9 ms·

Kind of. But the standard of trademark violation is not "did a competitor use it". The standard for violation is closer to: "was the trademark used in a way tha

• Certhas 7y ago
  In different jurisdictions the standard for a trademark violation is vastly different. In some European countries you can't name a competitor in an ad (so no Coke vs Pepsi ads). So this case seems to be well within the range of what trademark law could do. Simply make it illegal to run ads on keywords that are competitors trademarks. Totally not a lawyer though.
• dillonmckay 7y ago
  Do you remember this from about a decade ago? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_v._Louis_Vuitton https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_v._Louis_Vuitton
  • cardiffspaceman 7y ago
    The thinking in the ECJ ruling seemed to completely exclude the burden on the consumer that comes from having to sift through patently unethical listings to get the one you want. (Some people call "patently unethical" dealings "sharp" dealings or whatever supposedly complementary term but let's admit that those practices take advantage of unschooled consumers, and are only good if you think that the only worthy consumer is one who is already schooled) It may be "fun" to discover prices through haggling or learn through research that BogusHandbags.example.com[1] isn't a legitimate dealer in Louis Vuitton handbags but it is work and it doesn't scale to have every consumer have to do it for every decision. [1] using example.com purely as an example. The operators of example.com are doing a good thing for the internet.