Internal Search Results Aren't Trademark Infringing--PEM v. Peninsula

Internal Search Results Aren’t Trademark Infringing–PEM v. Peninsula

This is a case involving a trademark owner and a competitive keyword advertiser. The trademark owner memorably (and ridiculously) characterized the rival as engaging in “keyword conquesting,” a term I encourage you never to use. The court already sent that…

2023 Quick Links: IP, Keyword Ads

* For over a decade, I’ve implored people to stop using the term “Soft IP.” Amanda Levendowski now provides another reason: the term has problematic gender implications. * After II Movie, LLC v. Grande Communications Networks, LLC, 2023 WL 1422808…

512(f) Doesn’t Restrict Competitive Gaming of Search Results–Source Capital v. Barrett Financial

This case involves two “hard money lending” competitors, Source Capital and Barrett. Allegedly on behalf of Barrett, an SEO vendor sent DMCA takedown notices to Google, alleging that Source Capital had copied some of Barrett’s copyrighted material. Source Capital alleges…

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?--Adler v McNeil

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?–Adler v McNeil

This case involves Jim Adler, a/k/a the “Texas Hammer,” a Texas lawyer who has spent $100M+ on advertising to build his brand. The defendants run a call-center service that attracts prospective legal clients and then makes compensated referrals of the…

Court Denies Injunction in Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit--Nursing CE Central v. Colibri

Court Denies Injunction in Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit–Nursing CE Central v. Colibri

This is a competitive keyword advertising lawsuit. The plaintiff has a trademark registration for the “Nursing CE Central” mark for providing continuing education for nurses. [Note: if it’s not obvious, “CE” is an abbreviation for “continuing education.” Just like we…

Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit Fails...Despite 236 Potentially Confused Customers--Lerner & Rowe v. Brown Engstrand

Competitive Keyword Ad Lawsuit Fails…Despite 236 Potentially Confused Customers–Lerner & Rowe v. Brown Engstrand

This case involves two rival personal injury law firms in Arizona, one of which engaged in competitive keyword advertising against the other. The court dismisses the lawsuit on summary judgment. The court focuses on the likelihood of consumer confusion. The…

Services Aren’t Liable for Ignoring the DMCA’s 512(g) Counternotification Procedures–Hopson v. Google

This case involves a UGC anime site called Gelbooru, run by Hopson. Rightsowners sent DMCA takedown notices targeting the site to Google. (Lumen has many takedown notices containing the word “Gelbooru”). Google stripped out the notices’ identifying information and forwarded…

Venkat's Blog Post Unjustly Removed from Google Search Results Due to EU RTBF Takedown

Venkat’s Blog Post Unjustly Removed from Google Search Results Due to EU RTBF Takedown

This is not the first time my blog has been subject to right-to-be-forgotten (RTBF) takedowns. See, e.g., this post (scroll down for the updates). But every time the RTBF is applied to my blog, it’s probably a wrongful application of…

Quick Debrief on the Gonzalez v. Google Oral Arguments

Quick Debrief on the Gonzalez v. Google Oral Arguments

I’m going to crank this blog post out before I get swamped with press requests. My takeaways: I did not hear 5 votes in favor of the plaintiffs’ position. Indeed, the justices didn’t really engage with the plaintiffs’ core arguments…

9th Circuit Unceremoniously Dismisses Antitrust Lawsuit Against Google–Dreamstime v. Google

I previously summarized this case: Dreamstime sells stock photos. It had favorable organic indexing that made it some money, and it bought Adwords advertising that made it more money. Dreamstime was a big enough player that it got personal support…