Resources
The quality and depth of Rouse's IP resources gives it, and its clients, the edge.
Trade Marks in Adwords - Infringement in China
Firstly, China's Trade Mark Law stipulates that "the registrant of a trade mark enjoys the exclusive right to use the trade mark". The term "use" is defined broadly to include advertising and other commercial activities. This wide interpretation suggests that selecting and purchasing the trademarked keyword for business purposes may be deemed as using another's trade mark illegally.
Secondly, China's Anti-unfair Competition Law states that "publicising goods by misleading means" is prohibited. There is a concern that after keywords have been typed into a search engine, internet users may misleadingly reach a conclusion that there is a connection between the trade mark and the bidder. Therefore it is likely that the bidder's selecting and bidding on such keyword may be considered misleading and a form of unfair competition.
Although court rulings do not set precedents and are not binding on future courts, there are two published cases in China that offer some insight as to how some courts may rule on such case in the future. The Guangzhou Baiyun District People's Court held that the bidder's act of selecting and purchasing the keyword in question from a search engine service provider to exhibit its website link to promote products and services should be a form of advertisement. Since the use of trade marks includes use in advertisements, the bidder's use of the trademarked keyword in this case was held to be trade mark infringement. In another case, the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court ruled that the bidder's use of another's trade mark on its website and the selection and purchase of the trademarked keyword to advertise its website misled consumers and therefore infringed the trade mark owner's exclusive use right. The court also held that the keyword's bidder's actions constituted a form of unfair competition.
Search Engine Service Provider's Potential Liability in China
Under current laws in China, a search engine service provider's liabilities, for selling trademarked keywords in China, are unclear. According to the Advertisement Law, the advertiser and the advertising publisher who publish advertisements for advertisers are responsible for checking papers or certificates. It is questionable whether accepting keywords selected by bidders would make them advertisers or advertisement publishers. If selecting and purchasing keywords is considered a form of advertising, then, under Advertisement Law, the service provider may be required to check the bidder's trade mark certificates.
The aforementioned two cases provide little clarity in determining the extent in which a search engine service provider will be held liable in China.
In the first case, although the court held bidding for keyword is a form of advertisement, it did not address whether the service provider had any obligation to check whether the keywords were registered trade marks. The court in its judgment only commented that it was beyond the service provider's capability to supervise whether the information on the internet is illegal in nature or not.However, the court noted that any expedient removal from the website of any questionable material after being notified by the trade mark owner would not result in the service provider being held liable for trade mark infringement.
In the second case however, the court held that the service provider is jointly liable for trade mark infringement. Like the first court, it did not comment on whether the service provider's provision of the keyword to bidders would in itself constitute trade mark infringement or unfair competition where this question remains to be addressed.
Conclusion
It appears that under current Chinese laws, bidders' selecting and purchasing trademarked keywords may constitute trademark infringement and unfair competition. However, it is still uncertain whether an internet search engine service provider's provision of the trademarked keywords to bidders is illegal.