The document discusses the legal conflicts arising from search engine marketing and trademark issues, primarily focused on ongoing litigation involving Google, Geico, and American Blinds. The cases challenge Google's AdWords program, which allegedly allows competitors to purchase protected trademark keywords, potentially leading to consumer confusion and brand dilution. The outcome of these proceedings could significantly impact search marketing practices and Google's advertising revenue model.

1. When Search Engine Marketing and Trademarks Collide
In the world of marketing, branding issues are always an important part of any campaign.
Companies work hard for your name to be recognized as a quality organization and a leader in its
field. Companies will defend any action they see as a negative to their brand. They do not want
unauthorized third parties to advertise their products as they can do in a poor way, which will
generate negative consequences for the quality of the brand of the company. Recently, Google was
accused of violations by Geico and blinds brand in America. The cases (C 03-05340 JF U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division) have gone to the discovery phase of
litigation, which means that judges have said no is now sufficient to justify the facts possibly these
demands. The impact of this study could be serious for search marketers.
A "brand" is a word, a symbol (eg, Logo) or phrase that is used to identify a particular product and
distinguish it from other products on the market. The degree of distinctiveness or uniqueness is
what usually determines legal protection. Terms or symbols that are unique to a particular product
or company usually do not receive protection. Generic terms are not protected. The claims made by
Geico and American Blinds are that Google AdWords program violates the law by allowing
competitors to buy keywords that are protected trademarks. Geico and American Blinds contest that
by allowing advertisers to bid on the keyword that is essentially the same as selling the Geico or
American name Blinds without permission.
Trademark law was instituted primarily to protect the consumer. When a customer sees a brand or
logo, they associate a certain quality and expectation of the logo. If inferior companies were allowed
to use the same logo and have worse products or services, the consumer does not know what to
expect. With trademark law the consumer gets a degree of certainty and avoids confusion or unmet
expectations.
According to lawyers this litigation could be very complicated. What Google has to do is convince the
court that there is no customer confusion regarding how keywords and ads based on Google
searches. Most likely be set by running various consumer surveys. If successful, this would set a
legal precedent preventing future demands of the same nature, however, there is a big risk if Google
fails. One hundred ninety-five to ninety-nine of Google's revenue model is in their advertising, and a
ruling against him could be a problem for the company. If installed, however, as it did then the
suggestion that sets no legal precedent allowing other companies doing the same charges in the
future.
Whatever the outcome, it is clear that in the coming months something will happen to the search

2. marketing. At least, Google will have to monitor trademark infringement a little more vigorously, in
the worst of the company may lose some of their income.