Google France SARL v. Louis Vuitton Malletier SA
European Union Court of Justice
[2010] E.T.M.R. 30, Case C-236/08, Case C-237/08, Case C-238/08 (2010)
- Written by Margot Parmenter, JD
Facts
Google France SARL (Google) (defendant), an internet search engine, offered a paid service called AdWords, which allowed entities to pin advertisements for their websites to searchable keywords. The AdWords service operated via an automated process: an entity would select its desired keywords, devise a short commercial message to comprise the content of the ad, and attach a link to its website. Then, when a Google user searched for any of those keywords, the ad would appear alongside the user’s natural search results. Google allowed advertisers to select trademarks as keywords. Louis Vuitton Malletier SA (LV) (plaintiff), a purveyor of luxury leather goods, owned the French trademark for the words Louis Vuitton, the initials LV, and the European Union (EU) community trademark for the word Vuitton. In 2003, LV learned that Google, through AdWords, was displaying ads for sites offering knockoffs of its goods: Google allowed advertisers to select LV’s trademarks as keywords and also to select those words in combination with the terms “imitation” and “copy.” LV sued Google in France for trademark infringement. In 2005, Google was found guilty of infringement by the Paris Regional Court. That court’s judgment was upheld by the court of appeal. Google appealed the second judgment to the France Court of Cassation, which stayed proceedings to seek guidance from the EU Court of Justice in the form of a preliminary ruling.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.