On August 26, 2025 I decided to take a deep dive into how Lawyer Directories like FindLaw, Nolo, Avvo, Super Lawyers, and Lawyers.com handled AI Search. I was blown away when I looked at the “keyword” suggestions for FindLaw. They literally recommended:
· escorts okc
· upskirt
· two girls and a cup
There are multiple reasons FindLaw has this set of outrageous recommended keywords associated with the domain, which will be discussed. Thomson Reuters owned the legal directory for years until it was sold to Internet Brands in December 2024. Even though the acquisition is over 9 months old, Internet Brands still hasn’t listed FindLaw and other assets that they acquired in the transaction with Thomson Reuters. Internet Brands has a history of not giving AF about what is on its corporate website. A couple of years ago, we documented that Legal Directory information had information about healthcare directories co-mingled.
The reasons for FindLaw being associated with “Escorts” are many, and may not be the fault of Thomson Reuters or Internet Brands. It is also possible, FindLaw's proprietary CMS system mentioned in the analysis creates technical limitations that may make it difficult to isolate contaminated content. When keyword research tools crawl these shared hosting environments, they may detect inappropriate content that has been injected into attorney profiles or firm pages, creating false keyword associations.
1. Algorithm Cross-Contamination from User Search Behavior
SEO keyword tools pull data from Google Autocomplete and search suggestion algorithms, which aggregate billions of real user queries. When users search for legal services, some may inadvertently or intentionally include inappropriate terms in the same search sessions. For example, someone might search "FindLaw lawyers" followed by unrelated inappropriate content, creating algorithmic associations.
The Google Autocomplete system learns from collective user behavior patterns, meaning if enough users have searched for both FindLaw-related terms and inappropriate content within similar sessions or geographic locations, the algorithm may create false correlations. This is particularly problematic for large legal directories that attract diverse user bases with varying search intents.
2. Data Pollution from Competitor SEO Attacks
FindLaw faces systematic competitor attacks through negative SEO practices. Competitors or malicious actors may create artificial search patterns by repeatedly searching for FindLaw followed by inappropriate keywords to contaminate the autocomplete suggestions and keyword research data.
This technique, known as "SERP contamination," involves coordinated efforts to associate a competitor's brand with negative or inappropriate terms. Given FindLaw's dominant market position and the high-stakes nature of legal marketing, such attacks are economically motivated. The research shows FindLaw has historically faced "SEO misconduct" issues and penalties, making it a target for further attacks.
3. Shared IP and Server Infrastructure Issues
Large legal directories like FindLaw host millions of attorney profiles and law firm websites on shared server infrastructures. If any hosted sites contain inappropriate content or have been compromised with malicious SEO injections, this can create algorithmic associations across the entire network.
4. Historical Content Database Contamination
SEO tools maintain historical keyword databases that may contain legacy data from when FindLaw's content filtering was less sophisticated. Earlier versions of legal directories often had less stringent content moderation, allowing inappropriate user-generated content in reviews, comments, or attorney descriptions.
Even after cleanup efforts, this contaminated data remains in third-party SEO tool databases like SEMrush, Ahrefs, and keyword research platforms. These tools aggregate historical search data and may continue suggesting inappropriate keywords based on outdated associations, creating a persistent contamination problem that's difficult to resolve.
5. Black Hat SEO and Link Farm Associations
The research reveals FindLaw has historically engaged in questionable link-building practices that resulted in Google penalties. These practices may have created associations with link farms or spam networks that also promoted inappropriate content.
When FindLaw purchased links from low-quality link networks (as documented in the "SEO misconduct" findings), these networks likely contained sites with inappropriate content. SEO tools detect these link relationships and may suggest related keywords based on the entire network's content profile, not just FindLaw's legitimate legal content.
Additionally, SEO poisoning attacks specifically target high-authority domains like FindLaw. Malicious actors create artificial link structures pointing inappropriate keywords toward FindLaw pages, contaminating the site's keyword profile in research tools.
How do we fix FindLaw?
Technical Resolution Recommendations:
- Implement comprehensive disavow file management for toxic backlinks
- Deploy advanced content filtering algorithms across all hosted profiles
- Establish keyword monitoring systems to detect inappropriate associations early
- Work directly with SEO tool providers to report and clean contaminated data
- Implement robust server isolation between attorney profiles to prevent cross-contamination
These inappropriate suggestions reflect systemic issues in how large-scale legal directories interact with modern SEO algorithms, rather than any intentional association with inappropriate content by FindLaw itself.
Edward Bukstel
