SEO legal action on Trademark infringement

[petermeadit]

Hello all,

Just wondering how this scenario goes?

An SEO guy picks 6 targeted keywords derived from research and analysis, and decides to go out and do SEO on those keywords getting backlinks to the target domain name.

The keywords start ranking pretty well in a pretty tough vertical. They also start getting a lot of incidental/natural rankings for keywords which obviously other companies would like to rank for. No optimisation or links actively aquired were done for any keywords other than the targeted 6 chosen .

Now a compeditor wants to claims Trademark Infringement and threatens legal action because they got outranked naturally for their own keywords... and one of those keywords just happened to be their own domain name since it was very generic...

The question is this, can there be any trademark infringement if the compeditor outranks naturally its compeditors trademark keywords and including their actually domain name?

Example compeditors domain name is: 'name.com' targeted SEO domain name is: 'somename.com'. SERP results start showing somename.com above name.com naturally...??

So when you type the words 'name.com' into the search engine, then 'somename.com' outranks them...

Do they have a legal leg to stand on?

Cheers,
Peter Mead

 

[helloworld]

Sounds mega lulzy.

Forget the SEO it is irrelevant. I could create the same website and create internal pages and for a generic term mybrandx.com/some-name

or domainname.com doesn't want cheapdomains.com out ranking it for domain name search.

Oh wait, this is what I do everyday.

I think the real question is, have you infringed on their trademark ?

Also can I have competitors domain and contacts. I will hit them up for seo.

 

[petermeadit]

Thanks, just did all the usual SEO tasks on the checklist. You know, clean up the site, choose some good keywords and put them on there... Then get links to the site for selected keywords... pretty basic stuff.

No optimization has been done for their trademark.

Perhaps you could give them some SEO help because their website is very poorly optimized, but it looks good.

 

[snakeman]

Interesting stuff as we deal with this stuff daily!
No we are not an SEO firm, but rather a reptile shows business.
We have some very coveted trademarks that have been in use for many years before the internet came along and before the word SEO was invented!
Now newcomers are using our registered trademarks with SEO for their sites to beat us in search and openly steal our established clients.
Since 2008 we've had battles with more than a dozen other companies doing SEO to beat us in search, link bombing our key sites to knock us off the search engines and so it goes on.
We have sued and been paid by three infingers already and have more in our sights.
Now we are a tiny business, so you can expect lots of others to be in our shoes as well.
My advice is never do SEO for a registered "words" trademark.
All the best

 

[johno69]

We have sued and been paid by three infingers already and have more in our sights.
Now we are a tiny business, so you can expect lots of others to be in our shoes as well.

Interesting stuff. I have someone who created a landing page and are paying for adwords and specifically targeting my trade mark term.

 

[goldnugget]

Its not just trademark issues either (though personally I wouldnt try and directly SEO registered trademarks for keywords), even copying a competitors kewords word for word can invoke legal enquiries.

I have read of webmasters taken down by well ranking website owners where they have coppied the leading websites description, keywords etc which are protected from memory under copyright. So its not just what you see that is protected by copyright, some aspects of their code is as well and because kewords and some other metatags are customised for the webpage..they are protected.

Jay

 

[petermeadit]

Trademarks and SEO

Any blackhat techniques that specifically target trademarks will come undone when Google releases an algo to zap them out of the SERPS. I consider trademark targeting a waste of time, because what you are really after is a better SERPS for your sell-able products. Any underhanded tactics like trademark squatting link bombing etc are just plan anti-competitive and never condoned in any way shape for form. Thankfully that's not what I was talking about at the start of this thread.

Picture this hypothetical scenario: A major USA based, global corporation trade marks the word "Hat" (for example). Then, without this knowledge, a small Australian based company gets trademark approval for the words "Top Hat".

Then it goes to follow that "Hat" co. will always beat "Top Hat" co. in in a trademark case. This is the ruling and it is accepted as fair. All good, *swallowing the bitter pill*.

The issue I have with all this is, doing SEO on the products which "Top Hat" co. has for sale, such as hats, feathers, beanies etc. If done well, "Top Hat" co. will naturally outrank "Hat" co. for its Organic Keywords. This is fair competition; it's the aim of SEO. Notice we are targeting the generic product keywords, and not the brand or trademarks.

So the only form of SEO that this so called "Hat" co. is interested in doing is targeting smaller competitors, and taking them to court for their brand name and trademarks and putting them out of the market.

Not sure what you think, but this just didn't seem right to me. But it was the ruling so *swallow the bitter pill* . So if the "Top Hat" co. is serious about it's products, then it needs to find a new unique brand name to trademark, and then get back into business. The company I am talking about is a legitimate business and they have to *swallow the bitter pill* and deal with this if their small business is to survive.


snakeman : Seems your trademarks have clearly been infringed on and you are taking action, as you should do. Keep it up I say.

johno69 : Looks like you have a legitimate case for trademark infringement. Sound like It's worth taking action.

goldnugget : I agree with what you say. Any good SEO company already knows this, and would never knowingly target any trademark names or any trademarked keywords.


Thanks for the discussion.

 

[findtim]

i've OFTEN found that if you dig deep enough THEY are doing what you are scared to do thus thats why they are ranking.

it would be interesting for johno69 to give us a hyperthetical on what he is doing about his trademark issue. Not asking for specifics or domain names but just a process of protection view.

tim

 

[johno69]

At this stage not doing anything. We are outranking them for the term by a long way, and many other generic terms in our category too.

I think they may have given up on trying to out rank us at the moment.

 

[Chris.C]

Interesting stuff. I have someone who created a landing page and are paying for adwords and specifically targeting my trade mark term.

Seriously... And you haven't submitted a complaint to Google?



Google are pretty good at nipping this sort of thing in the butt when it comes to AdWords. I'd be sending them a complaint ASAP.

 

[johno69]

I tried a few searches last night and today and haven't seen the ad again. But I will if I see it.

 

[snakeman]

johno69, I have some advice for you based on unpleasant experience.
If you have an infringer bootlegging your trademark for SEO to outrank you, but they haven't got there yet, I'd be dealing with it as a matter of urgency.
When we have been slack on this, the infringer eventually gets on top (sometimes one good backlink is all it takes to change a long-standing order on SERPs).
If and when the infringer gets the taste of your business clients going to them as a result of their misleading and deceptive conduct and the dollars start lining their pockets, they are much less likely to accept a polite "cease and desist" and also they will use the money generated from your clients to attack you.
With that in mind, I'd be seriously considering attacking any backlinks using your registered trademarks and make sure that they either point to you or are removed.
All the best

 

[Ash]

I think it also benefits you to show a history of actively protecting your trademarks because if you show complacency in one instance I believe it can set a precedent for future trademark infringers.

 

[snakeman]

Yes, we have recently taken up infinging adverts with Google adwords, in the last week or so. They accepted our claim for two trademarks as in the snake man ones, but said they weren't going to act on the reptile parties trademarks. To my mind, they are idiots as by accepting liability for one lot, they must as a matter of logic accept the other as well.
Anyway, I pointed this out to them in a return e-mail and also sent them details of the the recent ACCC judgement against them (which I'll post here as an image file).
That e-mail went out just a few minutes ago, so I may have to wait a day or three for a reply.
I'll keep you posted.
By the way, I should also point out that at the present time, there were no adverts coming up for the searches for snake man and snakeman, but there were for the terms reptile parties and the deceptively similar reptile party, so there may have been a financial reason to accept liability for one and not the other.
All the best

 

[333]

Hi Snakeman,

Like many others with outstanding TM disputes against Google, you'll probably need to wait until the High Court publishes a decision in the case that flowed from the one you've linked to in the article/image.

http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case_s175-2012

333

 

[snakeman]

Yes and no.
No doubt if the decision goes as expected (against Google), then you are correct.
On the other hand if it goes with Google, I can see another similar case in court as the next aggrieved party sues.
Of relevance are two more recent decisions.
One by the Advertising Standards Bureau which has ruled that user generated content is the responsibility of the search engine or forum, meaning that when alerted to wrongt content, it must be removed. This ruling has been made in the context of both defamation and trademarks.
There was also the recent case of the Melbourne who sued Yahoo and Google and got payouts from both for defamation.
This case resolved a couple of months back, with both the search giants losing and neither appealed.
Also be going to Google now and before the final High Court Judgement (due in Feb at the latest), I am beating the obvious rush!
All the best