*Graphical summary of the GA’s opinion on the French Keyword Advertising cases

20091107_Google France Opinionw2.003Having pondered about the GA’s opinion for some time I’d now like to sum my conclusions up. I’ve especially considered the statements published by Mackenzie, Ott, the IPKat and van Hoboken.

To enlarge the pictures just click onto the thumbnail above or onto the picture below. Although I’ve really tried to find a way to display most aspects of the opinion in a simple and comprehensible way, I do not recommend it for people who searching for an introduction into the topic, as the stuff is still quite complicated.


My criticism:

First of all I really do like the GA’s general view of the issue and agree with him e.g. on the nature of the internet. However, I do have to wonder if the ECJ will follow the GA on all issues. So for example…

– I am looking forward to seeing if the ECJ will agree with the GA’s splitting of the keyword advertising process into two separate issues and thus seeing the booking of the keywords by the advertiser as a non-commercial act and the selling of the keywords as a seperate service to the linking of ads to websites.

20091112_Google France Opinion.003

click to enlarge

– I share the GA’s view on the likeliness of confusion and welcome the fact that the GA kind of follows the “multi factor test“, as suggested by the District Court of Massachusetts.


– I am reluctant to agree that the search process should be compared to “caching” and the process of displaying ads to “hosting. In my opinion, it doesn’t make much sense to “forcefully expand” the existing provisions to fit onto these two concepts as well. Clear-cut exceptions would be more useful, but would require the EU Comission to act; something it is apparently a bit reluctant to do…


– I am also very sceptical towards guiding claims against AdWords and the advertiser towards national liability rules, as I think that harmonised laws would create more certainty & security for business and consumers and thus be far more efficient.


20091112_Google France Opinion.002

click to enlarge

I’d appreciate any comments.

4 Responses to “*Graphical summary of the GA’s opinion on the French Keyword Advertising cases”


  1. 1 Martin Husovec 25/11/2009 at 23:13

    I don´t understand at all why, is the act of booking the keywords considered as private act. And why is the advertiser even compared to consumer ? (consumer is just a natural person) – see 149 .

    Booking does have direct connection to display (56), it´s specific detail needed for advertising in search engines. So why is it a private act ? I do agree with “two uses theory”, but not with consumer-like use of trademark.


  1. 1 *Danish Supreme Court on Keyword Advertising « Austrotrabant's Blog Trackback on 09/12/2009 at 11:05
  2. 2 *ECJ: “Google France v. Louis Vuitton” Expected For The 23rd Of March 2010 « Austrotrabant's Blog Trackback on 19/02/2010 at 19:20
  3. 3 *IRIS2010 Recap: “Beware of The Leopard” And Other Goodies « Austrotrabant's Blog Trackback on 08/03/2010 at 23:36

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




This Satelite Doesn’t Beep But It ‘Tweets’

Please click here if you want to follow this blog on Twitter.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 95 other followers

Author’s Rights

Stopline.at

Stopline.at - Online reporting hotline for child pornography and nationalsocialist content on the internet
JuraBlogs - Die Welt juristischer Blogs
Herdict.org

Previous Posts:

RSS WIRED Epicenter

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
wordpress stat

%d bloggers like this: