Slashdot Mirror
France: No Google Text Ads For Trademarked Words
ASN writes "Reuters reports that a French court barred Google from providing text ads with search results for trademarked terms, except those from the trademark owner (in this case, 'Bourse des vols,' potentially -- 'Microsoft,' 'Scientology'
even 'Linux').
According to Reuters, 'If it was upheld on appeal and validated in other countries the decision could force the search services to pre-screen search terms for trademarks before letting advertisers use them.' Google was fined 75,000 euros for the practice, and would have to pay 1,500 euro for each further infraction while appeal is underway (which
makes one wonder if Google is paying for this)."
The idea is that Google should not allow other interested parties to use copyrighted expressions. E.g., Ford Motors can by a text link for Toyota Corolla and direct them to Ford Focus.
Whether it makes sense, I am not quite sure, but it is not a clearly ridiculous idea
How is google supposed to know if a word is trademarked? Does France have some kind of list of all registered trademarks, and what kind of product or company they specifically refer to availible electronically? Or even on paper? Even if such a list were availible, how is google supposed to know whether I was searching for information pertaining to a product with a trademarked name or just a normal combination of words? Perhaps I was slightly off in my terminology, and happened to enter a trademarked phrase as opposed to what I was actually looking for (because I didn't know exactly what it was called)? I fear that the simpliest thing for google to do at this point is to start running banner ads. Otherwise, it is likely that some daft frenchmen are going to put them under, one search at a time.
====
Crudely Drawn Games
More than that, it's perfectly legitimate for someone who is not the trademark holder to us that trademark in their advertising.
"Well sell cars from a particular manufacturer from a particular country, but we can't tell you which of either."
Please come in and buy one."
This isn't about protecting trademarks, this is about simply being able to advertise what you sell. Advertising that I sell Serta mattresses doesn't in any way delute the trademark.
KFG
Did you apply your brain before whining about the insult?
Suppose Company A owns and registers a trademark on their product named MegaSuperItem. If company B runs an advertisement saying "ImprovedNiftyItem -- twice as good as MegaSuperItem," who is traditionally at fault? I believe that Company B should be held liable, not the media that published the advertisement.
There is also, as many other people have commented, the fact that trademarks pertain to a specific market or field. The Internet encompasses all those fields recognized by trademark offices and many more. Owning a trademark does not give you exclusive rights to the word -- except as it relates to marketing or selling products or services.
Why should Google be responsible for doing trademark research and forming a legal opinion on whether every AdWord they run may infringe someone's copyright? That burden goes far beyond what is reasonable for any company to bear.
It might not even be a competitor. For example, Fry's in the US sells Microsoft Windows. They're entirely within their rights to use the term "Microsoft Windows" in their ads to identify what they're selling, even though they don't hold the trademark on "Microsoft Windows". Buying a text ad keyed on that term would, IMHO, fall well within that same allowance.
This seems like a bad idea, at least in some cases, for the trademark holder. There are many cases where you *want* other companies to have access to your trademarks for advertising purposes.
As an example, I recently bought a Kawasaki motorcycle. It's a great bike, but there are some extra things I want, and so I went to google and searched for Kawasaki aftermarket parts. Now, every one of the advertisers was using the Kawasaki name, but without a healthy aftermarket presence, Kawasaki would sell a heck of a lot less of their product -- people are a whole lot more willing to buy a motorcycle if they know they can get performance parts for the bike without doing a whole lot of digging.
Even more simply, what if someone is using their name to say that their company is retailing the products of the trademark holder? Then they'd be cutting into their own visibility in the market place, and lowering their own sales.
It seems to me that this is not the most intellegent move on the part of the trademark holder. If you protect your trademark so passionately that you hurt your own product sales, what the hell was the trademark for in the first place?
Narrative
and so have to ABIDE french law of not using your competitor trademark.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
How do you determine who the trademark holder(s) are when I type in Ford?
In short, you don't. You simply ask the clients to whome you sell ads to indemnify you for all damages caused by their selection of search keywords. Or you charge all clients a little more to compensate for the risk.
No, they know exactly what they're doing. And sabotaging major American corporations is just considered good politics in Europe nowadays. Of course, the fact that they're trying to force French law on a business based in a foreign country is the real crux of the matter. Google should tell the to have a real nice day, and turn the whole thing over to the State Department. If they want to make this into an international pissing contest, fine. Hey, if the French don't like Google, let them pull a China on themselves and block Google's IP. Then we'll see just how long this foolishness lasts.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Google has a monopoly over good search engines (i.e. google is the only search that anyone wants to use). They should block France until the French Government changes their opinion on this ruling. They'll do this because everyone will complain that they can't use google, and google will tell them that google's no longer profitable in France, and that they can't afford to do business there with the new laws. That should result in some change fairly quickly :)
My other car is first.
If a company has a problem with another company using their trademark for advertising, they should confront the company who bought the ad, not the media who carried it. Requiring Google to proactively compare every word against trademarks is ridiculous, and is a bad precedent that could be extended to cripple other forms of media.
---------
There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
I would respond to this censorship with further censorship.. by BANNING ALL FRENCH IP ADDRESSES!
-- I am. Therefore, I think!