When many netizens are looking for web pages they want to browse, they often turn to search engine websites and enter keywords to search. Therefore, more and more businesses are beginning to pay attention to keyword search results, hoping that their web links will be as high as possible. In the process of "you fighting for it", it is inevitable that some problems or even disputes will arise, and eventually it will go to court...
Recently, the Municipal No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court heard a trademark infringement dispute. The two companies went to court over ranking issues in Baidu keyword search results.
Not long after the trial ended, the plaintiff added Baidu as the second defendant. Yesterday, a Morning Post reporter conducted an investigation into this case against Baidu.
Plaintiff dissatisfied
More than 100,000 yuan was spent on promotion, but the position was robbed
In this trial, the plaintiff was a shoe art company in Chengdu. The company's chairman and lawyer were both sitting at the plaintiff's table. The defendant was a leather care company in Chongqing, and they hired two lawyers.
The plaintiff company was established in 1998 and registered the "Uncle Tom" brand. It currently has more than 20 branches in Chongqing. Mr. Duan, the company's legal counsel, told reporters that in 2007, the company established its own website and began to promote the "Uncle Tom" brand online, including Baidu keyword promotion.
Mr. Duan said that the company initially used "Uncle Tom" as a keyword. As long as you search for "Uncle Tom" on Baidu, the link to the company's website will appear at the first place in the search results. He said that at least more than 100,000 yuan has been invested from establishing the website to promoting Baidu keywords. "It has indeed achieved a certain brand promotion effect."
In 2010, when the company wanted to promote Baidu with the keyword "Uncle Tom Shoe Repair", it was told that the keyword had already been registered by another company.
Mr. Duan said that at that time, the words "Uncle Tom's shoe repair--a certain leather care chain organization" ranked first in Baidu's keyword search results. After clicking on it, it was linked to the website of this leather care chain organization. The name of this chain is exactly a brand of the defendant company.
"This is taking advantage of our popularity to attract customers." Mr. Duan believed that the defendant company was suspected of trademark infringement.
The defendant refuses to accept
The website has nothing to do with us, the plaintiff is hyping it up
"This may be hype." Mr. Wang, the person in charge of the defendant company, seemed a little helpless. He was very sure that the company would not use other people's brands for promotion. Because the company has dozens of branches in Chongqing, the company's brand is one of the best in China.
Mr. Wang told reporters that their leather care company also attaches great importance to online promotion. When searching for keywords such as "shoe repair" and "leather care" on Baidu, the company's website can be ranked at the top of the search results. "Our monthly online promotion fees are tens of thousands."
Mr. Wang himself actually wanted to understand why links to websites related to leather companies appeared when searching for "Uncle Tom shoe repair" on Baidu. Because after two years, all his colleagues in the company's network department have resigned, and he has never been sure why this happened.
The two companies have negotiated several times, but to no avail. Ultimately, the "Uncle Tom" company decided to sue the leather care company in Chongqing. Interestingly, not long after the court summons was issued, Mr. Duan, the legal counsel of the plaintiff company, discovered that the number one website link in the Baidu keyword search results for "Uncle Tom Shoe Repair" suddenly disappeared.
However, the "Uncle Tom" company decided not to withdraw the lawsuit. “Because trademark infringement disputes caused by keywords are relatively rare, we also hope that the law can give an explanation.”
Both sides refused to give in
The plaintiff took another step and sued Baidu.
At the trial, the defendant's two lawyers insisted that the website that ranked first in the search results had nothing to do with the defendant. The defendant's lawyer said that this website domain name is not a website owned by the defendant company.
Regarding the plaintiff's request for a cessation of infringement, an apology, and a compensation of 200,000 yuan, the defendant believed that the person who bore these responsibilities was not itself.
Because it was temporarily impossible to find out who was responsible for the "Uncle Tom Shoe Repair" incident, the plaintiff filed an application to add Baidu as a defendant at the court hearing. The defendant company and Baidu were "locked" together in order to find out the facts.
A few days after the trial ended, the court agreed to add Baidu as the second defendant. And set a date for a new trial.
The plaintiff and defendant had mixed reactions. "As a network service operator, Baidu also wants to know whether it should bear responsibility." Mr. Duan said. Mr. Wang, the person in charge of the defendant company, said that whether keyword searches constitute infringement remains to be discussed. This article is written by Chongqing Morning Post reporter Liu Bo, intern Wang Zihan
News in depth>
Website search ranking
Who decides
By conducting bidding rankings with search engine operators, the website can be ranked high when searching for relevant keywords. Websites can also conduct online marketing through SEO (Web Engine Optimization) companies, which increase the exposure of specific keywords on the Internet, thereby increasing the visibility of related websites in Internet searches.
There is also an alternative model that often appears in the mobile application market. When users search for applications with the same function, the mobile application market will default to placing products with high reviews at the front, allowing many application developers to use trolls to win online search rankings.
Lawyer’s statement>
Search engine service provider
or should bear responsibility
Some lawyers believe that whether legal disputes caused by online keywords constitute trademark infringement still depends on the specific circumstances. There are currently many relevant cases, but there are still few specific legal provisions.
Many lawyers believe that operators providing search services should bear relevant responsibilities for disputes caused by online keywords. In April 2005, the "Internet Copyright Administrative Protection Measures" issued by the National Copyright Administration and the Ministry of Information Industry pointed out that network service providers should promptly correct behaviors that may cause infringement and prevent knowing and intentional violations.
In recent years, disputes caused by keyword searches in my country have been on the rise year by year. Some lawyers also suggest that merchants who need online promotion services should try to avoid using words similar to competitors' trademark names as keywords for search promotion to reduce unnecessary disputes.