French Court Orders Google to Stop Competing Ad Displays
charleste writes "NPR is reporting that a French court has ordered Google to stop displaying ads when users search for competitors (e.g. if you search for Louis Vuitton, no more ads for Dior). If this holds up, wouldn't this affect most business models for free web tools?" CNET also has details , and information about previous cases.
February 13, 2004
l e. shtml
Google bans ads that criticize cruise ships
By MICHAEL LIEDTKE
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
SAN FRANCISCO - Online search engine leader Google has banned the ads of an environmental group protesting a major cruise line's sewage treatment methods, casting a spotlight on the editorial policies that control the popular Web site's lucrative marketing program.
Jim Ayers, Pacific Region director for Oceana, said from his Juneau home that he was shocked that Google would censor his group's ads based on corporate bias.
Washington D.C.-based Oceana said Google dropped the text-based ads displayed in shaded boxes along the right side of its Web page because they were critical of Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines.
http://juneauempire.com/stories/021304/sta_goog
There's no reason why Google should have to take this kind of abuse.
They should shut down google.fr (but keep control of the domain name so no one takes it over), and maybe even block French IPs from accessing the rest of Google.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
If I go to a store and ask for "Louis Vuitton" is it trademark infringement if the sales person also shows me Dior or some other maker's products? I would argue that as long as Google's ads do not mislead the user into thinking that the link is for "Louis Vuitton" then it is no different than a store clerk showing me a competing good.
All Google is doing is recognizing that people use specific terms to represent generic actions. I may search for "Louis Vuitton" but really intend to look at luxury goods of a wide range of makers -- the trademark name is only being used to find hits in the category. As long as the ads don't pretend to offer something they don't (bait and switch), I would argue that Google is serving the purpose of search.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
There is a precedent for this- Yahoo was ordered by a French court to ban Nazi memorabilia from their auctions. These decisions only affect users within the jurisdiction of the law, so only users who can be verified as being in France will not see ads for competitors.
FYI, Amanzon has a 'sponsored links' section that is keyed off search terms.
They should go all out. Now when someone in France searches for Dior, they get only one result, Dior's site along with a note to contact their government to complain if they don't like it.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
What is the scope of this judgement rendered by a French court against an American company? What is the impact outside of France? What constitutes a French company?
1) Does this only apply if one is using www.google.fr?
2) What if you are a German citizen using www.google.com from Italy looking for local solutions? If the company you seek has an office in France, does that mean Google is barred from showing you Italian competitors?