AdWords Lawsuits in France - Trademarks as keywords illegal?

I. Current legal situation (January 2008)

Important June 2008 Update: European Court of Justice will hear Google Adwords lawsuit!

1. Advertisers in France should not use trademark protected terms as keywords. The Court of Nanterre, the Court of Paris, the Court of Appeal of Versailles - all have found that advertisers committed a trademark infringement. Only the Court of Strasbourg (decision of July 20, 2007, Atrya vs. Google and K par K/Techni Feneres) has stressed the initial function of a trademark to distinguish a product or a service and to associate it to a specific origin and found no trademark infringement. Nethertheless the court deemed the use of the trademark to be unfair competition (parasitism based on the profiting of the well known brand of a competitor). So far no French court held the use of trademark protected keywords to be legal!

2. As for the liability of search engines, courts in France differ on the reasoning. According to the Court of Nanterre Google is an active trademark infringer. The mere fact of suggesting the infringement by using the mark as proposed keyword is enough. The court of Paris in contrary underlines that Google does not use the trademark for identical or similar products / services in a commercial manner. So there is no trademark infringement. But nethertheless Google's conduct was not deemed legal. Google's liability was based on the common civil principle of fault (Section 1382 of the Civil Code) due to the lack of preliminary control to check whether chosen keywords do infringe third party rights. The Court of Strasbourg, (decision of July 20, 2007, Atrya vs. Google and K par K/Techni Feneres) took into account technical measures implemented by Google (a filter and links to check third parties' rights) and excluded Google's liability on all grounds. This is the most recent decision from France and the first to exclude a search engine from liability in an Adword related lawsuit! It remains to be seen if other courts adopt the approach of the Court of Strasbourg.

3. According to the Cour d'Appel de Paris, French courts have no jurisdiction if the incriminated ads lead only to websites owned by companies established outside France and appear only on google.co.uk, google.de and google.ca, but not on google.fr. (decision of June 6, 2007, Google Inc. and Google France v. Axa et al, CRI 2007, 155 ff.).

For a good overview see:

• Denis-Leroy, Liability for AdWords Services in Frances, CRI 2007, 65-68

II. List of Decisions

 III. Additional Information on some cases

1. Google v. Viaticum / Luteciel

The civil court in Nanterre fined Google 75,000 euros for allowing advertisers to link text internet advertisements to trademarked search terms and gave the company 30 days to stop the practice. In the trademark case, the owner of the name "Bourse des vols" (Market for Flights) wanted Google to stop allowing competitors to include "Bourse des vols" as a term that would generate an advertisement and link to their own site. The decison is available here!

In March 2005 Google's French subsidiary lost its appeal. The court in Versailles, west of Paris, found that Google was guilty of "trademark counterfeiting" and ordered it to pay the damages originally awarded to French travel companies Luteciel and Viaticum. The search engine must now pay €75,000 (US$100,000) in fines and legal costs.

But according to the decision, Google has no general obligation to monitor the keywords their customers choose, but Google must be able to prohibit the use of illicit keywords such as those infringing trademarks. In this case, the court thought that Google knew or should have known the marks of the defendant companies.  But even if Google had legitimately not been aware of the fact that trademark protected terms had been used, Google has been notified of the fraudulent use of the key words and had the duty to put an immediate and full stop to such infringement.

The decision is available here, an English translation at: http://www.legalis.net/jurisprudence-decision.php3?id_article=1415

Also see: Speer, Lawrence, French Trademark Ruling Against Google Keyword Advertising Upheld on Appeal, Electronic Commerce & Law Report 2005, 296-297

The case is currently on appeal to the French Supreme Court.

2. Google v. Louis Vuitton

Louis Vuitton successfully sued Google and its French subsidiary for trademark infringement. Allowing competitors to run ads triggered by Louis Vuitton's trademark terms was deemed to be counterfeiting, unfair competition and misleading advertising. Google was ordered to pay 280.000 € in damages and court costs to Louis Vuitton and to stop displaying advertisements for Vuitton's rivals whenever Internet users typed Vuitton's name. Plaintiff even presented evidence that Google had not only allowed keyword combinations that associate plaintiff's protected marks with terms including "imitation, fake, copies" etc. to be purchased, but that the AdWord program actually proposed the terms to would-be advertisers. The Paris court ruling against Google Inc. applies to all its sites, not just its French Google.fr page.

Louis Vuitton Malletier / Google, Civil Court of Paris (TGI), February 4, 2005

In June 2006 The Paris Court of Appeals agreed with the February 2005 decision by a Paris district court that found Google guilty of trademark counterfeiting and unfair competition and advertising. The Paris court increased the Vuitton damages to allocate for the case (€300,000) and other legal expenses (€75,000).

Also see: Speer, Lawrence, Google Infringed Designer's Mark By Selling Similar Search Engine Keywords, Electronic Commerce & Law Report 2005, 150

3. Hotels Meridian v. Google France

• Nanterre Court (TGI), Decision of December 16, 2004, Hotels Meridien v. Google France
  
  An English translation can be found at: http://www.juriscom.net/jpt/visu.php?ID=631

Also see: Speer, Larence, Use of Hotels' Marks as Keywords Deemed Infringing by French Court, Electronic Commerce & Law Report 2005, 93

The verdict in the main procedure opposing Société des Hôtels Méridien and Google France was handed down on March 2, 2006. The Nanterre court of first instance held that Google France has committed acts of trademark infringement within the meaning of articles L 713-2-a and L 713-3-b of the Intellectual Property Code. The court ordered Google to

• to delete from its key-word generator, which is accessible from its website www.google.fr, any and all reference to the trademarks “MERIDIEN” and “Le MERIDIEN”, identically or similarly, under daily penalty of 5000 €

• to publish on the first page of its website accessible under the address www.google.fr the following legal advertisement, under the title “JUDICIAL PUBLICATION”, for a duration of fifteen days and under penalty of 3000 € per day, beginning 48 hours after the notification of the present verdict: "The first chamber of the Nanterre Court of First Instance has sentenced the company Google France by verdict of March 2, 2006 for having infringed on the rights of the company Société des Hôtels Méridien in the trademarks “MERIDIEN” and “Le MERIDIEN”"

The court also sentenced Google France to pay to the plaintiff the sum of 150.000 €  in compensation for the infringement.

• Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre 1ère chambre Jugement, Decision of March 2, 2006, http://www.legalis.net/breves-article.php3?id_article=1599

4. Accor v. Overture

A similar judgment by the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre was issued on 17 January 2005: Overture has been held legally liable because the judge considered Overture's ad booking tool, which suggests to customers keywords which promise to be successful, also encouraged advertisers to chose keywords that were trade marks belonging to Accor (with the suggested keyword hotel, the online service informed  its customers of other  possible keywords such as "Hotel Formule 1", "Hotel Ibis", "Hotel Mercure", "Hotel Accor"). Overture was ordered to pay damages of 200 000 euros and to publish the judgment on its website.

• Nanterre Court (TGI), Decision of January 17, 2004, Accor v. Overture

Also see: Speer, Larence, Use of Hotels' Marks as Keywords Deemed Infringing by French Court, Electronic Commerce & Law Report 2005, 93

IV. Press coverage of the lawsuits in France

• March 17, 2005: Google France loses AdWords appeal, Out-Law.com:
  ”Google France has lost an appeal against a French court ruling after it allowed advertisers to sponsor certain terms that are protected by registered trade marks, according to reports.”

• February 4, 2005: Olsen, Stefani, Google loses trademark case in France, CNet:

  "A French court on Friday ruled against Google in a trademark infringement case brought by Louis Vuitton Malletier, in the latest legal setback to the search giant overseas."

• January 27, 2005: Marken-Trigger auch für Overture verboten, intern.de

  Das Tribunalgericht im französischen Nanterre übt sich in einer Art ausgleichender Gerechtigkeit. Nachdem gerade erst Google verurteilt wurde, muss jetzt auch der Konkurrent Overture eine Niederlage einstecken.

• January 21, 2005: French court says Non! to Google's adwords, The Register:
  ”A French court has ruled that Google's keyword advertising service infringes on the trademark of Le Meridian Hotels, and has ordered the company to stop using the trademark to trigger advertisements for Le Meridian's competitors.”

• January 21, 2005: Olsen, Stefanie / Kaufmann, Joachim, Google verliert Prozess um Markenrechte, ZDNet:
  “Für das Adwords-Programm des Suchmaschinenanbieters Google ziehen dunkle Wolken am Himmel auf: Ein französisches Gericht hat letzten Monat entschieden, dass die Nutzung des Markennamens der Hotelkette "Le Meridian" die Rechte des Unternehmens verletzt.“

• January 21, 2005: Google verliert Rechtsstreit in Frankreich, Heise:
  “Nach einem Urteil eines Gerichtes in Nanterre darf Google keine eingetragenen Markennamen der Hotelkette Le Meridian als Schlüsselwörter für Werbung anbieten.“

• April 27, 2004: Olsen, Stefanie / Fiutak, Martin, Axa verklagt Google, ZDNet:
  "Versicherungskonzern wehrt sich gegen bezahlte Werbung mit dem eigenen Namen"

• April 27, 2004: AXA sues Google over keyword advertising, Out-Law.com:
  "Google is gearing up for a legal battle in the French courts over its keyword advertising sales service."

• April 26, 2004: Axa klagt gegen Google, Heise:
  "Der französische Versicherungskonzern AXA ist in Frankreich gegen den Suchmaschinenbetreiber Google vor Gericht gegangen."

• April 26, 2004: Oates, John, Google back in court over Adwords, The Register:
  "French insurance giant AXA is taking Google to court over allegations that the search engine sold on AXA trademarks as search terms."

• October 28: Louis Vuitton verklagt Google, Heise: 
  "Der französische Luxusgüter-Hersteller Louis Vuitton hat die Betreiber der Suchmaschine Google auf Schadenersatz verklagt, weil sie dessen Markenrechte durch die Platzierung von Werbebotschaften neben Trefferlisten verletzt haben sollen."

• October 24, 2003: Frost, Laurence, Louis Vuitton sues Google for alleged trademark infringement online, Mercury News:
  "Google and its French subsidiary are facing another trademark challenge in the wake of a landmark ruling that could force the popular Internet search engine to change how it sells advertising."

• October 24, 2003: Handbag maker Vuitton sues Google, CNN:
  "Louis Vuitton SA is suing Google and its French subsidiary for trademark infringement in the wake of a landmark ruling that could force the popular Internet search engine to change the way it sells advertising."

• October 20, 2003: Google muss 75.000 Euro wegen Einblendung von Textwerbung zahlen, Institut für Urheber- und Medienrecht:
  "Die Eingabe von Adwords, die gleichzeitig Markennamen sind, darf nicht zur Auflistung von Textwerbung führen, die den geschützten Begriff enthält."

• October 19, 2003: "Adwords" bei Google dürfen nicht auf fremde Werbung verweisen", Heise:
  "In Frankreich hat ein Gericht entschieden, dass Suchworte bei Google, die gleichzeitig Markennamen sind, nicht mehr auf Links von Konkurrenten verweisen dürfen, die diese Markennamen in ihre Werbung einbauen."