Google France & Google (Intellectual property) [2010] EUECJ C-238/08 (23 March 2010)

Google France & Google (Intellectual property) [2010] EUECJ C-238/08 (23 March 2010)

The Court held that advertisers who select keywords identical with trade marks and trigger ads for identical goods/services may be prohibited from such use if the ad does not clearly indicate the origin of the goods/services. However, the referencing service provider (Google) does not itself 'use' the trade marks within the meaning of Directive 89/104 or Regulation No 40/94, and thus cannot be held liable under trade mark law for merely storing keywords and displaying ads. The hosting exemption under Article 14 of Directive 2000/31 may apply to Google, limiting its liability provided it acts expeditiously upon notification of unlawful use.

Citation
[2010] EUECJ C-238/08
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Google France SARL; Appellant/respondent: Google Inc.; Respondent/appellant: Louis Vuitton Malletier SA; Respondent/appellant: Viaticum SA; Respondent/appellant: Luteciel SARL; Respondent/appellant: Centre national de recherche en relations humaines (CNRRH) SARL; Respondent/appellant: Tiger SARL; Respondent/appellant: Mr Thonet; Respondent/appellant: Mr Raboin
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
23 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Reference (joined Cases C 236/08, C 237/08, C 238/08) / Preliminary Ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union
Outcome
Preliminary ruling issued; questions answered as set out in the judgment.
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Keyword Advertising, Liability of Internet Intermediaries, Electronic Commerce, Hosting Exemption
Intellectual Property Law European Union Law Information Technology Law Trade Marks Keyword Advertising Liability of Internet Intermediaries Electronic Commerce Hosting Exemption

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Google France SARL

Appellant/respondent

Google Inc.

Appellant/respondent

Louis Vuitton Malletier SA

Respondent/appellant

Viaticum SA

Respondent/appellant

Luteciel SARL

Respondent/appellant

Centre national de recherche en relations humaines (CNRRH) SARL

Respondent/appellant

Tiger SARL

Respondent/appellant

Mr Thonet

Respondent/appellant

Mr Raboin

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Reference (joined Cases C 236/08, C 237/08, C 238/08) / Preliminary Ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of trade marks as keywords in paid referencing services constitutes 'use' that can be prohibited by the trade mark proprietor under Directive 89/104 and Regulation No 40/94
  2. 2 Whether the referencing service provider (Google) itself 'uses' the trade marks within the meaning of the relevant legislation
  3. 3 Whether the hosting exemption under Article 14 of Directive 2000/31 applies to the referencing service provider

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that advertisers who select keywords identical with trade marks and trigger ads for identical goods/services may be prohibited from such use if the ad does not clearly indicate the origin of the goods/services. However, the referencing service provider (Google) does not itself 'use' the trade marks within the meaning of Directive 89/104 or Regulation No 40/94, and thus cannot be held liable under trade mark law for merely storing keywords and displaying ads. The hosting exemption under Article 14 of Directive 2000/31 may apply to Google, limiting its liability provided it acts expeditiously upon notification of unlawful use.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling issued; questions answered as set out in the judgment.

Orders

  • Article 5(1)(a) of Directive 89/104 and Article 9(1)(a) of Regulation No 40/94 entitle trade mark proprietors to prohibit advertisers from using keywords identical with their marks in certain circumstances, but not the referencing service provider.
  • A referencing service provider does not itself use the trade marks within the meaning of the relevant legislation.