• by Wendy Davis , Yesterday

The advertiser PVC Fence Wholesaler must take its dispute with Google over paid search campaigns to arbitration, a federal judge has ruled.

In a decision issued Monday, U.S. District Court Judge P. Casey Pitts in the Northern District of California ruled that PVC Fence Wholesaler forfeited its right to sue in federal court by accepting Google's terms of service, which include a clause requiring arbitration of disputes.

The order comes in a battle dating to June, when PVC alleged in a class-action complaint that Google charges advertisers for clicks on keywords, but doesn't always disclose those keywords.

PVC alleged that between 2007 and 2020, Google told advertisers which search terms resulted in paid clicks, but that starting in 2020, Google curbed its disclosures due to "purported privacy concerns.”

"Charging a customer for a secret or unknown good or service that the customer never agreed to purchase, and about which the seller refuses to provide any disclosure, is a quintessential breach of contract, unfair dealing, and unfair and deceptive trade practice," PVC Fence, a Florida-based company that sells fences and gates, alleged.

The complaint included claims that Google broke its contract with PVC and violated a California consumer protection law.

PVC specifically alleged that between 2020 and 2025, it paid slightly more than $49,450 for Google ads, and that Google did not disclose search queries accounting for around $18,337 of the ad spend.

Google urged Pitts to dismiss the suit, arguing both that its September 2017 revision to Google Ads' terms of service required advertisers to arbitrate disputes, and that PVC Fence's allegations -- even if proven true -- wouldn't show that the company was harmed.

"Plaintiff’s alleged facts show that it was charged for advertisements that were served and clicked on by users, resulting in actual conversions, thereby garnering more visibility and revenue for its business," Google argued in court papers.

PVC countered that that the lack of specific data about queries prevented it from refining its search ad strategy.

The advertiser also said the arbitration provision shouldn't be enforced, arguing that advertisers like itself had no opportunity to negotiate the terms of service.

Pitts rejected PVC's argument regarding the arbitration provision, writing that when Google revised the terms of service, the company gave advertisers 30 days to opt out of the clause requiring arbitration of disputes.

"PVC Fence has offered no evidence that Google pressured advertisers not to opt out or otherwise made it difficult to opt out," Pitts wrote, adding that Google "offered substantial evidence that it provided unambiguous notice to advertisers of their ability to opt out in multiple places."

The judge didn't rule on Google's contention that PVC wasn't harmed by the alleged failure to disclose search queries, writing that substantive questions about the merits of PVC's claims should be decided by an arbitrator.