Google Ruled a Trademark Infringer

Stephan writes "Google lost a trademark-infringement case in France. News.com is reporting that a Paris District Court ruled yesterday against Google in a lawsuit filed by high-end fashion designer Louis Vuitton. The company is suing Google for allowing its competitors to buy targeted ads on the search engine's search results pages that use or are associated with the Vuitton trademark. The court charged Google with trademark counterfeiting, unfair competition and misleading advertising. Google was ordered to pay $257,430 (200,000 euros). Google is facing similar lawsuits in different countries. In the United States, the company recently won a favorable ruling in a similar case brought by GEICO, the car insurance company."

Comments

Re:This is plain stupid.

[tomhudson]

They are selling AD SPACE. If I have a Mazda to sell, I can mention the Mazda trademark in ads. If I buy ad space in the newspaper opposite a full-page Honda ad, or on the same page as a story about GM opening a new plant, that's their tough shit. Sure, my ad will be seen by more people because it's next to something else - that's life.

People doing searches for Louis V-whatever-the-frig-handbags are going to see ads for others - boo hoo.

Re:This is plain stupid.

[squiggleslash]

It's more the case of (to use your example) Ford outbidding Mazda for the advertising space on their name. You search for Mazda and up comes Ford.

I honestly don't think Mazda would mind...

Anyway, I still don't see the issue with respect to Google. You can't buy "all the advertising space" related to your rival with Google, all you can do is have it so your advertising comes up if you search for that rival.

From the point of view of an end user, this is far from evil or misleading. This isn't about people trying to pass themselves off as a company, it's simply marketing to people interested in a particular product. If I search for "Biro", the chances are I want a pen. If I'm searching for something specific to Biro (like "How do I contact them about repairing this pen"), then the relevent links will appear on the left, as always. If I'm looking to buy a biro, then I'll be interested in the unobtrusive links on the right from companies that feel I may be interested in their product. Maybe I would prefer a Parker. Maybe I want to buy the Biro from WHSmiths.

I think the fairest comparison is actually Parker Pens going to a newspaper and saying "When you next do a story concerning Biros, can you put our ad next to it?"

That shouldn't be considered trademark infringment, and it's certainly not evil business practices. Trademarks were intended as a way to guarantee against fraud, as one group passing its products off as the other's. It strikes me that the laws here are being taken to go far beyond that remit, to the point that it threatens speech instead. If they carry on this way, just as the DMCA is undermining the legitimacy of copyright, and software patents the legitimacy of the patent system, they risk undermining trademarks too. Legislatures need to intervene and stop this abuse.

Re:Versus Billboards

[DirePickle]

It's more like looking up a company in the yellow pages, and finding competitors' ads right next to it.