RealTechNews.com - Independent Tech

Wednesday, December 15, 2004

Geico gets Googled
Judge Leonie Brinkema of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted Google's motion to dismiss a trademark-infringement complaint brought by Geico. The insurance company had charged Google with violating its trademarks by using the word "Geico" to trigger rival ads in sponsored search results. Geico claimed the practice diluted its trademarks and caused consumer confusion.

So let me see if I have this straight... If I enter the word "Geico" in the Google search bar, it will return search references to Geico, but, in the ads that appear on the side of the results page (you know, those ads we're not supposed to mention), I'd see links to competing insurance companies and the Judge says that's fine? Isn't this the same Judge Brinkema who's handling the Zacarias Moussaoui case? (And that's as far into the political realm as I'm going. You can draw or erase your own conclusions.)

Now here's the interesting thing to keep an eye out for: Google's AdSense ads (which we're not really mentioning because we're not supposed to draw undue attention to them) are typically keyed to the most current blog posts. (In case you hadn't noticed, and we're certainly not telling you to notice.) So let's see what, if anything, comes up now that this Geico post is here. Check back often. It may get interestinger.

# Permalink Posted at 2:49 PM 4 comments Email this Link

Comments on this Item:

LEXUS -> Automobile
LEXIS -> On-line Database
Sound -> the same
LOGO - > Different
Public recognition / secondary meaning -> established for both
Confusion between cars and databases? Nah.

Geico has the right to litigate in matters that present new issues. Courts get things right or wrong. Get over it.

Trademarks are a tad bit more complex than you are, Bill. Best that you consider that the VERY FIRST MARK ever issued is still in use (the triangle on Bass Ale). It has been almost 300 years since Queen Ann started the formal recognition of these "shortcuts" to identify a product from an established business. Marks help consumers quickly determine who made an item.

This works well with the illiterate.

This has no real benefit for you because you don't create and market anything of value.

Go bitch about some other area of the law. This one has been working just fine for a hell of a long time.

Why not put your pointy little head to something useful - I hear that they put little lights on the top of pointy trees this time of year.

Write if you get work! LOVE Todd (p.s. was your DNA found at NEVERLAND, too?)

# posted by Anonymous 6:23 AM

Did you know that the blog tracks the origin of people who come visit?

# posted by Bill 10:30 AM

I have a different bias on this than you seem to, Bill. Even though I've never paid Google a cent, I can use their services and benefit greatly from them. You could never say that about an insurance company.

Geico should consider the example of retailers. Frequently, when one retailer (let's say McDonald's) has an established location, another (let's say Burger King) puts a store across the street. Burger King will now take customers away from McDonald's, people who knew the McDonald's location was there, but didn't know the Burger King was. Does Burger King have the right to do this? Of course they do. In some cities, you can find twelve different antique stores in one area. People are already in the habit of going to that area for antiques, and it just makes sense, if you're a new antiques dealer, to be where people go for antiques already.

The judge was right--companies like Geico shouldn't be allowed to dictate where ads appear on the pages of search engine site. Only the site's owner and the market determine that, and if people don't like the way the ads appear, they shouldn't use the site, or advertise on it. Personally, I much prefer Google's ads to those of other sites.

# posted by Alan M. 6:36 AM

Alan, I think you're mixing apples and hand grenades...

Geico's problem wasn't "where," it was at all. If someone did a search for "insurance companies" I'd agree that it didn't have a three-legged dog's chance in a rabbit hunt. (Sorry, Dan...) But the search was specific for "Geico" and what Google is doing is also putting up ads for all of the competition as well --taking advantage of the fact that the person doing the search was looking for an insurance company.

I'd agree that all things sleazy aren't illegal but this was certainly sleazy behavior on the part of Google.

# posted by Bill 9:07 AM

Post a Comment