It contains 1 advert and 2 keywords. One of the keywords went straight on trial without being shown. I then added a couple of quote's around it and it jumped back to normal.
The only thing I can think of is that both these keywords are company names. Now this is something I already do with existing campaigns without trouble. The advert itself does not mention this company (except via the {keyword} option).
A further odity is one of the company names is incrediably generic and a genuine search term with multiple contexts and meanings.
I have had my whole account on hold before, but my other campaigns are running fine. Google just won't show my damn add for those damn keywords.
Has anyone else got similar experience, advice or frustrations?
If you go to the Ad Diagnostic Tools, ads falling victim of this policy will show with a status of (something like) "Can't display advert due to over-riding account setting". Usually, the advert will be disappoved too. If you try and question Google, they will simply refer you to the company in question.
I can understand your frustration, my bidding on "Budget <widget>" was disallowed due to "Budget" being a company name. Think i'll start a company called "Cheap" then ask Google to put me on the exclusion list...
Kay
Violation of the "trademark" policy would have google disallow the keywords, not put them into trial.
Indeed it was a trademark issue, but one of the keywords was put into 'on trial' too.
How come other adverts are showing for these keywords though? One is an ebay aff. ad.
I've run into somewhat of the same problem. I woke up early this morning (4:30 AM eastern) to notice that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the ads on a successful campaign I was running was shut down. The product in question is almost ubiquitous in its market, and the term is very important to help avoid confusion (taking the trademarked term away suggests another similar product by the company). It's also used a lot on regular websites, I can recall seeing it used 4 or 5 times on a popular consumer electronics website earlier today. I wouldn't have much of a problem with this, except for the fact that (as of right now) EVERY SINGLE OTHER AD on the page still has this trademark in their respective ads (the company that makes it and about 8 other people).
Am I just being paranoid/selfish (i.e. their ads haven't been reviewed yet), or am I getting singled out here?
I saw several ads which had been using trademarked terms for a while suddenly disabled for trademark violations.
Odds are that the other ads haven't been reviewed yet.
[webmasterworld.com...]
Indeed it was a trademark issue...How come other adverts are showing for these keywords though?
tenerifejim, I hope that you have also contacted AdWords support, or that you will. The questions you're asking will be best answered by a look at the actual account in question, which of course none of us here can do.
On the topic of trademarks, there's some info on the AdWords site that is worth reading, at least to develop an overview of the policy. Please note that the policy differs for the US and Canada, and outside of the US and Canada.
What is Google's trademark policy?
[adwords.google.com...]
Trademark Complaint Procedure
[google.com...]
The second link will give you the most detail - so it's worth reading even in you are not interested in making a 'complaint'. ;)
AWA
My ads just got slammed again. What frustrates me is not so much the trademark enforcement, but the uneven enforcement (i.e. it only seems to be happening to me). I checked the keyword I'm bidding on, and EVERY SINGLE OTHER AD still had the trademarked term in it (including one ad from the trademark owner, which is perfectly fine with me). I don't have a problem with this policy if Google makes a concerted effort to enforce the trademarks for EVERYONE, but that doesn't seem to be the case in my instance.
BriGuy20, I think I can put this in perspective for you.
As background, keep in mind that a major component of trademark policy revolves around what, specifically, the trademark owner has requested should be allowed, or not allowed.
And what they have requested does not necessarily stay the same, over time.
So, when a trademark owner changes what they will allow, (or will not allow), the change applies to both new ads (easy to implement, as the new ads are reviewed shortly after they're created) and existing ads. For existing ads, however, the change is not so straightforward to implement - as it requires re-reviewing ads that have may already have been reviewed and approved. Maybe even thousands of them.
So, my guess is that when you're getting 'slammed', as you put it, you are submitting new ads. Or, your ads have come up for re-review as part of the process of incorporating trademark owners's requests retroactively to all existing ads. This process can take some time to complete.
...I don't have a problem with this policy if Google makes a concerted effort to enforce the trademarks for EVERYONE, but that doesn't seem to be the case in my instance.
Bottom line, you can rest assured that a concerted effort is most definitely being made to hold everyone to the same standards - and if it appears otherwise, please know that it is most likely a simple matter of timing - in that the review team has not yet reached all the existing ads.
When I say most "most likely a simple matter of timing" above, I am leaving open the possibility that some of the competitors who seem to be allowed to do what you're not allowed to do, may have contacted the trademark owner and requested (and received) permission to be an exception. This is not at all uncommon, BTW - and may well be an avenue worth exploring.
However, it'll need to be the trademark owner who makes the exception, and not Google. Having agreed to make an exception for you, the trademark owner would then need to formally inform Google of the exception they've made in your case, and your account would be noted.
Hope that helps to clear things up.
AW
Thanks for the reply. I guess I let my temper get the better of me in the above post, and hopefully the other ads will eventually be re-reviewed if they have not obtained an exception.
I'll try to sticky you my case specifics, so I can get a better idea of what's going on. I can understand a company's reluctance to let somone use their trademark (especially if their trademark is being used to promote a competing product), but I really can't see the logic in denying other people who are selling your product (at their own expense) the ability to do so. Granted, there is a lot of self-interest speaking here, but I think it's silly.
EDIT: Apparently I can't sticky you.
EDIT 2: It was my impression that individual ads could be cited for keyword violations. Is this the case? My first guess was that the trademark owner was displeased with my ad (it happens to rank higher than theirs) and wanted to get rid of it, and asked for the trademark to be enforced (i.e. just on my ad). I suspect, however, that what you mentioned is correct in that, first, the ads came up for re-review. Since all of the ads had the keyword in the ad copy, they were all suspended. When I tried to resubmit the ads, the keyword violation in place prevented me from using the keyword on the new ads.
Thanks for the reply and the links.
