Remove Advertising Remove Brands Remove Settlement Remove Trademark Law
article thumbnail

Georgia Supreme Court Blesses Google’s Keyword Ad Sales–Edible IP v. Google

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

.” In other words, they sought to establish (using centuries-old chattel-based theft doctrines rather than trademark law) that a trademark owner has the unrestricted right to shut down anyone using their trademarks, even if no consumers are harmed. to see if it could find some soft spot in Georgia state law.

IP 126
article thumbnail

Preventing Trademark Infringement or Stifling Healthy Competition? A Look at 1-800 Contacts and its Keyword Advertising Battle

LexBlog IP

It is difficult to remember a time when keyword advertising did not dominate the internet. Most search engines, such as Google, Bing, and Yahoo, maintain keyword advertising programs which allow advertisers to bid on search terms and keywords that drive customers searching for a particular product or service to their website.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?–Adler v McNeil

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

This case involves Jim Adler, a/k/a the “Texas Hammer,” a Texas lawyer who has spent $100M+ on advertising to build his brand. The defendants bought competitive keyword ads on Adler’s trademarks, which Adler objected to. For background on the legal battles over keyword advertising by lawyers, see this article.

article thumbnail

Internal Search Results Aren’t Trademark Infringing–PEM v. Peninsula

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

This is a case involving a trademark owner and a competitive keyword advertiser. The trademark owner memorably (and ridiculously) characterized the rival as engaging in “keyword conquesting,” a term I encourage you never to use. The court already sent that trademark claim to the jury ( my blog post on that ruling ).

article thumbnail

Court Dismisses Trademark Claims Over Internal Search Results–Las Vegas Skydiving v. Groupon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Las Vegas Skydiving Adventures offers tandem skydiving under the “Fyrosity” brand. Melwani sells products under the “Royal Silk” brand. More Posts About Keyword Advertising. Google. * Competitive Keyword Advertising Claim Fails–Reflex Media v. It has never offered its services through Groupon.

article thumbnail

Google’s Search Disambiguation Doesn’t Create Initial Interest Confusion–Aliign v. lululemon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

lululemon’s brand also displays prominently in its keyword ads. More Posts About Keyword Advertising. Ohio Bans Competitive Keyword Advertising by Lawyers. Want to Engage in Anti-Competitive Trademark Bullying? Amazon & More. * Do Adjacent Organic Search Results Constitute Trademark Infringement?

article thumbnail

Fifth Circuit Says Keyword Ads Could Contribute to Initial Interest Confusion (UGH)–Adler v. McNeil

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

However, “[b]ecause meta tags direct internet traffic and are invisible to the internet user (absent the user taking additional steps), meta tags are similar to keyword advertising” (citing a non-precedential metatags opinion from 20 years ago). More Posts About Keyword Advertising. Distraction is insufficient. OK, I guess.