A recently-filed case in the UK High Court may have considerable implications for keyword-based SEO strategies.
Interflora – the world’s largest flower delivery firm – are seeking undisclosed damages and an injunction to stop retailer Marks and Spencer from bidding on their brand name in pay-per-click advertisements. It is alleged that Marks and Spencer had been using the word “Interflora” along with a variety of mis-spellings in their Google Adwords campaigns to attract people to their Flowers Direct flower delivery service.
Interflora claim that this is a breach of the Trade Marks Act 1994 as their brand name has been used to advertise another company’s services. They argue that allowing this to continue will cause a dilution of the distinctiveness of their brand name and lessen its capability to distinguish Interflora and its or services from those of their competitors.
This is similar to a case that has been lodged in the US against Yahoo! by American Airlines, who claim that Yahoo! are allowing competitors to place advertisements that use the American Airlines brand name. This follows on from a dispute between American Airlines and Google last year which was reported to have ended in a settlement that did not involve damages.
The law in this area has not been fully tested in the UK – the most recent High Court case in this area saw Yahoo! win a case brought against it over the alleged use of the trade mark-protected term ‘Mr Spicy’ in keyword advertising. Yahoo! won that case because the keyword in question turned out to be ’spicy’ and not the registered mark ‘Mr Spicy’.
Riding off the back of well-established industry brands in keyword bidding is a widespread practice, particularly in the recruitment sector. A judgement in Interflora’s favour could have serious implications for SEO keyword strategies as more care will have to be taken over potential copyright infringements in keyword lists and Adwords campaigns.