Google Adwords on a competitor?

[Mr. Ingram's Computer Repair & Shoppe]

I hope this can stay a non-heated thread.

I am the only brick-n-mortar computer repair within 12-15 mile radius, which is pretty durn good!

The next small town over has a computer business that has been around literally as long as I have been alive.

For google adwords I set it up to advertise within a 10 mile radius of me. Making sure I keep within my town.

I am debating on setting up a couple more ad campaigns around me specifically targeting their name/keywords in their service area?

I've closed my shoppe early several times and went down and talked with the owner of the different stores, Everyone is a keep-to-themselves type of business, they don't want to trade customers or stock parts for eachother... me and my wholeseller are completely open books, I don't care how much she knows about my business, she's helped me troubleshoot several times and simply put a second set of eyes on a problem for me.

What is yalls thoughts on advertising on competitors turf?

Is it normal to do so, and im just way to nice?

Or am I getting greedy?

 

[trevm999]

I'd say it's fine to target their area keywords, as long you actually service the area.

I've seen some google ads that must be targeting the keyword of another product, but I'd say that is pretty low. If a user specifically searches for another company and your company pops out on top, you're specially the cause of not giving them what they're looking for.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Why the hell wouldn't you target them? Are you in business or not?

 

[Mr. Ingram's Computer Repair & Shoppe]

I'd say it's fine to target their area keywords

Not area keywords, but them specifically, their business name, owners name, techs name and have a very small ad radius that covers between them and me. attempting to take half their customers.

as long you actually service the area.

I do. I get several customers a week from that area. I also live 4 minutes from them... So a lot of people see me on walks the Bruce anyways XD

 

[nlinecomputers]

Ok, that is different. It is tricky to use other businesses by name in your own advertising. You risk lawsuits from Trademark infringement to slander. Example, if you actually mention MY name in your advertising I WOULD SUE YOU.

 

[nlinecomputers]

https://www.smartuplegal.com/learn-center/can-i-use-a-competitors-name-in-advertising/

 

[Alexey]

What is yalls thoughts on advertising on competitors turf?

Yes, why not. Even trademarks can be used as keywords, see https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6118?hl=en

You can't use their trademarks in your ad texts, at least not in general case, but otherwise there is no general rule forbidding it. If you have some specific arrangements with them, you may be not willing to do it, but with keep-to-themselves ... don't want to trade customers, I'd say its a fair game. Can you profit from this? Thats up to you, obviously. But it is certainly not forbidden to try.

I'd say it's fine to target their area keywords, as long you actually service the area.

If one advertises on keywords (and spends money on ads) while not actually getting any work done for these keywords (not getting any return from ads), that eventually ends up in bankrupcy. So I don't see what's wrong with that either.

Example, if you actually mention MY name in your advertising I WOULD SUE YOU.

But I can put my name on my advertising, and target your name as the keyword.

 

[nlinecomputers]

But I can put my name on my advertising, and target your name as the keyword.

And you can be sued for trademark infringement. One of the purposes of a trademark is not to mislead people into an endorsement or misrepresentation of yourself as another company. This is why it is so important to properly trademark your business name.

 

[Alexey]

And you can be sued for trademark infringement. One of the purposes of a trademark is not to mislead people into an endorsement or misrepresentation of yourself as another company. This is why it is so important to properly trademark your business name.

I can be sued for pretty much anything. However, I can write an ad copy like "My greatest repair shop {my-name-goes-here}, cheap prices and same-day turnaround", and then I bid for "your shop name" keyword, so my ad pops up when people search for your company. There is no misrepresentation or endorsement. The ad clearly states that it is {my-name-goes-here} shop which is cheap and quick. The ad does not mention your shop in any way.

 

[Mr. Ingram's Computer Repair & Shoppe]

So to clear it up. I would be using their name under "search phrases" so when someone googles "PC Paramedic Mint Hill" an ad will pop up:

So I don't believe I will be breaking any law.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Nonsense. Your site pops up on a search for me. That is an illegal use of MY trademark. Also note that Google will lower the results of your ad if you use other trademarks as keywords.

 

[nlinecomputers]

So I don't believe I will be breaking any law.

Wrong: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/11/11-4114.pdf

 

[Alexey]

Wrong: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/11/11-4114.pdf

Lets' examine this.

So, 1800CONTACTS is suing Lens.com because some affiliate of Lens.com used 1800CONTACTS both in keywords (invisible to searcher), and in ad text (visible to searcher).

All further quotes are from PDF, and all bolding mine.

... primary claim was that Lens.com itself had infringed the 1800CONTACTS mark by purchasing keywords resembling the mark. According
to 1-800, this conduct had directed potential customers for 1-800 to Lens.com by creating what is known as “initial-interest confusion,” which can be actionable under the Lanham Act.

As the case progressed, 1-800 supplemented its claim of direct infringement by alleging that certain third-party marketers hired by Lens.com, known as affiliates, had also purchased keywords resembling the mark and that at least one affiliate was using the mark in the text of its online ads.

...

The district court awarded summary judgment to Lens.com on all claims. On the direct-liability claim and most of the secondary-liability claims, the court ruled that 1-800 had raised no genuine issue of fact regarding the likelihood of initial-interest confusion.

So as I understand, Lens.com won the district court case and then 1800CONTACTS appealed, and the PDF I'm reading is appeal proceedings.

Thus, to the extent that 1-800’s secondary-liability claim derives from keyword use by Goggans and McCoy that did not generate ads containing the 1800CONTACTS mark, there is insufficient evidence of direct infringement.

and finally

We AFFIRM summary judgment on all claims of infringement based on keyword use that did not result in ads displaying 1-800’s mark in their text.

So the ads which did not have trademark in the text were actually found to be OK.

That is, unless I read the document wrong. This can quite possibly be case, because I'm not very good in English legal-speak, and if that's the case, I'm quite happy to be corrected.

 

[Alexey]

Could you please elaborate a bit, because I seem to have trouble understanding this part

The district court awarded summary judgment to Lens.com on all claims. On the direct-liability claim and most of the secondary-liability claims, the court ruled that 1-800 had raised no genuine issue of fact regarding the likelihood of initial-interest confusion.

When it says "court awarded summary judgement to X", does it mean (grammatically) that X won, or X lost, or maybe you cannot conclude if they won or lost by just reading this statement?

When it says "raised no genuine issue of fact regarding the likelihood of X", does it not effectively translate to "X was not confirmed" or "X was not found to be a problem"?

 

[nlinecomputers]

Could you please elaborate a bit, because I seem to have trouble understanding this part



When it says "court awarded summary judgement to X", does it mean (grammatically) that X won, or X lost, or maybe you cannot conclude if they won or lost by just reading this statement?

When it says "raised no genuine issue of fact regarding the likelihood of X", does it not effectively translate to "X was not confirmed" or "X was not found to be a problem"?

Ignore. I deleted my comment and rereading this doc. (You may be right)

 

[Alexey]

Are you sure you are not mixing up two cases here, because I have just found the Wikipedia article mentioning this case,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens.com,_Inc._v._1-800_Contacts,_Inc.

While this case was ongoing, the two parties were also embroiled in other trademark litigation. Approximately one year following this decision, the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit decided another controversy between 1-800 Contacts and Lens.com, this time over the latter's use of its competitor's trademark in Google adwords as a means of redirecting customers to its own website.[8] The Tenth Circuit held that Lens.com did not commit trademark infringement when it purchased search advertising using 1-800 Contacts' federally registered 1800 CONTACTS trademark as a keyword.

and further

In August 2016, the Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint against 1-800 Contacts alleging, among other things, that its search advertising trademark enforcement practices have unreasonably restrained competition in violation of the FTC Act. 1-800 Contacts has denied all wrongdoing and is scheduled to appear before an FTC administrative law judge in April 2017.[9]

 

[Alexey]

Ah, OK, no problem. Thanks for bearing with me for that long.

 

[Markverhyden]

I would think that as long as one does not publicly use a competitors name, absent a legitimate reason, then your fine. A legitimate reason might be Joe's Computer Repair charges $80 for xyz and I only charge $60. Personally I'd never mention a competitors name for any reason. You can only control 1/2 of the exchange and some people really are nuts.

As far as broadcast area. Forget this let's be gentlemen thing. You're in business to support yourself and your family. And that includes saving for the future. Forget about Social Security, the fund will be empty in some 15 years or so. So payments will be based purely on tax receipts.

 

[trevm999]

Say you went to enter a business and there was a giant sign for it's competitor right beside the business. So big and flashy that passers by probably thought that the sign was to do with the business that was physically there. I would think that the competing business was run by a-holes.

 

[Your PCMD]

I find it funny that when I Google my business name I get this as well:

Your PCMD | Technibble Forums
https://www.technibble.com › Members
Your PCMD is a member of Technibble Forums. Well-Known Member, Male, from Gainesville, TX.