Google review policy: illegal content and legal removals
Google's content policies apply worldwide. On top of them, Google lets anyone report content they believe breaks local law, through a separate legal process. It is the route for copyright, court orders and similar matters, and it is slower and more formal than a policy report. We tell you in the audit when a review belongs there.
Published . Reviewed against Google’s policies on
100% risk-free. You only pay for the reviews that come down.
N. O.
2 weeks ago on Google
[The full text of a court document that is under seal, pasted into the review.]
A question of local law, which goes through Google's legal removal form and not the report button.
Priya S.
1 month ago on Google
I was billed twice for one visit. It took three calls to fix.
A real billing complaint. The answer is a reply and a fix.
Example. Reviews written by us. Not real reviews.
Short answer
Google's current policy page has no heading called illegal content. Reviews that break local law go through a separate legal removal process, which Google describes on its Legal Removals page. It covers matters such as copyright and court orders. Most abusive reviews also break a content policy, and the ordinary report is the faster first step.
Key facts
Google says its prohibited and restricted content policies apply to content on Google Maps wherever you are in the world.
Source: Legal Removals, Google Maps User Generated Content Policy
In addition, users can report content they believe is in violation of local law.
Source: Legal Removals, Google Maps User Generated Content Policy
Google says it removes content because it violates its policies or Terms of Service, or to comply with legal obligations.
Source: Maps user-generated content policy, Google Maps User Generated Content Policy
This rule in 27 seconds
0:00 / 0:27
The rule, in Google's words
Google's Legal Removals page is short. It says:
Our Prohibited and Restricted Content policies apply to content on Google Maps wherever you are in the world. In addition, users can report content they believe is in violation of local law.
The page links to Google's form for reporting content under local law and to its Copyright Help Center. Copyright claims run under the DMCA, which does not fit an ordinary review: the customer wrote it, so the business holds no copyright in it. Google's policy overview says it removes content "because it violates our policies or Terms of Service, or to comply with legal obligations".
What this rule does not cover
- A review you believe is unfair or untrue, with no legal finding behind it.
- Anything a content policy already covers. Use the report first.
- Pressure. A legal threat sent to a reviewer over an honest review can breach the FTC's review rule and the Consumer Review Fairness Act.
Google's report page sets the general limit: "Do not report a review just because you disagree with it or dislike it."
Evidence that supports a report
- The law or the order. A court order, a copyright registration, or a lawyer's statement of the legal basis.
- The exact content, with its link.
- Your standing. Who you are and why the claim is yours to make.
Examples
These examples are ours. They are written to show the rule and are not real reviews. The cards at the top of this page show one review that can qualify and one that stays.
| Review text | Outcome under this policy | Why |
|---|---|---|
| A review that pastes a sealed court document | Legal route | A question of local law |
| A review that copies your copyrighted photo set | Legal route | Copyright, through Google's copyright process |
| A review covered by a court order naming it | Legal route | Google complies with legal obligations |
| "They are frauds", with no detail | Report button first | Offensive content policy: unsubstantiated allegation |
| A harsh but honest account of a visit | Stays online | Not illegal, and within the policy |
How to report it
A business reports a review from its Business Profile or from Google's Reviews Management Tool. Google says evaluation typically takes several days, and each review gets one appeal.
Start with the ordinary report whenever a content policy fits, because it costs nothing and takes days. Keep the legal form for cases where the law is the only route. Bring a lawyer in before you file, since a legal request makes formal claims in your name.
For health brands
Health brands sometimes reach for a lawyer's letter first. That is the risky order. The FTC treats threats over honest reviews as review suppression. A policy report through Google's tool is the method the FTC's own guidance leaves open.
Where to go next
See the main Google review removal page, and our comparison of flagging or a lawyer for when legal action makes sense. The qualification tool checks a review against Google's policies in a few questions.
For help with your own profile, start with our Google review removal service. Our review removal pricing is per confirmed removal, with nothing up front.
Frequently asked questions
It can be, and the law differs by country. In the United States, Section 230 shields platforms from most claims over what users post, so the claim is against the writer. Read can you sue over a bad review and speak to a lawyer before you file anything.
Google gives no time for it. Expect it to be slower, because a legal claim needs checking. Use the report button first when a policy also applies.
No. We are not a law firm and nothing here is legal advice. We identify the reviews that belong on this route and say so in the audit.
Primary sources used on this page
- Legal Removals. Google Maps User Generated Content PolicyLast verified
- Maps user-generated content policy. Google Maps User Generated Content PolicyLast verified
- 16 CFR Part 465: Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials. Electronic Code of Federal RegulationsLast verified
- Consumer Review Fairness Act: What Businesses Need to Know. Federal Trade CommissionLast verified
- Report inappropriate reviews on your Business Profile. Google Business Profile HelpLast verified
- 47 U.S. Code § 230: Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law SchoolLast verified