European Court Of Justice Finds Google Not Guilty Of Trademark Infringement In Ad Sales… But Leaves Lots Of Loopholes
from the will-they-give-up-yet? dept
Various big luxury brands have been trying for years to get courts to say that Google is somehow liable for trademark infringement if it sells ads based on people doing searches on trademarked keywords. Most courts have rejected this argument — but there was one in France that accepted it and sided with LVMH (owners of brands Louis Vuitton, Moet & Hennessey, among others). That case moved up to the European Court of Justice, which had already suggested that selling ads based on trademarked keywords shouldn’t be considered infringing. I had thought, upon reading the BBC’s coverage of the final decision, that the court had strongly agreed with Google by saying that it was not guilty of trademark infringement, but it seemed odd that LVMH seemed to be claiming victory in the quote in that article, saying: “the ruling clarified the rules of online advertising.”
Looking at other coverage of the ruling, it appears the BBC’s explanation leaves out many of the important details. While it’s true that the court found that Google was not guilty, it did say that Google needs to remove ads when companies complain and that national courts can set their own rules on this topic. It’s not a complete win for either party, but it does seem to give more control to big brands to block perfectly legitimate advertising.
Filed Under: advertising, counterfeits, trademarks
Comments on “European Court Of Justice Finds Google Not Guilty Of Trademark Infringement In Ad Sales… But Leaves Lots Of Loopholes”
“Google needs to remove ads when companies complain“
That’s more than a loophole, it’s basically an outright win for the brand owners who sued. And it’s a complete perversion of what trademark is supposed to be about: consumer protection.
Re: Re:
Agreed. Is it a blanket action, like a DMCA takedown request? Or is there any oversight by any third party to determine whether or not the takedown request is frivilous?
Re: Re: Re:
It sounds blanket to me.
Imagine if someone searches on Google for “Chevy Venture Honda Pilot comparison.” Now what if the Chevrolet’s adword advertisement was a comparison between the Venture and the Pilot. Would that have to be pulled too?
Let’s go beyond adwords. Let’s assume that GM puts a video on YouTube comparing its cars to Honda. When you search for Honda that GM video/ad comes up first, should that also be removed if Honda complains?
This is a huge blow to free speech and it makes it more difficult for consumers to find factual information they might need before purchasing.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I believe comparison advertising is illegal in certain EU member states, anyways…
im gonna just send 50000000 complaints fo all kinds
and wonder how many businesses will suffer after paying for there ad.
Capitalism is becoming bad ….very stupid and bad
These suits are based on a very shaky understanding of how things work.