The ECJ and the
AdWords Cases
Five keyword cases have been transferred to the European Court of
Justice. Four rulings are in, one case is still pending.
1. France,
Rs. C-236/09, 237/09,
238/09 (ECJ
decision,
see
Update 69);
What's new:
The French Cour de
Cassation took back the case and issued another decision on July 13,
2010. As a
consequence of the ECJ's ruling, the Court referred a previous
ruling against Google Inc. back to the Court of Appeal, effectively
cancelling an earlier decision in favour of French luxury goods
company Louis Vuitton. It is up for the Court of Appeal to examine
factual matters more closely now (which the Cour de Cassation can't)
with the ECJ's ruling in mind (see:
Louis Vuitton says Google trademark fight ain’t
over - San Francisco Business Times).
2. Austria,
Rs.
C-278/08, Bergspechte
(ECJ
decision). What's new:
The Austrian Supreme
court ruled on 21 June 2010
(Case
Nr.
17 Ob 3/10f),
that even ads that don’t contain the third party trademark may lead
to a likelihood of confusion as long as the advertiser does not add
‘appropriate
clarifying indications‘.
Austrotrabant
has more on the case!
3.
Netherlands, Rs. C-558/08 ,
Primakabin / Portakabin (ECJ
decision, see
Update 70)
4. Germany,
Rs. C 91/09 –
Eis.de (ECJ
decision)
5. UK,
Rs. C-323/09 -
Interflora (Reference)
For more information (in German)
see:
Mehr Fragen
als Antworten – die Google France Entscheidung des EuGH zum Keyword
Advertising and
Fremde
Marken als Keywörter – Orakelsprüche des EuGH als Antwort auf biblische
Fragen.