Think your site doesn’t show ads related to a trademark? Think again.
Have you ever noticed a Google Adsense ad that seems to have nothing to do with the context of the page you’re viewing? These are retargeted ads based on your previous web browsing.
These ads may prove to be a new way for trademark owners to claim that your web site was designed to infringe on their marks.
For years, trademark owners have manipulated the results on parked domain names to show ads related to the trademark holder’s field of use. But re-targeted ads might take this tactic up a notch.
Consider this scenario: you operate a web site that includes a generic term in the domain name. The generic term is also a trademark in a limited field of use. But the trademark holder visits your page after visiting web sites in the field of use of the trademark and sees ads related to the field. Thus, the mark holder claims that your domain was created to infringe on its mark.
Sound far fetched? Hardly. In a recent UDRP decision (now the subject of a lawsuit), complainant Vanguard Trademark Holdings USA LLC (which owns the Alamo car rental brand) made this exact argument:
Respondent admits that he is using Google’s AdChoices program in an attempt to generate money from the disputed domain name “alamoclub.comâ€. Notwithstanding Respondent’s assertion that his website cannot provide links to car rental services, the copy of Respondent’s web page and Google’s own explanation of Google’s AdChoices program shows that it can and will. In this regard, Complainant relies upon the Google website as to what Google envisages about its AdChoices program (See Exhibit 4):
What are AdChoices?
The AdChoices icon appears on sites that use Google’s AdSense program to show ads. While Google often shows you ads based on the content of the page you are viewing, we also show some ads based on the types of websites you visit, view, or where you interact with an ad or other Google product supported by Google’s advertising services. In doing this, Google doesn’t know your name or any other personal information about you. Google simply recognizes the number stored in your browser on the DoubleClick cookie, and shows ads related to the interest and inferred demographic categories associated with that cookie. It’s our goal to make these ads as relevant and useful as possible for you. Google doesn’t create categories, or show ads, based on sensitive topics such as race, religion, sexual orientation, or health.
The ads shown on Respondent’s web page can and will include links to vehicle rental sites that participate in Google’s AdChoices program, particularly if the Internet user has been searching for vehicle rentals.
At least Vanguard admits that this is how the ads showed up on the page.
When you sign up for Adsense, you can select companies you don’t want to advertise. It would have been prudent for the owner to restrict ALL the major car rentals. I don’t see any car rental ads on the site now.
Sorry, but I think Alamo has a point! You can’t claim you’re not infringing, but stealthily collect ad revenue from the trademark . . .
Louise, I must assume that YOU visited car rental sites BEFORE visiting the AlamoClub site since otherwise your “observaton” (of no car rental ads) is a potential non sequitor. You see, Louise, you won’t see car rental ads (since they’re irrelevant to the site) UNLESS YOU previously were searching for . . . drum roll . . rental cars. In that case you might see ads on my PieALAMOde.com website. Do we have a trademark issue, therefore, Louise?
While the owner of AlamoClub is busying him/herself blocking ads for car companies would you also have him block ads for the other 250 US trademarks, from painting companies to meat purveyors to godknowswhat?
The one-sided tenor of your comments and the use of the word “prudent” suggests you are far more the advocated/ally and far less the casual observer who just happens to drop by this news item to comment.
“Stealthily collect ad revenue”?
Ya. Hidden website. Hidden Adsense ads. Full stealth mode, fer shur.
Suppose a tv network broadcasts the movie “The Alamo”, and there is a commercial for Avis or Budget car rentals. Is anyone liable for TM infringement? I think not.
There needs to be an exclusionary measure introduced into the UDRP process for this exact reason.
This affects every website in the world, not just the parking industry.
This is very problematic and needs to be addressed.
I’ve been worried about this for many months now. It can throw ANYONE in tub of boiling oil for no reason.
…I still fail to see how google adsense is not culpable for this…it’s like an aids victim spreading a disease with willful neglect.
Funny how powerful concerns can be free from liability…