Google sells advertising space beside its search engine results.
The adverts are chosen according to the search terms typed in by
the user. Google allows one company to place advertising when
another company is searched for, even if the term is a registered
trade mark of that other company.
The terms are called keywords and Google's keyword advertising
facility is called AdWords. The fact that trade marks can be
purchased as keywords by people other than their owners has long
been controversial. Google applies this policy only in the US,
Canada, the UK and Ireland.
Computer repair business Rescuecom sued Google, claiming that
when Google sold Rescuecom's name to competitors as a trigger it
engaged in trade mark infringement.
A US district court had said that the practice was not unlawful
because the use of the term as a trigger was not 'use in commerce'.
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that
position untenable, though.
"What Google is recommending and selling to its advertisers is
Rescuecom’s trademark," said the Court's ruling. "Google displays,
offers, and sells Rescuecom’s mark to Google’s advertising
customers when selling its advertising services."
Rescuecom also argued that Google infringed when it proactively
made suggestions of relevant or useful terms to its advertisers
through its 'keyword suggestion tool'.
Rescuecom said that the appearance of other people's brands when
the term 'Rescuecom' is searched for will cause consumers
confusion. It said that this was the case especially when
advertising results are displayed at the top of the page. Googe
displays paid-for search results at the side and/or on top of the
natural results.
The Court agreed that confusion was a possibility.
"If the searcher sees a different brand name as the top entry in
response to the search for 'Rescuecom,' the searcher is likely to
believe mistakenly that the different name which appears is
affiliated with the brand name sought in the search and will not
suspect, because the fact is not adequately signaled by Google’s
presentation, that this is not the most relevant response to the
search," said the ruling. "Whether Google’s actual practice is in
fact benign or confusing is not for us to judge at this time."
The Court of Appeal had previously ruled in a case involving web
advertising software company 1-800 Contacts. It had found that
1-800's use of trade marks inside its system for triggering pop-up
ads did not count as 'use in commerce'.
The district court in the Google case said that the 1-800
precedent meant that it had to declare Google's use acceptable as
well. The Court of Appeal disagreed.
"In contrast to 1-800, where we emphasized that the defendant
made no use whatsoever of the plaintiff’s trademark, here what
Google is recommending and selling to its advertisers is
Rescuecom’s trademark," said the ruling. "Second, in contrast with
the facts of 1-800 where the defendant did not 'use or display,'
much less sell, trademarks as search terms to its advertisers, here
Google displays, offers, and sells Rescuecom’s mark to Google’s
advertising customers when selling its advertising services."
"In addition, Google encourages the purchase of Rescuecom’s mark
through its Keyword Suggestion Tool," it said.
The case will go back to the lower court to be heard fully.
Google's policy is to respond to complaints about the use of
trade marks in the text of adverts in all countries. But
controversially the company extended its US and Canada policy for
the choice of keywords to the UK and Ireland last year. That means
that brand holders in the UK and Ireland must bid with rivals for
the right to have their trade marks trigger their own ads.
Google's policy for all other countries is to respond to
complaints about keywords that correspond to trade marks.
Notwithstanding, the company was fined by a French court in
February for selling trademarked terms as keywords. Google has
argued that generic terms should not be eligible for protection
under its trade mark policy. German courts are awaiting help from
the European Court of Justice on where the law stands on keyword
advertising and trade marks.
Disclaimer: We hope you find OUT-LAW’s content useful. It’s prepared by the lawyers at Pinsent Masons. Please remember, though, that it’s intended as general information only. It’s not legal advice. If that’s what you’re seeking, please
contact us. See also: our
full disclaimer