Google has announced a major change to its global trademark policy. Effective in June, the search giant will permit the use of trademarks as keywords as part of AdWords campaigns in many countries around the world.
Previously, Google was much more restrictive; a permissive policy was the exception and applied only to a handful of countries, including the US, Canada and the UK, where it began allowing the use of trademarks as keywords in 2008.
Google's 180-degree reversal could have major implications for brands that have previously not faced competition when bidding on keywords related to their own trademarks. The most immediate: the specter of increased costs.
According to Lyndsay Menzies, COO of digital agency Bigmouthmedia, "While dropping trademark protection didn’t send costs skyrocketing to the extent many feared in the UK, during the initial scramble to bid on competitor brand terms we saw cost-per-click prices rise by an average of 400-500%. Those levels proved unsustainable in the long term however, and we would expect any spike in keyword prices to normalise within a matter of weeks".
Even if the same thing comes to pass here, brands will still have to grapple with a more complex PPC campaign management landscape internationally. They'll need to manage trademark-related campaigns more effectively since they won't have the spotlight to themselves (which has its own cost) and they'll also need to consider their own strategy as it relates to possibly bidding on the trademark keywords of their competitors.
On the Google side of the equation, I think this is another sign of Google getting more aggressive in maximizing revenue from its core business. Since it knows that the law is likely to be on its side in this area, it's taking advantage of the opportunity and adjusting its policies accordingly.
While that's a good thing for Google and its shareholders, Google should also be careful that it doesn't go too far. With more scrutiny being applied to all of Google's activities, I have a feeling it's going to need all the friends it can find at some point. Big brands are some of its most desirable customers and it doesn't want to make life too difficult for them.
Photo credit: ToastyKen via Flickr.
Patricio Robles is a tech reporter at Econsultancy. Follow him on Twitter.
Recommended reports
SEMPO State of Search Marketing Report 2011
The State of Search Marketing Report 2011, published by Econsultancy in association with SEMPO, looks in-depth at how companies are using paid search, search engine optimization (natural search) and social media marketing. The report, which also contains a marketplace valuation, has been compiled from a survey of more than 900 global respondents, from both companies (client-side advertisers) and agencies. The report looks closely at current practices and emerging trends across paid search and SEO, alongside their relationship with social media.
Alternatively, see our Paid Search Agencies Buyer’s Guide or SEO Best Practice: Index Inclusion.
Advisor at The Lost Agency
7:08AM on 7th May 2009
Im sure that i will regret this statement, but try bidding on Google trademark terms... sorry but you will find your ads have flag as violation of copyright terms.
I understand it is their system and they make the rules, but if transperancy is the key issue, but I think that people or competitors outside Google Partners program should be able to bid on their trademark terms if they are offering a related product or service.
This is not a call for spammers to pitch Google Adsense get rich quick schemes but there are other adnetworks and web analytics providers who have their competitors running adwords next to their name, cant they do the same for Google products?
CEO at Econsultancy
7:16AM on 7th May 2009
I've been saying for a while now that it's only a matter of time before politicians (and even businesses) finally realise the extent of the power that Google wields and will therefore come under increasing scrutiny.
When Google hired BBC Newsnight editor Peter Barron to a "communications role" last year I always assumed it was to be a behinds-the-scene political lobbyist because they knew they would need friends in the right places.
So far Google seems to be escaping the worst of things (e.g. recent legal ruling in their favour on Google Streetview) but pressure and scrutiny is mounting as you point out...