Judgment 105/2016,
rendered by the Civil Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court on 29 February,
establishes the criteria pursuant to which the use of a third-party trademark
as a search engine keyword must be examined in order to determine whether it
infringes the trademark holder’s exclusive rights.
To that end, the Supreme Court has followed in the
footsteps of Alicante Court of Appeal and applied the doctrine established by
the Court of Justice of the European Union in its judgments of 23 March 2010
(joined cases C-236/08 -Google France v Louis Vuitton-, C-237/08 -Google France
v Viaticum- and C-238/08 - Google France v Centre National de Recherche en
Relations Humaines), 12 July 2011 (C-324/09, L'Oréal SA v eBay International
AG) and 22 September 2011 (C-323/09, Interflora Inc. v Marks & Spencer
plc).
According to that doctrine, the use of third parties’
trademarks as keywords in principle infringes the trademark holder’s
rights. Nevertheless, since exclusive
trademark rights are not absolute, under certain circumstances such use will
not be considered as infringing. Those
circumstances are as follows:
i) where the use of the trademark is not liable to affect the ‘product origin indicating’, advertising or investment functions of the trademark; and
ii) where it is clear to the average Internet user that the goods or services advertised do not come from the trademark holder or from an undertaking economically connected to it.
i) where the use of the trademark is not liable to affect the ‘product origin indicating’, advertising or investment functions of the trademark; and
ii) where it is clear to the average Internet user that the goods or services advertised do not come from the trademark holder or from an undertaking economically connected to it.
In this specific case heard by the Supreme Court, the
defendant had used the trademarks “masaltos” and “masaltos.com” as keywords in
order to contract Google.es’ adwords service.
Thus, when Internet users put those terms into the search engine, the
defendant’s advertisement appeared on the upper part of the results screen,
with a link to its website. The ad
nevertheless did not contain any of those terms; instead, the following wording
appeared: “aumentar su altura de 7 cm/ bertulli-zapatos.es. Zapatos con
plantillas para aumentar la altura www.bertulli-zapatos.es”
(“increase your height by 7 cm/ bertulli-zapatos.es. Shoes with insoles that increase your height www.bertulli-zapatos.es”).
The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts’ dismissal
of the action on the grounds that, since the plaintiff’s trademarks did not
appear in the ad in question, consumers were clearly made aware that the
companies were different and in competition with one another, and so the origin
indicating function of the trademark was respected. In the Supreme Court’s view, no detriment was
caused to the advertising or investment functions either.
In this regard, the Supreme Court underscored the fact
that exclusive trademark rights are not absolute. It warned that, taken to the extreme, such a
situation of absolute exclusive rights could give rise to malfunction in the
marketplace, leading to reduced market transparency and the obstruction of
competitors’ lawful commercial activities.
The Court lastly rejected the appellant’s argument
that the appealed judgment contradicted Granada Court of Appeal’s findings of
14 March 2014 and Madrid Court of Appeal’s findings of 30 September 2013,
confirmed by the Supreme Court itself in its judgment no. 98/2016 of 19
February. In both judgments, the action
for infringement of the “masaltos” and “masaltos.com” trademarks, which had
been used as Internet keywords, was accepted.
Here, the Supreme Court pointed out that there were
different facts at issue in those cases, since the trademarks in question also
appeared in the wording of the sponsored ads and on the website to which the ad
redirected, respectively, and so in those cases the requirements for trademark
infringement to have occurred, as established by CJEU case-law, were met.
Basically, the Spanish
Supreme Court has naturally fallen into step with the Court of Justice in
respect of these increasingly common cases of use of third parties’ trademarks
as keywords in Internet advertising.
Visit our website: http://www.elzaburu.es/en
Author: Carlos Morán
Visit our website: http://www.elzaburu.es/en
Thank you for this insightful blog! It's fascinating to see the Spanish Supreme Court align with CJEU on keyword trademark use.
ReplyDeleteIIT JAM BIOTECHNOLOGY