Google cleared by Australia's High Court in deceptive AdWords case

The company did not violate Australian law by allowing companies to use words related to their competitors in advertisements

The High Court cleared Google on Wednesday of violating fair trade law by allowing companies to publish advertisements containing their competitors' names, handing a defeat to the country's fair trade regulator.

The High Court found that Google did not have a hand in creating paid-for sponsored links sold through its AdWords advertising product, through which some companies used competitors' business or product names in headlines.

"Ordinary and reasonable users of the Google search engine would have understood that the representations conveyed by the sponsored links were those of the advertisers, and would not have concluded that Google adopted or endorsed the representations," according to a news release from the High Court. "Accordingly, Google did not engage in conduct that was misleading or deceptive."

The judgement, handed down by the High Court in Canberra, brings an end to a six-year legal battle.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which is responsible for ensuring compliance fair trading and consumer protection laws, brought a case against Google in 2007. It alleged the Internet giant sold misleading advertisements that allowed companies to use words related to their competitors between 2005 and 2008.

The 11 advertisements in question contained business names, product names or web addresses for a competitor which had not purchased AdWords advertisements from Google. AdWords, a key revenue source for Google, allows companies to bid for keywords that triggers ads that are then matched to people's search queries.

In one example, AdWords containing the name Harvey World Travel were purchased by an Australian company called STA Travel, a competing agency. Those who searched for Harvey World Travel saw sponsored links for STA Travel.

In October 2011, a Federal Court judge found that some of the ads in question were misleading but in some instances that Google had only presented the representations of advertisers.

The ACCC appealed. The Full Federal Court found in April 2012 that four advertisements were misleading and breached the Trade Practices Act 1974, ordering Google to put in place a consumer compliance program.

Google appealed that decision, which brought the case to Australia's High Court. Google has maintained it acts as a publisher and that it was not responsible for the content and representations made by AdWords purchasers.

Join the Good Gear Guide newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags advertisingGoogleCivil lawsuitslegalinternet

Struggling for Christmas presents this year? Check out our Christmas Gift Guide for some top tech suggestions and more.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Jeremy Kirk

IDG News Service

Most Popular Reviews

Follow Us

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Shopping.com

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Latest Jobs

Shopping.com

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?