Slashdot Mirror
Google Wins European Trademark Victory
adeelarshad82 writes "A European court has ruled in Google's favor, saying that allowing advertising customers to use the names of other companies as search keywords does not represent a trademark violation. The court also went on to say that Google's AdWords program is protected by a European law governing Internet hosting services. Google's main line of defense was claiming that companies that want to extend trademark law to keywords are really interested in 'controlling and restricting the amount of information that users may see in response to their searches.' The decision is the first in a series of decisions from the court about how trademark rights can be used to restrict information available to users. Google is currently battling several trademark keyword cases in the US, including a case against Rosetta Stone, Inc."
it is clear as day that we all, american and european alike, need to gather behind Eu in order to bring sense into this intellectual property insensibility.
Read radical news here
This makes sense to me because companies can use each others names in TV commercials, Google ads seems like a sensible online analogy.
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." - Pablo Picasso
the problem stems from people using trademarks that have become synonymous with some field of expertise. ie like, 'Mysql Development' mysql wouldnt go try to suppress people because they used mysql in phrases, but, you get the idea. what you are doing is irrelevant to company's business (even furthers it), doesnt cost them anything and whatnot. but some companies, like apple etc, try to suppress people, and lay claim to mere words. even if you are a grocery store selling apples.
Read radical news here
The summary and the linked article are extremely incomplete ! Yes, Google was essentially exonerated from the charges - i.e. is not held responsible for the chosen adwords. But the buyers of adwords (the advertisers) can still be held responsible. To quote the WSJ article: Google isn't liable for trademark infringement when it sells linked ads to a brand's competitor. The court held that the search giant is merely a host for ads and that it is an advertiser's responsibility to make clear if its product is different from that searched for.
The good thing is that google's service/business is acknowledged as a neutral one. But the advertisers can still be held responsible if they use the trademarked brand without the right to do so.
I wonder if Google's reputation for fighting the good fight ever plays a part in influencing their court battles. Judges are human beings after all, and while trying to be as impartial as humanly possible is their job, subconsciously some of them may want to reward one of the very few giant corporations out there that doesn't act like a sociopathic criminal.
Hooray!!... Or...is it ??
It's a well-known thing in the United Kingdom that British Telecom do not try very hard to crack down on certain premium rate call scams, even if they are illegal... now, it's certainly not BT's fault that some firm is using the telecommunications network to run a scam, but the huge profits directed towards the scammer /and/ British Telecom should be returned to the victim of a scam.
Similarly, I have no problem not considering Google responsible for someone trying to abuse its service... as long as they return all profits gained as a result of the abuse. If they keep one cent, they are complicit.
Good thing they won a victory! They'd be in a lot of trouble if they had lost a defeat!
a while back they didn't allow the key phrase "rent a car". Go figure.