If a competitor is trying to leech off your name, you must have done something right (or you must be in a field that invites such competition).
you can find details here: [google.com...]
there are tools available which allow you to monitor whether anyone is advertising on terms of your choice...making sure you are always aware of advertisers bidding on your trademark keywords
i believe that if you have trademarked your site name, then noone ideally should be able to bid on that keyword
I don't believe that's true for the US.
I see this a lot. Honestly, I don't think you should worry too much about it. Odds are your competitor is going to get hit bigtime with a low quality score, and end up having to set a minimum CPC of $5.00 or $10.00 just to keep the ad running (I see that happen when I bid on acronyms that my clients use, even when the rest of the campaigns all have excellent QS and we use the acronym liberally on the landing page) So then one of two things will happen - they'll give up in disgust because they don't want to pay so much for a click, or else they'll keep running them and it will cost them bigtime to try to swipe your customers. If you're running ads too, and your ad text is compelling, and you feel you are operating on a competitive basis - then don't worry about it.
And if it's REALLY getting to you, you can run an ad that points out that you are the real deal, and don't be fooled by substitutes. I've done that, and it worked - the other guy disappeared.
i believe that if you have trademarked your site name, then noone ideally should be able to bid on that keyword...if they are doing so, you can take it forward with google - lodge a complaint - and google will then disallow the advertiser from bidding on the keywords.
This policy refers to use of a Trademark in ad text only - not simply bidding on a keyword.
From Googls's Trademark Complaint Procedure:
When we receive a complaint from a trademark owner, we only investigate the use of the trademark in ad text. If the advertiser is using the trademark in ad text, we will require the advertiser to remove the trademark and prevent them from using it in ad text in the future. Please note that we will not disable keywords in response to a trademark complaint. In addition, please note that any such investigation will only affect ads served on or by Google.
Beyond accepting that others bidding on your trademark is an unfortunate reality - I can't think of any better advice than that put worth by Netmeg in the previous post.
Look, advertisers for a long time in the real world have used pictures, logos, names, etc., of their competition in ads. Whether it was Coke, Pepsi, or whatever. What was wrong with that?
Now all of a sudden, you come online, and bam, the First Amendment has been trampled on, and you can't mention a competitor in an ad. Absolutely absurd!
Listen, you can't trample on the First Amendment by getting someone else's ad blocked. Fight back with your own ad when their name is searched. That's the American way to do it.
How outrageous it would be if Pepsi had an ad that said "Better than Coke!"
"Oh my gosh, that is sooooo wild!"
<shock, horror>
p/g
I don't really understand why companies with strong brand images would bid on their own names. For instance, if I (as a potential cusomer) search for "UPS Store" and FedEx comes up in the sponsored links section of the SERP, most likely I was looking specifically for the UPS Store and not their compeditors. FedEx may have a chance at grabbing the business, but I think it's unlikely since I was searching for a specific vendor.
Meanwhile, if UPS comes up in the sponsored links, it's pretty good odds that they're paying for a click that would've come naturally anyway. Now, a search on "Shipping" is natually a whole diffent story...
It cuts right into the heart of freedom of speech law.
Last time I checked, the First Amendment starts out "Congress shall make no law..."
Since then, it's been interpreted by courts as applying to the entire Federal government.
As far as I know, there's no concomitant interpretation that it applies to Google.
It's a common misconception.
I was able to get the advertiser to stop using my name in the ads, but they are still there. Crazy.
I was able to get the advertiser to stop using my name in the ads, but they are still there. Crazy.
I don't really understand why companies with strong brand images would bid on their own names. For instance, if I (as a potential cusomer) search for "UPS Store" and FedEx comes up in the sponsored links section of the SERP, most likely I was looking specifically for the UPS Store and not their compeditors. FedEx may have a chance at grabbing the business, but I think it's unlikely since I was searching for a specific vendor.
Consumers may search for popular brand names if they're at the brink of a purchase, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they will only buy from that site. Case in point - I know my competition gains conversions from bidding on my brand name and, consequently, I gain conversions from bidding on theirs as well.
It's for the same reason that I bid on my own name... to (try to) stay top-of-mind while crowding out others vying for these purchase-ready consumers...
