Google Adwords dive-bombed by American Airlines

'We do not bring this suit lightly'


Yet another trademark owner has gone to war over Google's keyword advertising. But this time it's a name everyone knows: American Airlines.

Yesterday, the world's largest airline slapped a federal suit on the world's largest search engine, claiming that Google's cash-cow of an ad system infringes on American's rather extensive trademark portfolio.

"Some individuals and entities attempt to take advantage of consumers by marketing their products or services using the brands of others," reads a filing with the US District for the Northern District of Texas. "This lawsuit involves exactly such a situation - efforts by certain companies to free ride on American Airlines' brands through use of Google technology."

Google is to blame, the suit argues, because it allows third-party businesses to piggy-back their ads on search engine keywords that violate American Airlines trademarks - like "American Airlines," "AA," and "A A."

Close to a dozen companies have filled similar suits against Google, including Geico and American Blinds, but none can match the profile of an American Airlines. "Geico is a pretty well known brand," Santa Clara University law professor and tech law blogger Eric Goldman told The Reg, "but American Airlines is one of those highest-echelon brands, one of the brands that almost everyone is familiar with." And American Airlines has lots of money to pay its lawyers.

American's argument is, shall we say, multi-faceted. On one level, the airline claims that Google is "directly" infringing its trademarks, that the search engine is using intellectual property owned by American Airlines to rake in cold, hard cash.

"The law doesn't really distinguish between me slapping a competitor's brand on my knock-off good and Google offering the ability to make a keyword match on its database," Goldman told us. "The fact that Google is taking money for having made an association on someone's trademark could, in theory, meet the trademark statute standards" - i.e. break the law.

What's more, the suit argues, Google is actually suggesting that advertisers purchase keywords that violate American Airlines trademarks. "Google has a sandbox where it suggests what keywords [advertisers] should buy and it will routinely suggests third-party trademarks," Goldman explained. "If you go onto the site and say 'Hey, I'm thinking about advertising in the travel business,' it will say 'Have you considered the following keywords' - and American Airlines trademarks may be on that list."

The airline makes a boatload of additional claims - with some holding more water than others. At one point, it gets huffy because Google doesn't allow keyword matches on its own trademark, and it complains that when you click on links related to American Airlines trademarks, you're taken to sites that sell both American Airlines tickets and tickets from competitors. You might as well complain that your local grocery store is selling both Coke and Pepsi even though it ran a Pepsi ad in the local paper.

So far, no such suit has actually gone to jury trial, but the American Blinds case is headed that way, and Google ended up settling with Geico. Basically, US courts are in disagreement over whether keyword advertising actually violates trademarks. "About half the courts who've opined on the question have said 'Yes, it does,' and about half have said 'No,'" Goldman said.

Goldman believes the American Airlines suit is doomed to fail, but you can bet the company will take it the distance. This is the word from those well-paid lawyers: "American Airlines does not bring this lawsuit lightly." ®

Similar topics

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading
  • Big Tech loves talking up privacy – while trying to kill privacy legislation
    Study claims Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft work to derail data rules

    Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft often support privacy in public statements, but behind the scenes they've been working through some common organizations to weaken or kill privacy legislation in US states.

    That's according to a report this week from news non-profit The Markup, which said the corporations hire lobbyists from the same few groups and law firms to defang or drown state privacy bills.

    The report examined 31 states when state legislatures were considering privacy legislation and identified 445 lobbyists and lobbying firms working on behalf of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, along with industry groups like TechNet and the State Privacy and Security Coalition.

    Continue reading
  • SEC probes Musk for not properly disclosing Twitter stake
    Meanwhile, social network's board rejects resignation of one its directors

    America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance. 

    A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.

    Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022