|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
Geico takes Google to court
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
globeandmail.com has the info about Geico suing Google because rival insurance company ads show up when you search for Geico.
Lawyers for auto insurance giant Geico told U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema that Google should not be allowed to sell ads to rival insurance companies that are triggered whenever Geico's name is typed into the Google search box.
Geico claims that Google's AdWords program, which displays the rival ads under a “Sponsored Links” heading next to a user's search results, causes confusion for consumers and illegally exploits Geico's investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in its brand.
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
I should also be able to sue Google because I did a search for Fruit Smoothies and got Latin porn links instead.
Posted by: SKYHN
Everytime I search for Elbow Deep Teens, I get OTS. I think Canis should sue.
http://www.google.com/search?q=Elbow+Deep+Teens
Posted by: laborat
I think Geico has a good chance in court. Fair business practices and all. And popups for rival insurance companies when Geico is typed in is hardly fair. I happen to like the way they built up brand name recognition. It was a good ad campaign. top notch even.I hope they win.
In reality, I think Google, (like any good corporation) is just testing the limits of how much they can get away with, without getting smacked by the courts. That's why we have courts and judges...and Congress. So litigants can grease the government trough with bribes and campaign donations.
It would be a good thing for Google to settle out of court though, and keep the income stream alive till the next big suit that won't settle.
Geico would collect more in actual damages, legally, by going after the rival insurance companies that paid Google monies for the opportunity to be "sneaky rutters" (look it up) to Geico's alpha male Ghecko.
it will certainly prune the men from the boys in popup land. Gonna have to have the bucks to fight things in court should your dirty practices popups and spams and porno income streams strike someone with big bucks, and an axe to grind, or a point to prove, as being something (the popups or whatever) akin to "selling a pig in a poke". In the end lawyers will wind up with most of the money and a book deal. It's about time for another "Barbarians at the Gate" type book to make the Booksellers top 10.
I would buy it. It promises to be a Big Book. with pictures and diagrams and footnotes.
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
While I don't agree with Google's ad policy, it's hardly confusing as they claim.
http://home.insightbb.com/~silverbolt/geico.jpg
Posted by: redwench
i dont see how geico's name is being exploited. the search returns appropriate links, with relevant ads off to the side. google is supported through these types of ads, and as long as they are appropriate, there is no issue. i could see geico suing if pron ads came up, but insurance? theyre in the insurance industry for christ's sake, its entirely appropriate for competitor's ads to appear.
if geico is going to sue every search engine that puts up advertisements for sites it doesnt like, its asking to be purged from them altogether. which really isnt what a for-profit company wants....
Posted by: Null Actor
Geico needs to just buy an adword. Sheesh. Then their name would be top of the ad list as well.
Posted by: Ocean
damn, its a shame that geico couldnt just buy google advertising, if they really think a large part of their revenue is being lost from google searchers.
we see pepsi ads countering coke ads in the superbowl, geico vs allstate in will and grace, and who are they suing?
if you accidentally type in gieco, google actually asks if you meant geico. if it wasn't for google, the structure of the web (which no one should be responsable for) would take you to competitor sites in these circumstances.
if it wasnt for google, there is no fukcing way in hell that the people who can spell geico in a google search would ever be able to remember geico.com
companies have a right to advertise against their competition. sue the companies for purchasing advertising triggered by a word they have no claim to. dont sue google for allowing the option.
Posted by: Null Actor
It's funny how the exact same situation comes up over and over and over. Companies always try and sell the tool instead of the person doing what they don't like. Don't like people downloading your stuff? Sue the file sharing app! Someone killed with a gun? Sue the gun manufacturers! Getting fat? Sue McDonalds!
There should be a rule of law that says "If you aren't suing the people directly responsible for what you don't like, it gets tossed out."
Posted by: AOTY2KB
 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Null Actor
There should be a rule of law that says "If you aren't suing the people directly responsible for what you don't like, it gets tossed out."
|
If we were to tow that line, what do you do about the kids being exploited by Mickey D's?
ie: Mc Donalds entices little kids with their offer of a toy in a Happy Meal in the commercials. Do you blame the parent for taking the kid and putting them in the unhealthy lifestyle or Mc Donalds for breaking advertising rules stating you can't have ads targeting minors under 8? Toys available at one point or another: Barbie, Hot Wheels, Transformers, Beanie Babies etc.
Posted by: redwench
parents who cant tell a kid "no" shouldnt be parents. ever seen the commercials that run during cartoons? you think theyre targeted at adults?
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by redwench
parents who cant tell a kid "no" shouldnt be parents. ever seen the commercials that run during cartoons? you think theyre targeted at adults?
|
I agree. Tickle me Elmo ads make me want to chokeslam puppies. Obviously not targeted for adults.
Posted by: Null Actor
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AOTY2KB
If we were to tow that line, what do you do about the kids being exploited by Mickey D's?
ie: Mc Donalds entices little kids with their offer of a toy in a Happy Meal in the commercials. Do you blame the parent for taking the kid and putting them in the unhealthy lifestyle or Mc Donalds for breaking advertising rules stating you can't have ads targeting minors under 8? Toys available at one point or another: Barbie, Hot Wheels, Transformers, Beanie Babies etc.
|
Another rule: If your lawsuit is attempting to pass the buck, it gets thrown out.
Posted by: Null Actor
Also: Google wins.
http://news.com.com/Google+wins+in+..._3-5491704.html
Posted by: AOTY2KB
Uncommon "common" sense seems to have played a role and gotten a speedy verdict
*too tired to write a rebuttal* good night
|
|
|
|
|
