Forum Moderators: mack
Can't provide examples due to TOS but we've noticed for one of our big brands where one company is a retail chain and separate company owns the catalog, it appears MSN has sold the top 3 spots to the catalog and blocked our Overture ad from showing up on the page at all or maybe there is a technical glitch preventing it from syndicating on MSN. In addition, the display URL is our site (retail outlet) and not where the click-through URL leads (catalog).
In another case, it appears MSN has sold the top spot for another brand directly to a major auction site. The trademarked brand term is also in the creative.
Does it change the TM dispute if the engine sells the ads through a method other than a free-for-all auction? With the G model, the brand can come in and buy the listing if it wants to ante up and due to the Google model, the brand will probably get the top spot without having to spend to much. If it is sold on a contract, then it seems like it might be a different case. Maybe the best middle-ground is to have the brand listing at the top by default and let other sites buy listings lower on the page which would keep confusion minimal while still allowing for comparison advertising/shopping.
Maybe the best middle-ground is to have the brand listing at the top by default and let other sites buy listings lower on the page
Might be a logocal route, but doesn't really help the legal aspects pne way or another. Infact - it would muddy the waters legally speaking quite a bit doing it that way.
I have not read the Adwords copyright legal thread you are talking about, but Microsoft would do well to be very careful on this front - with deeper pockets than G, they are more likely to be sued and more likely to lose on the press front out of copyright infringements.
