I get the "We think your business is a scam and so we are terminating our relationship" but I don't understand why "... and we'll keep the money." doesn't result in criminal charges.
Basically a big fuck you to Google: "give me all the data you have on me or I will report you and you may be on the hook for 4% of your revenue".
It appears that Google did something different this time, I don't know what.
> You received a credit because we found invalid activity on your ads. What is it: Invalid activity refers to clicks and impressions that we suspect aren't the result of genuine customer interest. We don't charge you for invalid activity on your ads. Example: Invalid activity includes clicks and impressions performed by automated tools, as well as accidental clicks – for instance, if someone double clicks your ad.
'It's like a manager telling the owner only $150 was taken from the til but $100 was and he pockets the $50. Not that I'm saying google is like that but you have no way of auditing this figure.'
But, in googles case it's more like: We charge you 1,000$ they say 100$ was fraud and refund you 100$ meanwhile 200$ was and they keep the 30% of 100$ distributing 70$ back for fraudulent clicks they don't really investigate.
And if your webpage says something like "please click on the ads to support my website", you'll get a warning from Google. Presumably they also look for suggestions like that within apps.
The problem lies with our justice system though. If it were more efficient we'd have less things like self-censorship and self-moderation.
Seriously?
"[The burden of] proof lies on him who states [a claim], not who denies [it]."