan Chatterjee and Xiaofeng Wang

VP and principal analyst and senior analyst, Forrester

Determining our Humanity

‘Business as unusual’ is a term my organisation has adopted to describe the professional aftermath of COVID-19 and the rest of the tragic events this year. Social distancing, perspex screens at counters and masks in all manner of situations have introduced us to a world we were never familiar with. But, as we keep being reminded, this is the new normal. This is the world we created. Yet we also have the opportunity to create something else.

Katja Forbes

Managing director of Designit, Australia and New Zealand

Should your business go back to the future?

In times of uncertainty, people gravitate towards the familiar. How can businesses capitalise on this to overcome the recessionary conditions brought on by COVID? Craig Flanders explains.

Craig Flanders

CEO, Spinach

Sign in