Utah Rethinking Anti-Keyword Advertising Law

Eric Goldman writes "Slashdot previously reported on Utah's recent law banning trademark-triggered keyword advertising. This week, a group of technology executives met with Utah legislators to discuss the law, and it looks like the legislature is rethinking its position. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, 'Legislative leaders are looking to tweak a troublesome trademark protection program rather than defend it in court, after an unprecedented meeting with Internet power brokers who would prefer the new registry be scrapped.'"

Comments

Google hypocrisy

[Raenex]

I agree it's a bad law, and Google is one of the companies against it, but this little bit from the article is interesting:

All lawmakers want is for Google to protect other brands the way they shield their own, Eastman said. If a company tries to buy the trigger rights to the word Google, the following message pops up: "Due to trademark reasons, we do not allow advertisers to use 'Google' in their Google AdWords ads. This term may be trademarked either for a certain product or service category and may apply only in certain countries."

Re:i told ya so

[boingo82]

Parent may appear to be trolling, but as someone who lives here, in a city where it's illegal to sell pornography or sex toys, in a city where we celebrated New Year's on Dec 30 and Independence Day on July 3 last year (both days had the audacity to fall on Sunday), in a city where you can't buy liquour except at the state-owned store, in a city...I think you get the picture. Parent may be trolling, but he's also accurate.