Case study: LV Vs. Google The presentation has been prepared by the students of MFM (Master Of Fashion Management), New Delhi as a part of the study on cases of Trademark Infringement.

1. LOUIS VUITTON VS. GOOGLE A PRESENTATION BY: ANURADHA SAJWAN, CHANDERBHAN KUMAR, JASMINE MONGA, KARISHMA DADOO MASTER OF FASHION MANAGEMENT, NIFT DELHI

2. CONTENTS Trademark Trademark Registration Trademark Infringement Case: Louis vuitton Vs. Google Judgement

3. TRADEMARK A trademark or trade mark is a distinctive sign or indicator used by an individual, business organization, or other legal entity to identify that the products or services to consumers with which the trademark appears originate from a unique source, and to distinguish its products or services from those of other entities.

4. TRADEMARK A trademark is a type of intellectual property, and typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements Also includes any device, brand, label, name, signature, word, letter, numerical, shape of goods, packaging, color or combination of colors, smell, sound, movement or any combination thereof which is capable of distinguishing goods and services of one business from those of others.

5. REGISTERED TRADEMARK A registered trademark confers a bundle of exclusive rights upon the registered owner, including the right to exclusive use of the mark in relation to the products or services for which it is registered. prevents unauthorized use of the mark in relation to products or services which are identical or "colorfully" similar to the "registered" products or services

6. TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT Trademark infringement is a violation of the exclusive rights attaching to a trademark without the authorization of the trademark owner or any licensees (provided that such authorization was within the scope of the license). Infringement may occur when one party, the "infringer", uses a trademark which is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark owned by another party, in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services which the registration covers.

8. The Case: LV Vs. Google For several years, Google and a number of luxury brands, including Louis Vuitton, have been fighting a battle The object of discussion is the Google Ad Wordssystem, the "purchase" of keywords by advertisers who post their advertisements on the search results page when an Internet user searches for that particular word. LMVH’s beef was with ads selling Louis Vuitton replicas being shown when someone Googled “Louis Vuitton”. They were choked that Google would be selling the Louis Vuitton trademark to third parties – specifically websites selling counterfeits.

9. Google paying over $400,000 USD for trademark infringement in 2005 Google took the case to the European Union’s highest courts where the battle continued for another 5 years

10. THE CASE… 2003: In 2003 LMVH sued Google in French courts and eventually won in 2005 2005: Google was convicted of promoting counterfeiting and was forced to pay LVMH damages 2006: The Paris Court of appeal went even further by extending its verdict to the natural listing of the search engine, claiming that the American Internet giant was technically competent enough to filter search results and exclude counterfeiting websites

11. 2008: The appelate court asked the European Court of Justice to speak on the case, based on the European directive on brand protection 2009: The public procecutor of the European Court of Justice, Poiares Maduro, gave his opinion giving Google the advantage, saying that Google did not cause any damage to brands by allowing advertisers to purchase key words corresponding to registered brands THE CASE…

12. 2010: European Court Judgement

13. The Judgement The European Court of Justice has today given its judgment in this case. Essentially it has decided that: 1.Louis Vuitton can prevent use of its trade mark as a keyword, without the consent of Google. 2. Louis Vuitton cannot directly prevent use of its trade mark as a keyword by Google unless Google has "played an active role of such a kind as to give [Google] knowledge of, or control over, the data stored".

14. THANK YOU