翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ "O" Is for Outlaw
・ "O"-Jung.Ban.Hap.
・ "Ode-to-Napoleon" hexachord
・ "Oh Yeah!" Live
・ "Our Contemporary" regional art exhibition (Leningrad, 1975)
・ "P" Is for Peril
・ "Pimpernel" Smith
・ "Polish death camp" controversy
・ "Pro knigi" ("About books")
・ "Prosopa" Greek Television Awards
・ "Pussy Cats" Starring the Walkmen
・ "Q" Is for Quarry
・ "R" Is for Ricochet
・ "R" The King (2016 film)
・ "Rags" Ragland
・ ! (album)
・ ! (disambiguation)
・ !!
・ !!!
・ !!! (album)
・ !!Destroy-Oh-Boy!!
・ !Action Pact!
・ !Arriba! La Pachanga
・ !Hero
・ !Hero (album)
・ !Kung language
・ !Oka Tokat
・ !PAUS3
・ !T.O.O.H.!
・ !Women Art Revolution


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Google, Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc. : ウィキペディア英語版
Google, Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.

''Google, Inc. v. American Blind and Wallpaper Factory, Inc.'', No. 03-cv-05340 JF (RS) (N.D. Cal. Apr. 18, 2007),〔''Google, Inc. v. American Blind and Wallpaper Factory, Inc.'', (No. 03-cv-05340 JF (RS) ) (N.D. Cal. Apr. 18, 2007).〕 was a decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California that challenged the legality of Google's AdWords program. The court concluded that, pending the outcome of a jury trial, Google AdWords ''may'' be in violation of trademark law (see federal Lanham Act, (1)) because it (1) allowed arbitrary advertisers to key their ads (see keyword advertising) to American Blind's trademarks and (2) ''may'' confuse search-engine users initially interested in visiting American Blind's website into visiting its competitors' websites (see Initial Interest Confusion doctrine).
''Google v. American Blind'' was not the first case to address trademark infringement in the context of online keyword advertising (see ''Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Netscape Communications Corp.'',〔''Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Netscape Communications Corp.'', (354 F.3d 1020 ) (9th Cir. 2004).〕 ''1-800-CONTACTS v. WhenU Inc.''〔''1-800-CONTACTS v. WhenU Inc.'', (414 F.3d 400 ) (2d Cir. 2005).〕). Nevertheless, it generated interest in the trademark-law community because it came on the heels of ''Playboy v. Netscape''〔—a case that failed to resolve the legality of keyword advertising in which the origins of ads are clearly designated.〔Kevin J. Heller, ''(American Blind v. Google )'', Tech Law Advisor (Mar. 31, 2005).〕 Despite a four-year battle, American Blind settled with Google soon after this decision, hence leaving much of this legal territory unexplored.
== Background ==


抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Google, Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.