Court rules no willful disobedience by Google India in allowing use of trademarks as keywords in online ads.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Tejas Karia, dismissed a contempt application filed by M/s DRS Logistics (P) Ltd. against Google India Pvt. Ltd. The plaintiffs accused Google India of allowing third-party advertisers to use their registered trademarks as keywords in online advertisements, allegedly infringing on their trademark rights.
The case revolved around the use of the trademarks "AGARWAL," "AGGARWAL PACKERS AND MOVERS," and "DRS Logistics" in Google's advertising platform, which the plaintiffs claimed diverted traffic from their website to those of the advertisers. The plaintiffs argued that this practice constituted a breach of previous court judgments which directed Google to investigate and act upon complaints regarding such use of trademarks.
However, the court found that the directions in earlier judgments were limited to investigating complaints specifically related to the use of trademarks as keywords, and did not extend to their use in advertisement text, titles, or URLs. The court clarified that Google's obligation to act only arises upon receiving a complaint from the trademark owner, and no proactive monitoring duty was imposed on Google.
The court also highlighted that the legal position affirmed that using a trademark as a keyword does not automatically constitute infringement unless it leads to confusion, dilution, or a compromise of trademark rights. Furthermore, Google's contributory liability would only arise if it had knowledge of the infringement and failed to act on it.
Justice Karia emphasized that contempt proceedings are not maintainable when there are multiple interpretations of a court order, and only explicit and self-evident directions can form the basis for such actions. The court concluded that there was no willful disobedience by Google India, as the URLs in question had been taken down following the plaintiffs' notice and in compliance with Google's advertising policy.
This ruling underscores the complexities of trademark law in the digital advertising space and sets a precedent for how platform providers like Google are expected to handle trademark complaints.
Bottom line:-
Trademark infringement involving the use of registered marks as keywords in online advertisements - Directions confined to complaints by plaintiffs regarding use as keywords and not Ad-Text, Ad-Title, or URL.
Statutory provision(s): Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC, Section 151 of CPC, Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
M/s DRS Logistics (P) Ltd. v. Google India Pvt. Ltd., (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2924450
