« Fast Search Promotes In-House Ad Sales Platform | Main | Yahoo Buys the Rest of Rightmedia.com $680 mm »

April 30, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451907b69e200d834f8750053ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference TM Keyword Bidding in Paid Search:

Comments

cathy

these are interesting points, I am not sure were the line is drawn I would be interested in hearing more about this though.

Drewbert


>I don't plan to push that envelope

Look into my eyes, Frank, look into my eyes.

Push the envelope.

Puuuuuuush theeeeeeee envelooooooooope.

Jamie

I haven't seen the ruling on that Webergrills.com case, but I'd guess it'd come down to how big of a legal bill you are willing to incur in order to find the boundary ;)

as far as the Columbia House example, it's quite likely that Columbia House have either not formulated a ppc policy for their affiliates, or they have decided to let them play on the brand.

When a new merchant signs onto an affiliate program they typically set up the terms and conditions for the affiliates in all arenas.

There are some best practices to follow, but at the end of the day a company's conversion and cost data should be the final arbiter on what policy works best.

Also, consider the source of the blog. The aurthor is the VP of Bus Dev at Sendtec. They do a lot of direct respose advertising in a lot of channels. They've got a good story around TV ads and have been moving into PPC for a couple of years now.

They (sendtec) are running into channel conflict issues where they are managing the PPC campaign for client, but that client also has affiliates in the PPC world. In this case the agency will view the PPC landscape as a zero sum game. The agency will view any sales that the affiliate generates as a lost/stolen opportunity.

The client however may view it as revenue from another source and also as a way to push their competitors farther down in the rankings (because they will have multiple listings) Again, they should look at their data and figure out what is the cheapest way to acquire the sales and protect their brand from the real competition.

Raymond Hackney

Great post Frank maybe Keyword buying will ned to be put into affiliate agreements

Jon Pedersen

Frank,

This pre-dates domains but has the same "human intention" traffic generation that domains have now...

How about "pilfering your brand thru paid 411" try dialing 411 in the US and ask for Directv and see how many times you get a Directv corporate # (never) vs. a dealer / affiliate # (they have stuffed the results-directory assistance parked pages?) How many people see a Directv ad on TV and then dial 411 later only to reach a dealer. Directv seem's to be ok with it as its been going on for longer than the first domains were reg'd.

Other similar instances -
KT&T Communications- registering "I don't care" " I don't know" as phone company name's
http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/summer96/0392.html

MCI getting $300k per month on a misdial-
http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5853

***FS*** Fascinating.. I never considered that.. thanks for posting.

Steve M.

In my own UDRP vs Lego (over legosystem/s.com) of several years ago, one of my arguments was that--as a bona fide, CA-state licensed real estate broker--because I was legally entitled under state laws to sell business opportunities; including when such sales included intellectual property (IP) including the trademarks of companies and/or their dealers/licensed/franchised entities; I was therefore legally also entitled to sell stand alone trademark domains (which are, really, themselves biz opps).

While I lost the decision (my arbitrator obviously having a tough time making a decision as he was months late); I still maintain that licensed realty agents and brokers--in particular in those states like CA where with such a license you're entitled to sell biz opps--have the right to sell TM domains.

Including those owned by licensed agents; as in my case.

If they'd been worth more and/or I had the time or inclination to get involved in such; I would have filed a US lawsuit to make this argument stick.

If any UDRPs come up again, I will include the same argument again. Might be a good idea for other licensees to do the same.

Drewbert


I wonder if the registrant being a stockholder in the TM owning company would have an effect on things?

The comments to this entry are closed.