Google keyword case – now in Israel

CNet reports that the latest trade mark dispute involving Google selling advertising keywords to someone other than the trade mark owner is taking place in Israel. The action is being brought by clothing company Matim Li, which is seeking $530,000 in damages.

The IPKat is sure that there’s a great lesson to be learnt from the different treatment that the keywords cases get in the various different jurisdictions – he’s just not sure what it is yet.

Judge in sense of humour shock (continued)

The IPKat was kicking himself for not having noticed the secret code in the Da Vinci Code judgment, until he realised where he’d gone wrong. The BAILII version of the judgment has the seemingly random italicised ‘typos’ corrected, rendering the code invisible. If you want to see the code in all its glory, take a look at the Court Service version.

FIFA loses in Germany

IOL reports that FIFA has lost a case against Ferrero before the Federal Court in Karlsruhe. The court found that FIFA can’t stop other undertakings from using WM 2006 (which translates as World Cup 2006), WM Deutschland (World Cup Germany) and Fussball WM Deutschland (Football World Cup Germany).

The IPKat would like to see a sensible approach taken here. While it’s rather mean to stop other undertakings referring to a national event, the use of such terms in the typeface used by FIFA could wrongly suggest that the user is an official sponsor, which would mislead the public.
KEYWORDS, CODES AND BALLS KEYWORDS, CODES AND BALLS Reviewed by Anonymous on Thursday, April 27, 2006 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.