1. Interesting article Matthew, hopefully the decision will give us all a little clarity.
    We have in the last week been informed by Google that there is a new trademark policy which we have used on a new client project. Interestingly the ‘review’ process did seem to take longer that normal when ads were submitted.
    Is a user clicking on an advert for a brand keyphrase no different from the ‘one brand’ products in supermarkets whose packaging looks nearly identical?

  2. informa

    Garry, the difference in the online arena is that – should Interflora lose this case – it will give carte balnche for anyone to bid online for someone else’s trademark. Fair enough you might say, using the “supermarket shelf” metaphor above.
    But online, there is one company dominating the provision of “shelf space”, and that’s Google. When we are all bidding more and more money to try to leech from one another’s brands, we will all lose, but Google’s Adword revenue will rocket.
    They must realise this; for them, good idea to stay quiet on the subject.

  3. @Informa, it’s true advertisers suffer with brand bidding if you are the biggest brand around, but what about the smaller businesses who can take traffic from the big names?
    I also do believe that consumers benefit from having the additional options…

  4. Interesting. What will this mean for Google ‘related ads’ that Google triggers on brands terms showing competitors ads?
    Surely if Interflora win, then this will be the end for related ads? (hooray!)

Comments are closed.