Broadband News
News, views and analysis
Business ISPs closely following landmark Google case
14 Oct 2010 | 11.25 Europe/London
British business ISPs will be among the many companies who will be keeping a close eye on an intriguing legal battle launched by Interflora against M&S.
The international flower delivery company is accusing the high street store of bidding in Google AdWords on its brand name. Hence, if a web users types Interflora as a search term, the top paid link is for Interflora but the second is an advert for Marks & Spencer (and presently an advert for Asda appears in third place).
This used to be banned by Google, which would only allow brands who owned a trademark to bid on it in search marketing campaigns. However, since it reversed its decision in 2008, some companies have decided to bid on one another’s trademarks, hoping to pick up traffic that was clearly interested in researching a rival business.
Broadband ISPs need to watch out
Such ‘brand bidding’ has happened in the British consumer broadband market but has largely now subsided. Search for the likes of BT, TalkTalk, Virgin Media and Sky now will only lead to adverts for the desired brand.
This is likely to be a result of slim margins in the consumer market making it unprofitable to bid on one another’s terms because, ultimately, the increased competition for the brand name pushes up the price paid to Google for each click through.
However, in the business broadband market, where margins can be higher and supplementary services, such as hosting and telephony, may be added to a contract, brand bidding is still taking place.
Sky, Plusnet, Virgin Media Business and BT Business Broadband are actively bidding on one another’s brand names and so will need to watch the current legal case very closely.
The legal action is made necessary by Google positioning itself as merely a place where companies can advertise and that any IP infringement needs to be taken up with the relevant authorities, hence Interflora has felt compelled to launch legal action against M&S.
A landmark case
Neither party is commenting but Matthew Whiteway, Client Services Director at search agency, Greenlight, believes because the court case moves beyond accusation of plain ‘competitor bidding’ and cites infringements to Interflora’s trademark, brands across the country will be waiting to see if they need to alter their current marketing plans.
“Were Interflora to win this battle, it would set a precedent and a number of advertisers would likely follow suit,” he predicts.
“In the case of online marketers, there would likely be a time of panic, with marketers having to frantically review their AdWords accounts to ensure they do not run the risk of appearing for any of their competitor’s trademarked terms.”
The international flower delivery company is accusing the high street store of bidding in Google AdWords on its brand name. Hence, if a web users types Interflora as a search term, the top paid link is for Interflora but the second is an advert for Marks & Spencer (and presently an advert for Asda appears in third place).
This used to be banned by Google, which would only allow brands who owned a trademark to bid on it in search marketing campaigns. However, since it reversed its decision in 2008, some companies have decided to bid on one another’s trademarks, hoping to pick up traffic that was clearly interested in researching a rival business.
Broadband ISPs need to watch out
Such ‘brand bidding’ has happened in the British consumer broadband market but has largely now subsided. Search for the likes of BT, TalkTalk, Virgin Media and Sky now will only lead to adverts for the desired brand.
This is likely to be a result of slim margins in the consumer market making it unprofitable to bid on one another’s terms because, ultimately, the increased competition for the brand name pushes up the price paid to Google for each click through.
However, in the business broadband market, where margins can be higher and supplementary services, such as hosting and telephony, may be added to a contract, brand bidding is still taking place.
Sky, Plusnet, Virgin Media Business and BT Business Broadband are actively bidding on one another’s brand names and so will need to watch the current legal case very closely.
The legal action is made necessary by Google positioning itself as merely a place where companies can advertise and that any IP infringement needs to be taken up with the relevant authorities, hence Interflora has felt compelled to launch legal action against M&S.
A landmark case
Neither party is commenting but Matthew Whiteway, Client Services Director at search agency, Greenlight, believes because the court case moves beyond accusation of plain ‘competitor bidding’ and cites infringements to Interflora’s trademark, brands across the country will be waiting to see if they need to alter their current marketing plans.
“Were Interflora to win this battle, it would set a precedent and a number of advertisers would likely follow suit,” he predicts.
“In the case of online marketers, there would likely be a time of panic, with marketers having to frantically review their AdWords accounts to ensure they do not run the risk of appearing for any of their competitor’s trademarked terms.”