…and so the story goes that one day Cloaking-system.com came forth and boldly announced that they would violate Google´s almost canonical Webmaster’s Guidelines and more precisely the section about cloaking:
Cloaking refers to the practice of presenting different content or URLs to users and search engines. Serving up different results based on user agent may cause your site to be perceived as deceptive and removed from the Google index. Some examples of cloaking include: * Serving a page of HTML text to search engines, while showing a page of images or Flash to users. * Serving different content to search engines than to users.
Here’s how Cloaking System describe their method: (from IP-delivery @ Cloaking System)
IP-delivery is the type of cloaking we use at Cloaking System. IP-delivery means that content is delivered, based on different IP-addresses. IP-delivery based on country IP’s is used by Google. When you type in www.google.com in your browsers address bar, you are automatically shown Google’s page in your own language… At Cloaking System we use IP-delivery a bit differently. We take the IP-addresses from the search engines and search robots and show them the content of one page, and show a different content to the visitors – your visitors. They are shown the page on your website that you want them to see.
The observant reader will notice that Google’s guidelines and Cloaking System´s method have some discrepancies. Now, openly admitting to corrupting Google’s search results can be compared to entering a the arena for a bullfight. 
Somehow, these two images remind me of each other… So… expectedly, Google blocks Cloaking System from their index – but our heroes are not duped at all. Like true heroes, they stand fast on their right of way, defending their points of views. On SEO Ninjas some of the central people from Cloaking System have a say: Google Promotes Cloaking. Impressive! True bravery. They are almost on par with Sundance Kid and Butch Cassidy. Now, putting ourselves in the place of the bull/Google, what course of action can be taken do when their first attempt to still the rebels has failed? But of course – find customers who have bought services from Cloaking System – and if unsuccesfull – find out where the rebels work and kick them out of the index too. And so ReFocus, the white hat-chapter of Cloaking System, was also booted out of Google’s index. That’ll teach them… Maybe someday we will see ReFocus back in Googles index – but until then they’ll have to follow the wise word of the Bible: “And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.” (Luke 6:29) And so it seems this time round, the bull won… 
Hi, Pål
Just because Google removed two sites we expected would be removed it doesn’t mean that the bull won (btw, love the comparison
). Our customers still get their service. We expected Cloaking-System.com to be removed because we cloak, and we expected ReFocus to be removed because many of the cloak-domains were owned by ReFocus 
Somebody always take the blame when it comes to cloaking. But it’s better that is’t us, then our clients…
But as I’ve mentioned many places: I respect Google for their decission. They need to show their authority, so cloaking isn’t something everybody does… But it seems a bit strange that other cloakers like KloakIt and Fantomaster is still in the index hehe…
Again: I respect what they’ve done, and I’m also ready to talk to Google staff if they have something to talk about (Google! feel free to write me at marcel@fuursted.net
). We are reasonable people and very open for dialogue, if that’s needed…
Hi Marcel,
seems like you are quite settled with Google’s excluding you from their index (would be tough if you weren’t). You state several places that using cloaking system is risk free for your customers. I have a hard understandig that, considering the way you’ve fared so far.
Isn’t there a risk that when Google sees where those cloaked pages point, they just ban the sites pointed on?
There is of course the argument that cloaking systems can be used to blow competitors out of the index, if Google punishes recipients of cloaked trafic – but still, from my POV, that’s a pretty thin speculation to risk your online business on.
…oh – and as for KloakIt: site:kloakit.com
Fantomaster still lingers in the index, though…
Hi…
Well, I know that nothing is sure when it comes to Google… But I’m sure that Google wouldn’t like competitors to blow each other out of the index. I do know that some of our clients are experimenting with this (cloaking to their competitors). I know that Google would never want this “fight” and that they know what the “fight” could do to their index…
But the reason WE are out of the search engines is that we cloak and take the blame on our shoulders – just to save our clients from having any risk
Now THIS is truly funny! Marcel Fuursted writes in the Danish debate amino.dk that Refocus were banned because of some experiments on the site that they forgot to remove. Facts are not in the way at the northern part of Jutland it seems.
Also the same Marcel seems to forget the fact that many customers have lost their money at Cloaking System because their cloaked pages are banned within few hours or days and Cloaking System does not answer mail or phone.
Also it seems forgotten that the management at Refocus publicly stated that they file for bankrupcy.
This is a case og almost scandalous misbehavior and very bad business moral.
There are no doubt in my mind that Google does monitor every move Cloaking System and Marcel Fuursted makes and that only a fool will take the risk to buy any solution from that company or man. I am sure that Google will state examples hence the fact that many of the customers have written in public that they have bought the system with cloaking.
Truly a case of how NOT to act!
Well, Henrik – I think there’s some things you’ve misunderstood. Cloaking System is not bankrupt – and the fact that you claim that is actually illegal. And I hope that Pål know that he can be hold responsible for your post!
Onlye 1 customer feel he has lost money, but he IS indexed now! So claiming the things you have said is actually totally wrong and illegal! Perhaps you were a little bit stressed out, when you wrote that post?
Well… It is unfortunately not ilegal not to be able to read English. But for your sake I’ll repeat myself: REFOCUS has publicly stated that they file for bankrupcy. Tell me that this is wrong? I think you know the excact posting at amino.dk where it is written by Kromann?
Plese tell me excactly where I have stated that Cloaking System is bankrupt? Can you please do that?
Maybe you should concider visiting Amino? And then repeat that only one customer has lost money and visits on your scheme?
No stress here
> But it seems a bit strange that other cloakers like KloakIt and Fantomaster is still in the index hehe…
No, thats not strange at all because they did not behave like bloody idiots!
You stil have a LOT to learn in this business – thats for sure.
And don’t think for one second that Google will stop here. It is indeed a very realistic next step that they will start to remove some of your clients brand domains. It is not very difficult to verify that they ordered the cloaking with you and therefor is fair to punish.
>they did not behave like bloody idiots!
I couldn’t agree more. Ralph and Fantomaster have been in the Google’s index as long as I can remember and they even offer solutions to do all sorts of stuff to/with Google. Moreover the index is still full of cloaking software providers, link sellers, SEO companies, get rich quick schemes and everything beyond the sun.
HOWEVER most of these DO officially behave and don’t rub it in Googles face…
If I was Google I would go a very long way to weed out all and everything I could find even remotely close to that cloaking site and ban them into oblivion. Why shouldn’t I?
It’s their engine, it’s their results, don’t piss them off like that. It’s just dumb and amateurish.
Just to clear possible misunderstandings:
The Henrik H.-profile in this blog is not that HH from http://www.sologstrand.dk where Marcel Fursted do his making for a living now…..
Wauh! Then we’ll have to wait and see if sologstrand.dk are banned by Google when he does some cloaking there. Why should’nt he? It does not hurt the brand domain he says
Hmm, looks like theCutts reads your blog too Pål asd he has made some INTERESTING observations lately:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/detecting-more-undetectable-webspam/
Matt and his colleague found a lot of nasty stuff and commented:
Guys, get a grip. If ya wanna cloak, do it right for christ sake
Merry Christmas
>> But the reason WE are out of the search engines is that we cloak and take the blame on our shoulders – just to save our clients from having any risk
(contd.)
So when Google picks up the story and name customers, and when newspapers pick up the story and name customers, the customers don’t take any risks????
http://www.erhvervsbladet.dk/article/20071128/news04/711280010/
WTF is wrong with these guys?
Well, Peter don’t what is wrong with them, but my own personal take from working with seo since 1999, is that they are simply in-experienced, ignorant and dumb. They haven’t learned the hard way to keep their bloody mouths shut. Too bad for the clients though.
Tonight, danish news site ComOn has a piece on it too: http://www.comon.dk/index.php/news/show/id=33792 just keeps on getting better and better. I’m making pop corn for this one
Im glad that i have nothing to do with cloaking. I think we have only seen the beginning of this case. Many sites will be banned from Google over the next couple of weeks.
Mikkel deMib described the whole story extremely elegant when he wrote in an answer to Marcel Fuursted: “You’ve mistaken this. It’s not about beeing the stupid boy in the class but about beeing the bright boy”
In my end of the world we have a saying for behavior like this: The light is on but nobody is home.